Political Roundtable Part XIX

[montestewart]

Right now Trump has lost his 3 strongest allies in the world Canada, Australia & UK plus the EU, Korea & Japan. A tariff that was designed to hurt China who is dumping steel unfairly hurt other nations much more. He may be using it a tactic in NAFTA but really won't work in that Canada knows it will create chaos in the automotive sector. In the short term it may hurt Canada but in longer term more automotive business will locate in Canada to avoid the tariff. Parts & automobiles are exempt from the tariff. NAFTA negotiations have been erratic because of the outlandish requests by the American negotiating team. Neither Canada nor Mexico as sovereign nations will never accept them. It also shows the world that America isn't trustworthy in international negotiations.

Trump is going to Canada for the G7 luckily it is far away from any major populations but you can rest assured he will never be invited to Ottawa.

Canada n Mexico can our . [Choose a different misspelled word. This is a family-friendly site] Once we have equal trade balance with each and every major trading country then we can listen to their whining n crying over tariffs. I say make the tariffs higher!!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

That is wonderful from a gun toting lunatic who likely doesn't have a carry permit and use's it to extort rent.

You ever get the feeling that STD is carving out a position specifically designed to make Trump's look reasonable in comparison, not really opinions but more a kind of an extreme right wing Rube Goldbergian smoke and mirrors propaganda tool? Flaming balls of post distracting from discourse. It may sound crazy, but it just.might.work.

[cammac]

Real News Fox Sean Hannity gets posterized about immigration.
He as usual gives figures as crimes on a incredible broad spectrum of crimes mostly minor and non violent and gets taken to task. When confronted and obviously losing he abruptly calls off the interview.

Finally, an exasperated Ramos let loose on Hannity for using what he called misleading numbers on crime by leaving out context.

“You don’t tell your audience the truth, the facts,” Ramos said, “that immigrants are less likely to be criminals than those born in the United States.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/sean-hannity-jorge-ramos_us_5aa0b4e8e4b002df2c60a61d

Drug cartels are a huge problem in the world they are violent, corrupt officials and do damage to the users of there unholy products. But who is the chief armorer for those cartels the lax gun law in the USA. Whether it is the illegal export of guns to Mexico or in other parts of the world.

There were 60 assault-style rifles and ammo in the shipment that arrived at Rio’s international airport on June 1, 2017 ― 45 of them manufactured in the United States. And they were all almost certainly intended for the drug gangs fighting among themselves and against local police in Rio’s favelas, helping drive a sharp spike in violence across Brazil’s second-largest city. These were Brazilian turf wars, waged with weapons manufactured in Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Illinois, Minnesota, South Carolina, Alabama and Florida.

In the days after the bust, police arrested several Brazilians they said were involved in the plot. But the alleged head of the operation remained elusive, even though police believed they knew exactly who he was: Frederik Barbieri, a 46-year-old Brazilian who had been raised outside Rio de Janeiro before becoming a millionaire by smuggling guns from the United States to his home country.

There had been a similar sting in 2010 and similar accusations against Barbieri. But by 2012, he had fled to the United States and settled in South Florida, from which, Brazilian police allege, he spent five years smuggling more than 1,000 rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition into Brazil.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/weapon-smuggling-us-brazil_us_5aa053d8e4b0d4f5b66d14e8

[dckingsfan]

What I don't get at all... is comparing the 2 parties and seeing an equivalence...

I hope I am not taking this out of context - I apologize if I am. I'll try to answer for an independent.

Understand where I am coming from. I don't see the parties as equivalents at this point. I hope the Rs get trounced in 2018 and 2020, they had their chance to govern and didn't. And I hope the Ds actually govern in 2021 - but I am old. I have watched both parties inability to govern. I try to learn from history and not ignore it - those that don't just repeat the same mistakes.

I don't trust the Ds as far as I can throw them either. I don't think they are willing to take the tough choices. It was clear when Obama had the majority - where did they put that stimulus money? Was it well spent? When they took on healthcare did they go after the cost drivers or do the political "thing". Did they take on gun control when they were the dominant majority. Did they get rid of baseline spending? Did they do the things that were required to get us growth to get out of this fiscal mess or did they just vilify the business community?

