Hey DEMS, get your act together!
#1
ANOTHER VIEW
Democrats need to drop identity politics — now 


Bernie Sanders helped elect Donald Trump, and for that he will never be forgiven. But give this to Sanders: He’s totally right that Democrats must drop their obsession with identity politics if they want to regain power.
To concede that white working-class Americans have problems needing to be addressed does not preclude acknowledging the justified complaints of various minorities — ethnic, racial and gender-based. But this fixation on identity groups causes two kinds of harm.
One, it devalues candidates from these groups by turning their contests into referendums on their biology rather than intellect. The reportage following the recent wave of Democratic wins centered not on these candidates’ talents but on their identity — a transgender woman chosen for the Virginia Legislature, transgender people of color joining the Minneapolis City Council, a Sikh made mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey, and a lesbian becoming mayor of Seattle.
Does this demonstrate that ordinary voters are not so prejudiced as some claim? To some extent perhaps. More importantly, it suggests that the voters recognized the intelligence and leadership qualities of Danica Roem, Andrea Jenkins, Phillipe Cunningham, Ravinder Bhalla and Jenny Durkan.
This points to the second harm done by identity politics. They turn elections into moral judgments on voters and their attitudes toward certain groups. Why did many white workers who voted for Barack Obama in 2012 switch to Trump in 2016? Did they suddenly turn racist? I don’t think so.
After this year’s elections, Sen. Kamala Harris of California proclaimed that “Democrats won incredible victories by embracing our diversity and rejecting the politics of hate.” Bah.
Again, those triumphs reflected strong candidates and an electorate that in fact didn’t seem to place much importance on race, ethnicity, gender or sexual identity. Must we assume, meanwhile, that all who voted otherwise were consumed with hate? Come on. That’s emotional extortion, and it turns voters off.
I voted twice for Obama because he was the better candidate, never because he was African-American. And my support for Hillary Clinton had nothing to do with her being a woman. I actually resent calls to vote on the bases of race and gender. Black, Latino and gay friends feel likewise, seeing condescension in appeals to sympathy for what they have no control over instead of respect for what they do.
Democrats don’t have to go on about how much more sensitive they are to the dignity of various minorities. Right-wingers are doing the work for them with their creepy attacks on gays, immigrants, African-Americans, religions and so on.
But condemning identity politics threatens the livelihood and importance of their peddlers. And that’s why they buried Mark Lilla in crazed charges of racism over his book “The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics.”
A professor of humanities at Columbia University, Lilla sees the contemporary left’s identity-based politics as a “textbook example of how not to build solidarity.” It’s why Republicans control the White House, both houses of Congress, two-thirds of the state legislatures and two-thirds of governorships.
The New Yorker’s David Remnick asked Lilla whether in-your-face protests by antifa types and campus identity groups aren’t essential to confronting social injustice. Lilla sees the point Remnick’s making but comes back to the point he’s making: Without power, Democrats can’t do anything for the overlooked, the oppressed or anyone else.
Steve Bannon famously said, “If the left is focused on race and identity and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.”
The man is appalling, but these words are on the mark. Sanders does Democrats a service by agreeing with them from the left. Identity politics are the road to political oblivion. — Follow Froma Harrop on Twitter @ FromaHarrop. Email her at fharrop@gmail. com.
Reply
#2
What if I'm not a democrat?
Reply
#3
I don't think Bernie Sanders helped elect Donald Trump. I think Hillary stopped Bernie, from getting elected.
Reply
#4
(12-01-2017, 01:59 PM)chuck white Wrote: I don't think Bernie Sanders helped elect Donald Trump. I think Hillary stopped Bernie, from getting elected.

Hillary Helped Trump get elected. Well her and all the lies about her.
Reply
#5
I'm confused. Aren't white working class Americans another identity?
Reply
#6
(12-01-2017, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 01:59 PM)chuck white Wrote: I don't think Bernie Sanders helped elect Donald Trump. I think Hillary stopped Bernie, from getting elected.

Hillary Helped Trump get elected. Well her and all the lies about her.

Indeed, those lies about Hillary helped get Trump elected. But the truths helped even more!
Reply
#7
(12-01-2017, 06:39 PM)GCG Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 01:59 PM)chuck white Wrote: I don't think Bernie Sanders helped elect Donald Trump. I think Hillary stopped Bernie, from getting elected.

