Since you didn’t quote whoever you were responding to, I have no idea who you’re talking about, and no practical way to find out.
Sorry, i’m at work and i misclicked? Touchy for some reason?
It occurred to me maybe i should speak more straightforwardly, so let me try: the unstated premise of my quote was that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s nomination was a Democratic reaction to Trump being elected and his subsequent behavior.
Her actual politics are immaterial in this context (or whether or not her winning the nomination is in fact a reaction or not); i’m talking to a bunch of Republicans getting their news from FOX and Friends. They’re going to think whatever Democrat of the week had been targeted is concentrated evil.
But if they don’t like that this “socialist” has been nominated, well, that’s the consequences of electing such a divisive President.
Yeah, kinda like how we elected an eloquent and educated black man and they responded by electing a vulgar yam. Now we respond with some socialist salsa!
So you counter the wacky far right GOP by going all in wacky far left. It is the middle that matters in most elections, otherwise one side would dominate, so maybe it would be best to not go all wacky at all.
and many people are sick of triangulation and rearguard actions against climate change, environmental, and health care issues where the far right has dominated the conversation and allowed to frame the issue in the media, because the Democrats are too chickenshit and centrist to defend these things with vigor.
So to hell with playing to the center, which allows the tea party to shift the conversation to the far right. Besides it’s not as if going hard right has politically hurt republicans. So I say the hell with it. Full speed ahead and man the torpedoes.
I don’t think going left with philosophy is necessary a loser, but it’s when the costs of the plans under that philosophy gets discussed, and the tax money required, that loses people.
Everyone wants health insurance, clean air and water etc, but very few want to pay for it all.
You should run for office (and just to be clear, that is intended as a compliment.)
Interesting post, thank you.
Not sure why you felt the need to introduce the “wacky” qualifier. I would not espouse going “wacky”.
Yet every other developed country has found a better solution to the health insurance problem than we have.
As for clean air and water, we don’t want it: we need it. The bill on that will come due, now or later.
My basic point, which I think was obvious, is that the left has some great ideas, but things have to be paid for. And just saying the rich will pay for it or that the military budget will pay for it doesn’t work.
As for using wacky, I thought that was being polite. :)
I’m going to use this example a lot, because while i agree in principle, remember Apple has more cash than the UK and Canada combined.
We need to get over this fear of “liberals are out to tax you”, guy who makes $150,000 a year, and get to “liberals want sensible tax systems for multinational corporations.”
From his high perch, where he was lashed to the rigging of his flagship, USS Hartford , Farragut could see the ships pulling back. “What’s the trouble?” he shouted through a trumpet to USS Brooklyn . “Torpedoes”, was the shouted reply. “Damn the torpedoes.”, said Farragut, “Four bells, Captain Drayton, go ahead. Jouett, full speed.”[27][28] The bulk of the fleet succeeded in entering the bay. Farragut triumphed over the opposition of heavy batteries in Fort Morgan and Fort Gaines to defeat the squadron of Admiral Franklin Buchanan.
But we are already paying for it (healthcare), and we’re paying significantly more than other developed nations. That’s where I can’t wrap my head around that argument/statement.
I think it is fair to say that when it comes to the battle of the “tax” word the republicans have won. Anytime tax reduction is discussed people respond positively, even when it may not help them at all and may lead to larger deficits.
People here are pretty sure that the Trump tax reduction was just a give away to the corporations, and maybe there are polls that would prove me wrong, but I would bet most people favor tax reductions of any kind.
Somehow raising taxes, even on wealthy corporations or millionaires, is seen as a negative.
I was amazed how many people on forums I visit hated Obamacare because it required them to have insurance and because it told them what kind of benefits they had to have. Even as the same people were happy that they could cover their kids they hated that somehow their taxes were paying for others to be covered.
The ACA given time nay have been a great idea, but the Dems lost the PR battle on it almost before it got started.
The other thing with health insurance, people whose companies paid for it had no idea how much it was costing those companies. So when those companies (or school districts, or government entities etc) started requiring them to pay for part of it they thought it was some massive raise caused by ACA.
I agree, and this is one of my strikes against the chickenshit DNC refusing to push back. And the horribly decrepit ‘both sideserism’ of the MSM that is so afraid of being labeled biased that they give extreme deference to GOP positions with minimal pushback.
And for the public for buying the GOP line, and not engaging in a modicum of critical thought.
The one thing liberals don’t often grasp, and what i’ll give conservatives a bit of credit for, is seeing the entire tax burden rather than the individual tax rate for a particular thing. So someone from Cali might have 35% FIC but also 13% SIT AND 1% property taxes (on inflated valued property) plus county tax rates if applicable plus sales taxes if applicable plus Consumer Sales Tax of 7.25%, ect. Top off FICA (“self employment taxes”) and individual medical insurance (non-group) and you can easily pass 60%+ effective tax rates for people today.
But, again, it’s corporate taxes that need to be increased (as well as nationalizing health care, ect).
The poll also finds that 34% of the public approve of the tax reform plan passed by Congress last December and 41% disapprove. Another 24% are not sure how they feel. These results have shifted in the past six weeks. Approval is down 6 points from 40% in late April and disapproval is down 3 points from 44%. The number who give no opinion on the plan has risen 8 points from 16%. Polls earlier this year had shown a more evenly divided public – 41% approve to 42% disapprove in March and 44% approve to 44% disapprove in January – with a smaller percentage of undecided opinion.
Let’s see how the approval is come next April when most individuals will know if the tax reform saved them any money. At this point in time most people probably don’t have any idea but they have been told they will save.
Next year will be an interesting tax year as the first two pages of the tax return have been totally overhauled and they have got rid of the 1040A and 1040EZ.