I really don't listen to what the Ds say any longer - I watch what they do. And I understand a bit of where SD is coming from... he comes from Illinois - look what the Ds have done to that state, they are corrupt. And yes, we could just as easily pick on Kansas and their knucklehead of a governor. Two classic examples of how to destroy a state - one #soD and one #soR.

So - if someone comes in and says - party x = evil. I say, but your party is as well. If you want to say party x < party y. Fine.

But neither have competent leadership and platforms at this time.

When I'm talking about equivalency, we could have it with someone like Jeb Bush or even Kasich or Romney as President. While I have major differences with them, they are intelligent and somewhat reasonable people that aren't just out to squash the other party and everyone who has a disagreement with them. They don't strike me as horrible human beings. What we have now is a horrible human being with an ego beyond measurement and a very mediocre intellect run with a "deplorable" House of Representatives and flawed Senate. Trump's time in office is all about chaos and reversal of progress, and I'm just hoping we'll survive it.

Violent agreement - and there were Rs that supported him... can't wait to see him go.

[montestewart]

I hope I am not taking this out of context - I apologize if I am. I'll try to answer for an independent.

Understand where I am coming from. I don't see the parties as equivalents at this point. I hope the Rs get trounced in 2018 and 2020, they had their chance to govern and didn't. And I hope the Ds actually govern in 2021 - but I am old. I have watched both parties inability to govern. I try to learn from history and not ignore it - those that don't just repeat the same mistakes.

I don't trust the Ds as far as I can throw them either. I don't think they are willing to take the tough choices. It was clear when Obama had the majority - where did they put that stimulus money? Was it well spent? When they took on healthcare did they go after the cost drivers or do the political "thing". Did they take on gun control when they were the dominant majority. Did they get rid of baseline spending? Did they do the things that were required to get us growth to get out of this fiscal mess or did they just vilify the business community?

I really don't listen to what the Ds say any longer - I watch what they do. And I understand a bit of where SD is coming from... he comes from Illinois - look what the Ds have done to that state, they are corrupt. And yes, we could just as easily pick on Kansas and their knucklehead of a governor. Two classic examples of how to destroy a state - one #soD and one #soR.

So - if someone comes in and says - party x = evil. I say, but your party is as well. If you want to say party x < party y. Fine.

But neither have competent leadership and platforms at this time.

When I'm talking about equivalency, we could have it with someone like Jeb Bush or even Kasich or Romney as President. While I have major differences with them, they are intelligent and somewhat reasonable people that aren't just out to squash the other party and everyone who has a disagreement with them. They don't strike me as horrible human beings. What we have now is a horrible human being with an ego beyond measurement and a very mediocre intellect run with a "deplorable" House of Representatives and flawed Senate. Trump's time in office is all about chaos and reversal of progress, and I'm just hoping we'll survive it.

Violent agreement - and there were Rs that supported him... can't wait to see him go.

One of the false equivalencies I sometimes see here and on the OT board is subtly or more explicitly characterizing criticism of the Democratic party or Clinton or Obama as of a piece with voting for and supporting Trump. I never really want to have that conversation, and a number of seemingly smart and well-informed (and occasionally quite witty) people sometimes seem to be going in that direction. It frequently does effectively derail discussion regarding Democratic Party and liberal platform shortcomings, a kind of knocking over the chessboard rather than risk defeat.

If anyone here said Clinton and Trump were basically the same, that had to be at least a little bit of have-I-made-my-point audaciocity, yeah?

[dckingsfan]

I don't trust the Ds as far as I can throw them either. I don't think they are willing to take the tough choices. It was clear when Obama had the majority - where did they put that stimulus money? Was it well spent? When they took on healthcare did they go after the cost drivers or do the political "thing". Did they take on gun control when they were the dominant majority. Did they get rid of baseline spending? Did they do the things that were required to get us growth to get out of this fiscal mess or did they just vilify the business community?

Aren't you asking an awful lot from a President and Dem Party that had the majority for 2 years, especially when you take into account that there was a major economic recession that needed to be immediately addressed when Obama took office?

You're right regarding healthcare cost drivers. They remain a major drag on healthcare and our economy. But if Obama and the Dems had taken on the cost drivers fight in the short time they held the majority I believe the healthcare reform bill would have never seen the light of day.