Hillary Helped Trump get elected. Well her and all the lies about her.

Indeed, those lies about Hillary helped get Trump elected. But the truths helped even more!

I'm wondering: The truth told by Trump about how he could "Make America Great again" or the truth about Hillary? Or both?
Reply
#8
(12-01-2017, 06:39 PM)GCG Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 01:59 PM)chuck white Wrote: I don't think Bernie Sanders helped elect Donald Trump. I think Hillary stopped Bernie, from getting elected.

Hillary Helped Trump get elected. Well her and all the lies about her.

Indeed, those lies about Hillary helped get Trump elected. But the truths helped even more!

Maybe more maybe equal. What truths are you talking about? That she got rapist off and laughed about it?
That her and bill had 60 people killed?
That she had some hidden illness and that's why she stumbled? That she sold our uranium to the Ruskies?
That she sat on her hands knowing people were dying and did nothin during Benghazi?
That she and bill are lining their pockets and keeping all the money donated to the Clinton foundation?
Reply
#9
(12-01-2017, 06:39 PM)GCG Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 01:59 PM)chuck white Wrote: I don't think Bernie Sanders helped elect Donald Trump. I think Hillary stopped Bernie, from getting elected.

Hillary Helped Trump get elected. Well her and all the lies about her.

Indeed, those lies about Hillary helped get Trump elected. But the truths helped even more!

I think this is very true, but I think it kept more people from making the effort to go to the polls considering most normal people thought there was no way in Hell a buffoon could ever win. I'll bet THAT never happens again, but ya never know....
Reply
#10
I'd be happy with a mandatory four party primary election that takes the top two to the general. Wacko left, wacko right, moderate left and moderate right.
Reply
#11
(12-01-2017, 09:35 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I'd be happy with a mandatory four party primary election that takes the top two to the general. Wacko left, wacko right, moderate left and moderate right.

[Image: b89c6a0390229377b372472924b036e3--follow...litics.jpg]
Reply
#12
(12-01-2017, 09:35 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I'd be happy with a mandatory four party primary election that takes the top two to the general. Wacko left, wacko right, moderate left and moderate right.

Lest we lose the theme of the 1st post:
 ****************************************************************************************************

To concede that white working-class Americans have problems needing to be addressed does not preclude acknowledging the justified complaints of various minorities — ethnic, racial and gender-based. But this fixation on identity groups causes two kinds of harm.
One, it devalues candidates from these groups by turning their contests into referendums on their biology rather than intellect. The reportage following the recent wave of Democratic wins centered not on these candidates’ talents but on their identity — a transgender woman chosen for the Virginia Legislature, transgender people of color joining the Minneapolis City Council, a Sikh made mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey, and a lesbian becoming mayor of Seattle.
Does this demonstrate that ordinary voters are not so prejudiced as some claim? To some extent perhaps. More importantly, it suggests that the voters recognized the intelligence and leadership qualities of Danica Roem, Andrea Jenkins, Phillipe Cunningham, Ravinder Bhalla and Jenny Durkan.
This points to the second harm done by identity politics. They turn elections into moral judgments on voters and their attitudes toward certain groups. Why did many white workers who voted for Barack Obama in 2012 switch to Trump in 2016? Did they suddenly turn racist? I don’t think so.
After this year’s elections, Sen. Kamala Harris of California proclaimed that “Democrats won incredible victories by embracing our diversity and rejecting the politics of hate.” Bah.
**********************************************************************************************************************

That's only a excerpt. I'm a Democrat, have been registered as such for many years. I agree with a number of pundits who feel the Party needs to reset and look to the traditional base of those who hold long standing values that sometimes does not include the more radical views of the fringes of the Party. 
Reply
#13
(12-02-2017, 11:06 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 09:35 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I'd be happy with a mandatory four party primary election that takes the top two to the general. Wacko left, wacko right, moderate left and moderate right.

