dagblog - Comments for "Forget Health Care: Warren on Business Reform"

I checked the author out

artappraiser — Mon, 23 Dec 2019 04:47:05 +0000

In reply to Apocalypse call 2012

I checked the author out further, poor guy, his term "deep state" was hijacked:

And it's rarely, if ever, used the way Mike Lofgren intended

"It's like I released this species into the wild and what it did, or maybe it's a Frankenstein, and what it does is not within my control," he said.

Checked out some other things, actually sounds like he and Liz Warren would have a lot to talk about as regards influence of massive corps. and institutions on government.

Apocalypse call 2012

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 23 Dec 2019 01:31:19 +0000

In reply to It's conventional wisdom,

Apocalypse call 2012

https://www.salon.com/2012/08/05/republicans_slouching_toward_theocracy/amp?

It's conventional wisdom,

ocean-kat — Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:59:31 +0000

In reply to I was not even thinking party

It's conventional wisdom, which I agree with, that eventually the republican party will have to change. I agree that no one can predict what it will be 10 or 20 years from now. But I feel very confident in predicting that change won't happen in 2020 nor in 2022. I feel very confident that the next president if a democrat will not find republicans to work with them. We'll see.

Yes democratic votes have to be whipped and a consensus must be reached among democrats. But that's not enough. For example the last gun control measure lost with 53 votes because it couldn't get the 60 needed to over come a filibuster. If democrats don't end it nothing important will get passed no matter how many democrat votes are whipped. Unless by some miracle democrats get 60 senators and even then one conservative vote will stop most of the progressive legislation I support.

I was not even thinking party

artappraiser — Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:17:47 +0000

In reply to What us voters should be

I was not even thinking party; Dem votes have to whipped on bills too, they don't all agree on what policy should be, far from it.

As for Republicans, that party is in the process of change for good or ill, it's in flux, with lots of the more moderate types retiring because of the rabid conservative caucuses combined with Trump as president driving them to giving up. Who knows what the next generation will be after this. I don't think one can predict.They've got to change to survive, that's all that's clear to me. Right now I'd bet on more libertarian types appealing to a certain type of young person especially if the future is activist Dem.

What us voters should be

ocean-kat — Sun, 22 Dec 2019 23:41:11 +0000

In reply to a comment there that jumped

What us voters should be looking for is someone with skill sets and desire to negotiate with Congress over solving problems they see in the federal government once they start trying to run it, like slick Willie or LBJ.

That's exactly what Obama was saying in 08. Back then many liberals didn't hear it and the moderates that did believed it was possible. I told the liberals that Obama wasn't going to be the progressive they hoped for and I told the moderates that there would be no working with republicans because they had no intention of even trying to negotiate.

I think history has borne out both of those predictions. My prediction is that republicans are no more ready to negotiate with democrats now. I don't care how great their skill set is and how much they desire to negotiate with congress. They will be no negotiation with the republicans in congress and no compromise on anything slightly important or meaningful. There are no republicans willing to negotiate. If anything gets done it will only come about if democrats control the presidency, house and senate and eliminate the filibuster.

You're living in a fantasy world if you think different.

That huge bureaucracy isn't

ocean-kat — Sun, 22 Dec 2019 18:33:17 +0000

In reply to a comment there that jumped

That huge bureaucracy isn't managed by the president but by the huge team he appoints to mange it. In Biden's case more than others that team will have immense power since Biden is to old to effectively lead it. He will pick all centrists and moderates at best with likely some conservatives. The progressives like Warren will fight on the fringe of this bureaucracy for crumbs. She might have a marginal affect in getting these crumbs but that's not what I want. It's not what about half the democratic electorate wants. We're always told we must stick with the democratic party and vote for the centrist that half the party wants and never does anyone say they should stick with the party and vote for the progressive we want. I'm tired of that argument.

a comment there that jumped

artappraiser — Sun, 22 Dec 2019 18:12:40 +0000

In reply to Forget Health Care: Warren on Business Reform

a comment there that jumped out at me like a wake-up call:

Also building movements away from presidential runs is key and could be Warren's best role, as a thought leader, adviser and gadfly like AOC.

Warren as president can't pass most of these proposals.

It's essential her ideas gradually gain traction, not that she be POTUS.
— Henry (@Fdr1942) December 20, 2019

When we vote for president we are voting for an Executive to run a huge bureaucracy that already exists. But we ALL fall for the horse race thing we think that one person can affect more than incremental change, as if we are voting for a dictator who will be able to wave a magic wand and do all kinds of stuff. Except for foreign policy and appt. of major judiciary, policy ideas and wonkery should not be the main determinant for this position, even though we all fall for that. What us voters should be looking for is someone with skill sets and desire to negotiate with Congress over solving problems they see in the federal government once they start trying to run it, like slick Willie or LBJ. They need to be able to herd cats one way or another and horse trade.

Turns out, mho, she's actually highly qualified on that front now after serving as a Senator. Unlike most Senators, she's been a very active Senator in politicking, including the House, she knows how to horse trade. Similar for both Joe and Bernie.Klobucher I dunno enough about her activities in Congress.. Buttigieg and Yang fall short here, zero experience. CEO's like Steyer and Bloomberg think they can do it but skills might not transfer. Bloomberg did well managing the huge NYC bureaucracy (i.e., won re-election) but NYC doesn't have a Congress and he would not be able to play his dictator skills thing as president.