I think Obama and the Dems chose to seize the opportunity to pass Obamacare--knowing it was a flawed bill--with the intention of coming back later to tackle the bills shortcomings, including cost drivers. Ideally, with the support of the Repubs. Obama himself pretty much said as much right after Obamacare was passed. You may not agree with that strategy but it is what it is.

BTW, the popularity of Obamacare is steadily rising. It is currently polling at 54% favorable to 42% unfavorable, according to the Kaiser Foundation.

Well yes, I am asking lots... that is the point. The point isn't to blame the opposition it is to see what you get done. The Ds took the wrong approach to their stimulus spending, how they approached healthcare (it doesn't matter if people approve of bad legislation, it still buries you) and increasing the use of the administration to pass "rules" vs. "laws". Pretty much HATE that Trump can use that now. It of course goes much deeper.

Lets go back to the Carter Administration and complete D control. Their inflationary positions really hurt the country and led to baseline spending - one of those really runniness policies. And many of our problems in the middle-east come directly from his administration. And you had a D congress that overrode his vetoes that had wasteful spending.

Or the Clinton Administration when the Ds had the majority - where they pushed through legislation that "helped" push the housing crisis.

But I am beating on the Ds now - I could easily beat on the Rs and each of their administrations - but I don't think I need to with this audience and with this current administration and legislative body.

[cammac]

When I'm talking about equivalency, we could have it with someone like Jeb Bush or even Kasich or Romney as President. While I have major differences with them, they are intelligent and somewhat reasonable people that aren't just out to squash the other party and everyone who has a disagreement with them. They don't strike me as horrible human beings. What we have now is a horrible human being with an ego beyond measurement and a very mediocre intellect run with a "deplorable" House of Representatives and flawed Senate. Trump's time in office is all about chaos and reversal of progress, and I'm just hoping we'll survive it.

Violent agreement - and there were Rs that supported him... can't wait to see him go.

One of the false equivalencies I sometimes see here and on the OT board is subtly or more explicitly characterizing criticism of the Democratic party or Clinton or Obama as of a piece with voting for and supporting Trump. I never really want to have that conversation, and a number of seemingly smart and well-informed (and occasionally quite witty) people sometimes seem to be going in that direction. It frequently does effectively derail discussion regarding Democratic Party and liberal platform shortcomings, a kind of knocking over the chessboard rather than risk defeat.

If anyone here said Clinton and Trump were basically the same, that had to be at least a little bit of have-I-made-my-point audaciocity, yeah?

As a outsider I do lean towards the Democrats but as a fiscal conservative both parties scare the heck out of me. Both have no concept of running a government the Republicans as a party of NO during the Obama years proved to be totally inept in governing.

The American government has been running on the credit card ever since the Clinton years. That has to stop! The latest tax reforms were blatantly stupid in that in a economy at full employment. This will increase the deficit by at least 1 trillion a year. America has to look at that it is not the economic superpower it once was. People must realize that taxes aren't inherently bad it's the value you receive for those taxes. While I'm unhappy in Canada that we haven't balanced the budget and even though last years 3% growth in the GDP did outstrip our deficit. But putting things in prospective our deficit of $5 billion would be equal to about $50 in USA compared to GDP growth of $57 billion.

Universal healthcare is the most efficient and cost effective way of reducing costs yet for many Democrats leaders it is poorly conceived. Bernie's plan outstrips what is offered in Canada but at the same time doesn't alleviate the cost drivers that Canada has. The best way is a staged approach fixing many of the inherent weaknesses in "Obama Care" then gradually implement a single payer system.

It is unfortunate with the great divide by the parties that consensus of unity for national stability can't be formed.

[gtn130]

I don't trust the Ds as far as I can throw them either. I don't think they are willing to take the tough choices. It was clear when Obama had the majority - where did they put that stimulus money? Was it well spent? When they took on healthcare did they go after the cost drivers or do the political "thing". Did they take on gun control when they were the dominant majority. Did they get rid of baseline spending? Did they do the things that were required to get us growth to get out of this fiscal mess or did they just vilify the business community?

Aren't you asking an awful lot from a President and Dem Party that had the majority for 2 years, especially when you take into account that there was a major economic recession that needed to be immediately addressed when Obama took office?

You're right regarding healthcare cost drivers. They remain a major drag on healthcare and our economy. But if Obama and the Dems had taken on the cost drivers fight in the short time they held the majority I believe the healthcare reform bill would have never seen the light of day.