Lest we lose the theme of the 1st post:
 ****************************************************************************************************

To concede that white working-class Americans have problems needing to be addressed does not preclude acknowledging the justified complaints of various minorities — ethnic, racial and gender-based. But this fixation on identity groups causes two kinds of harm.
One, it devalues candidates from these groups by turning their contests into referendums on their biology rather than intellect. The reportage following the recent wave of Democratic wins centered not on these candidates’ talents but on their identity — a transgender woman chosen for the Virginia Legislature, transgender people of color joining the Minneapolis City Council, a Sikh made mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey, and a lesbian becoming mayor of Seattle.
Does this demonstrate that ordinary voters are not so prejudiced as some claim? To some extent perhaps. More importantly, it suggests that the voters recognized the intelligence and leadership qualities of Danica Roem, Andrea Jenkins, Phillipe Cunningham, Ravinder Bhalla and Jenny Durkan.
This points to the second harm done by identity politics. They turn elections into moral judgments on voters and their attitudes toward certain groups. Why did many white workers who voted for Barack Obama in 2012 switch to Trump in 2016? Did they suddenly turn racist? I don’t think so.
After this year’s elections, Sen. Kamala Harris of California proclaimed that “Democrats won incredible victories by embracing our diversity and rejecting the politics of hate.” Bah.
**********************************************************************************************************************

That's only a excerpt. I'm a Democrat, have been registered as such for many years. I agree with a number of pundits who feel the Party needs to reset and look to the traditional base of those who hold long standing values that sometimes does not include the more radical views of the fringes of the Party. 

I'm thinkin' whichever party figures out how to pivot to the majority center without losing too much of their current base will be long term winners. Screw the radical outliers, who needs 'em.
Reply
#14
(12-02-2017, 01:11 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(12-02-2017, 11:06 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-01-2017, 09:35 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I'd be happy with a mandatory four party primary election that takes the top two to the general. Wacko left, wacko right, moderate left and moderate right.

Lest we lose the theme of the 1st post:
 ****************************************************************************************************

To concede that white working-class Americans have problems needing to be addressed does not preclude acknowledging the justified complaints of various minorities — ethnic, racial and gender-based. But this fixation on identity groups causes two kinds of harm.
One, it devalues candidates from these groups by turning their contests into referendums on their biology rather than intellect. The reportage following the recent wave of Democratic wins centered not on these candidates’ talents but on their identity — a transgender woman chosen for the Virginia Legislature, transgender people of color joining the Minneapolis City Council, a Sikh made mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey, and a lesbian becoming mayor of Seattle.
Does this demonstrate that ordinary voters are not so prejudiced as some claim? To some extent perhaps. More importantly, it suggests that the voters recognized the intelligence and leadership qualities of Danica Roem, Andrea Jenkins, Phillipe Cunningham, Ravinder Bhalla and Jenny Durkan.
This points to the second harm done by identity politics. They turn elections into moral judgments on voters and their attitudes toward certain groups. Why did many white workers who voted for Barack Obama in 2012 switch to Trump in 2016? Did they suddenly turn racist? I don’t think so.
After this year’s elections, Sen. Kamala Harris of California proclaimed that “Democrats won incredible victories by embracing our diversity and rejecting the politics of hate.” Bah.
**********************************************************************************************************************

That's only a excerpt. I'm a Democrat, have been registered as such for many years. I agree with a number of pundits who feel the Party needs to reset and look to the traditional base of those who hold long standing values that sometimes does not include the more radical views of the fringes of the Party. 

I'm thinkin' whichever party figures out how to pivot to the majority center without losing too much of their current base will be long term winners. Screw the radical outliers, who needs 'em.

Smiling We can only hope!
Reply
#15
" Independents" are people who want the best of both worlds and straddle the fence.
Reply
#16
(12-02-2017, 03:31 PM)tvguy Wrote: " Independents" are people who want the best of both worlds and straddle the fence.
Could be. But I like to make decisions INDEPENDENT of the political party I've joined. 
For instance: I'm a card carrying Democrat, but am not sympathetic to the ROE VS. WADE opinion that made abortion legal. I'm in favor of abortion but not ALL abortions: For my own reasons I feel that abortions in the last trimester of pregnancy is immoral. I also have a problem with the absolute opinion that it's a woman's body and ONLY she has a right to choose. I think that's true to a point, but when the fetus is near term I feel her husband (or significant other) should be part of the decision.

So, I remain independent of some of the view of my party. 