I think Obama and the Dems chose to seize the opportunity to pass Obamacare--knowing it was a flawed bill--with the intention of coming back later to tackle the bills shortcomings, including cost drivers. Ideally, with the support of the Repubs. Obama himself pretty much said as much right after Obamacare was passed. You may not agree with that strategy but it is what it is.

BTW, the popularity of Obamacare is steadily rising. It is currently polling at 54% favorable to 42% unfavorable, according to the Kaiser Foundation.

Well yes, I am asking lots... that is the point. The point isn't to blame the opposition it is to see what you get done. The Ds took the wrong approach to their stimulus spending, how they approached healthcare (it doesn't matter if people approve of bad legislation, it still buries you) and increasing the use of the administration to pass "rules" vs. "laws". Pretty much HATE that Trump can use that now. It of course goes much deeper.

Lets go back to the Carter Administration and complete D control. Their inflationary positions really hurt the country and led to baseline spending - one of those really runniness policies. And many of our problems in the middle-east come directly from his administration. And you had a D congress that overrode his vetoes that had wasteful spending.

Or the Clinton Administration when the Ds had the majority - where they pushed through legislation that "helped" push the housing crisis.

But I am beating on the Ds now - I could easily beat on the Rs and each of their administrations - but I don't think I need to with this audience and with this current administration and legislative body.

dckingsfan,

The GOP wants to:

-slash taxes for corporations/millionaires
-cut spending on healthcare and other services
-deregulate financial institutions

That's their governing agenda. There are no deficit hawks. Entire concept is mythology. They're not trying to help anyone or pass sweeping legislation that would do anything positive. Their lack of legislative accomplishments is by design.

The fact that you're trying to compare the GOP's antics to the two years the dems had a majority (and tried playing by the rules) shows how misguided this whole centrist bit is.

Remember Merrick Garland?

[dckingsfan]

Violent agreement - and there were Rs that supported him... can't wait to see him go.

One of the false equivalencies I sometimes see here and on the OT board is subtly or more explicitly characterizing criticism of the Democratic party or Clinton or Obama as of a piece with voting for and supporting Trump. I never really want to have that conversation, and a number of seemingly smart and well-informed (and occasionally quite witty) people sometimes seem to be going in that direction. It frequently does effectively derail discussion regarding Democratic Party and liberal platform shortcomings, a kind of knocking over the chessboard rather than risk defeat.

If anyone here said Clinton and Trump were basically the same, that had to be at least a little bit of have-I-made-my-point audaciocity, yeah?

As a outsider I do lean towards the Democrats but as a fiscal conservative both parties scare the heck out of me. Both have no concept of running a government the Republicans as a party of NO during the Obama years proved to be totally inept in governing.

The American government has been running on the credit card ever since the (Clinton) Carter years . That has to stop! The latest tax reforms were blatantly stupid in that in a economy at full employment. This will increase the deficit by at least 1 trillion a year. America has to look at that it is not the economic superpower it once was. People must realize that taxes aren't inherently bad it's the value you receive for those taxes. While I'm unhappy in Canada that we haven't balanced the budget and even though last years 3% growth in the GDP did outstrip our deficit. But putting things in prospective our deficit of $5 billion would be equal to about $50 in USA compared to GDP growth of $57 billion.

Universal healthcare is the most efficient and cost effective way of reducing costs yet for many Democrats leaders it is poorly conceived. Bernie's plan outstrips what is offered in Canada but at the same time doesn't alleviate the cost drivers that Canada has. The best way is a staged approach fixing many of the inherent weaknesses in "Obama Care" then gradually implement a single payer system.

It is unfortunate with the great divide by the parties that consensus of unity for national stability can't be formed.

[Ruzious]

Violent agreement - and there were Rs that supported him... can't wait to see him go.

One of the false equivalencies I sometimes see here and on the OT board is subtly or more explicitly characterizing criticism of the Democratic party or Clinton or Obama as of a piece with voting for and supporting Trump. I never really want to have that conversation, and a number of seemingly smart and well-informed (and occasionally quite witty) people sometimes seem to be going in that direction. It frequently does effectively derail discussion regarding Democratic Party and liberal platform shortcomings, a kind of knocking over the chessboard rather than risk defeat.