But maybe that's not what you meant to express. I guess because I'm a registered Democrat, I CAN"T Be an independent.  Big Grin
Reply
#17
(12-02-2017, 05:07 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-02-2017, 03:31 PM)tvguy Wrote: " Independents" are people who want the best of both worlds and straddle the fence.
Could be. But I like to make decisions INDEPENDENT of the political party I've joined. 
For instance: I'm a card carrying Democrat, but am not sympathetic to the ROE VS. WADE opinion that made abortion legal. I'm in favor of abortion but not ALL abortions: For my own reasons I feel that abortions in the last trimester of pregnancy is immoral. I also have a problem with the absolute opinion that it's a woman's body and ONLY she has a right to choose. I think that's true to a point, but when the fetus is near term I feel her husband (or significant other) should be part of the decision.

So, I remain independent of some of the view of my party. 

But maybe that's not what you meant to express. I guess because I'm a registered Democrat, I CAN"T Be an independent.  Big Grin

Your last sentence is pretty much what I was going to say. Most of us choose what ever party represents us the most.
And in the end you really only have two choices for a president.

I feel that abortions in the last trimester of pregnancy is immoral


And completely unnecessary because there are zero reasons to wait that long. Or who knows. What if at 8 months your kid was growing another head?
Reply
#18
(12-02-2017, 06:30 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-02-2017, 05:07 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-02-2017, 03:31 PM)tvguy Wrote: " Independents" are people who want the best of both worlds and straddle the fence.
Could be. But I like to make decisions INDEPENDENT of the political party I've joined. 
For instance: I'm a card carrying Democrat, but am not sympathetic to the ROE VS. WADE opinion that made abortion legal. I'm in favor of abortion but not ALL abortions: For my own reasons I feel that abortions in the last trimester of pregnancy is immoral. I also have a problem with the absolute opinion that it's a woman's body and ONLY she has a right to choose. I think that's true to a point, but when the fetus is near term I feel her husband (or significant other) should be part of the decision.

So, I remain independent of some of the view of my party. 

But maybe that's not what you meant to express. I guess because I'm a registered Democrat, I CAN"T Be an independent.  Big Grin

Your last sentence is pretty much what I was going to say. Most of us choose what ever party represents us the most.
And in the end you really only have two choices for a president.

I feel that abortions in the last trimester of pregnancy is immoral


And completely unnecessary because there are zero reasons to wait that long. Or who knows. What if at 8 months your kid was growing another head?

So are you passing judgement on two headed babies.
Maybe they have an evolutionary advantage and this is just the first step to a new species.
Reply
#19
(12-02-2017, 07:28 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(12-02-2017, 06:30 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-02-2017, 05:07 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-02-2017, 03:31 PM)tvguy Wrote: " Independents" are people who want the best of both worlds and straddle the fence.
Could be. But I like to make decisions INDEPENDENT of the political party I've joined. 
For instance: I'm a card carrying Democrat, but am not sympathetic to the ROE VS. WADE opinion that made abortion legal. I'm in favor of abortion but not ALL abortions: For my own reasons I feel that abortions in the last trimester of pregnancy is immoral. I also have a problem with the absolute opinion that it's a woman's body and ONLY she has a right to choose. I think that's true to a point, but when the fetus is near term I feel her husband (or significant other) should be part of the decision.

So, I remain independent of some of the view of my party. 

But maybe that's not what you meant to express. I guess because I'm a registered Democrat, I CAN"T Be an independent.  Big Grin

Your last sentence is pretty much what I was going to say. Most of us choose what ever party represents us the most.
And in the end you really only have two choices for a president.

I feel that abortions in the last trimester of pregnancy is immoral


And completely unnecessary because there are zero reasons to wait that long. Or who knows. What if at 8 months your kid was growing another head?

So are you passing judgement on two headed babies.
Maybe they have an evolutionary advantage and this is just the first step to a new species.

Serious stuff: There have been 8th month abortions, requiring the fetus's head to be crushed. Nasty stuff, and it should not be ONLY the woman's choice.
Reply
#20
That's absurd. By the 8th month it is about the life of the baby and mom. Elective surgery because the welfare queen decided she couldn't be bothered is a wingnut myth. Shame on you.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)