If anyone here said Clinton and Trump were basically the same, that had to be at least a little bit of have-I-made-my-point audaciocity, yeah?

As a outsider I do lean towards the Democrats but as a fiscal conservative both parties scare the heck out of me. Both have no concept of running a government the Republicans as a party of NO during the Obama years proved to be totally inept in governing.

The American government has been running on the credit card ever since the Clinton years. That has to stop! The latest tax reforms were blatantly stupid in that in a economy at full employment. This will increase the deficit by at least 1 trillion a year. America has to look at that it is not the economic superpower it once was. People must realize that taxes aren't inherently bad it's the value you receive for those taxes. While I'm unhappy in Canada that we haven't balanced the budget and even though last years 3% growth in the GDP did outstrip our deficit. But putting things in prospective our deficit of $5 billion would be equal to about $50 in USA compared to GDP growth of $57 billion.

Universal healthcare is the most efficient and cost effective way of reducing costs yet for many Democrats leaders it is poorly conceived. Bernie's plan outstrips what is offered in Canada but at the same time doesn't alleviate the cost drivers that Canada has. The best way is a staged approach fixing many of the inherent weaknesses in "Obama Care" then gradually implement a single payer system.

It is unfortunate with the great divide by the parties that consensus of unity for national stability can't be formed.

If polled, I'm betting that most Americans think the ACA was repealed. It's effectiveness has been greatly damaged by Trump, and the tax penalties have been repealed, but the ACA is still there. If the Dems get another shot at, it will be incumbent on them to make it better.

[dckingsfan]

The GOP wants to:

-slash taxes for corporations/millionaires
-cut spending on healthcare and other services
-deregulate financial institutions

That's their governing agenda. There are no deficit hawks. Entire concept is mythology. They're not trying to help anyone or pass sweeping legislation that would do anything positive. Their lack of legislative accomplishments is by design.

The fact that you're trying to compare the GOP's antics to the two years the dems had a majority (and tried playing by the rules) shows how misguided this whole centrist bit is.

Remember Merrick Garland?

You are right. The Rs no longer have deficit hawks. The Ds are not deficit hawks either.

The Rs have no recent legislative accomplishments (since Reagan trying to end the cold war). The Ds have no recent legislative accomplishments either. ACA - no. Student lending - no. HUD - no. Did you see the Ds really great tax proposal?

This shows how misguided it is when you think that taking a bad side actually helps.

[FAH1223]

One of the false equivalencies I sometimes see here and on the OT board is subtly or more explicitly characterizing criticism of the Democratic party or Clinton or Obama as of a piece with voting for and supporting Trump. I never really want to have that conversation, and a number of seemingly smart and well-informed (and occasionally quite witty) people sometimes seem to be going in that direction. It frequently does effectively derail discussion regarding Democratic Party and liberal platform shortcomings, a kind of knocking over the chessboard rather than risk defeat.

If anyone here said Clinton and Trump were basically the same, that had to be at least a little bit of have-I-made-my-point audaciocity, yeah?

As a outsider I do lean towards the Democrats but as a fiscal conservative both parties scare the heck out of me. Both have no concept of running a government the Republicans as a party of NO during the Obama years proved to be totally inept in governing.

The American government has been running on the credit card ever since the (Clinton) Carter years . That has to stop! The latest tax reforms were blatantly stupid in that in a economy at full employment. This will increase the deficit by at least 1 trillion a year. America has to look at that it is not the economic superpower it once was. People must realize that taxes aren't inherently bad it's the value you receive for those taxes. While I'm unhappy in Canada that we haven't balanced the budget and even though last years 3% growth in the GDP did outstrip our deficit. But putting things in prospective our deficit of $5 billion would be equal to about $50 in USA compared to GDP growth of $57 billion.

Universal healthcare is the most efficient and cost effective way of reducing costs yet for many Democrats leaders it is poorly conceived. Bernie's plan outstrips what is offered in Canada but at the same time doesn't alleviate the cost drivers that Canada has. The best way is a staged approach fixing many of the inherent weaknesses in "Obama Care" then gradually implement a single payer system.

It is unfortunate with the great divide by the parties that consensus of unity for national stability can't be formed.

Nope. It was Reagan.

Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, a 186 percent increase from the $998 billion debt at the end of Carter's last budget, FY 1981. Reaganomics didn't work to grow the economy enough to offset tax cuts.

FY 1989 - $255 billion.
FY 1988 - $252 billion.
FY 1987 - $225 billion.
FY 1986 - $297 billion.
FY 1985 - $256 billion.
FY 1984 - $195 billion.
FY 1983 - $235 billion.
FY 1982 - $144 billion.

Jimmy Carter: Added $299 billion, a 43 percent increase from the $699 billion debt at the end of Ford's last budget, FY 1977.

FY 1981 - $90 billion.
FY 1980 - $81 billion.
FY 1979 - $55 billion.
FY 1978 - $73 billion.

Gerald Ford: Added $224 billion, a 47 percent increase from the $475 billion debt at the end of Nixon's last budget, FY 1974.

FY 1977 - $78 billion.
FY 1976 - $87 billion.
FY 1975 - $58 billion.

Richard Nixon: Added $121 billion, a 34 percent increase from the $354 billion debt at the end of LBJ's last budget, FY 1969.

FY 1974 - $17 billion.
FY 1973 - $31 billion.
FY 1972 - $29 billion.
FY 1971 - $27 billion.
FY 1970 - $17 billion.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Added $42 billion, a 13 percent increase from the $312 billion debt at the end of JFK's last budget, FY 1964.

FY 1969 - $6 billion.
FY 1968 - $21 billion.
FY 1967 - $6 billion.
FY 1966 - $3 billion.
FY 1965 - $6 billion.

John F. Kennedy: Added $23 billion, an 8 percent increase from the $289 billion debt at the end of Eisenhower's last budget, FY 1961.

FY 1964 - $6 billion.
FY 1963 - $7 billion.
FY 1962 - $10 billion.

[gtn130]

One of the false equivalencies I sometimes see here and on the OT board is subtly or more explicitly characterizing criticism of the Democratic party or Clinton or Obama as of a piece with voting for and supporting Trump. I never really want to have that conversation, and a number of seemingly smart and well-informed (and occasionally quite witty) people sometimes seem to be going in that direction. It frequently does effectively derail discussion regarding Democratic Party and liberal platform shortcomings, a kind of knocking over the chessboard rather than risk defeat.

If anyone here said Clinton and Trump were basically the same, that had to be at least a little bit of have-I-made-my-point audaciocity, yeah?

There are an infinite number of people who think Clinton and Trump are equally corrupt. If you ask Nate or SDtard (for dotard), they'll tell you Hillary is far more corrupt and should be in jail.

When it comes to folks like dckingsfan - I know he doesn't think Hillary/Trump are the same, but I find it to be extremely tone deaf when the country is facing an existential and likely constitutional crisis, and somehow it's high time we dig into the shortcomings of the Democratic establishment.

I am very much aware of the Democrats being deeply flawed and sometimes even fraudulent, but we kind of need to overthrow this fascist imbecile and his minions before we start digging into policy.

[gtn130]

This shows how misguided it is when you think that taking a bad side actually helps.

The thing is, I might agree with this if Trump didn't exist and the Republicans weren't enabling and empowering him.

[Ruzious]

Yup, as much as I respect Reagan's 1986 tax act, he increased the debt by unprecedented percentages in his first term.

[TGW]

Reagan was an unmitigated disaster as President on so many different ways.

[cammac]

PA18 is in the news what should have been a walk in the park for the Republicans has turned into a horror show. The Republican candidate is almost mirror image of the Trumpster and boasts he was Trump before Trump. Conor Lamb is not the darling of the progressives in the Democratic party but much more of a centralist. VP Biden campaigned for him this week and the consensus is that he is marginally in the lead for March 13th. The Republican party and others have poured in more than $8 million in a district that will no longer exist in 2018. For a true BLUE WAVE more candidates like Conor Lamb need to run in Red States while progressives have a message it doesn't resonate everywhere.

Roughly two dozen unions are mobilizing workers like Sparks in the final days of the race to help Lamb do the improbable — win.

...

Two miles down the road from the rally is a local International Union of Painters and Allied Trades training center in Carnegie. It’s one of four union buildings in different corners of the 18th District hosting phone banks and organizing canvassing efforts.

Maps of the district line three of the four walls in one room, where stacks of papers cover the table and a “Steelworkers for Lamb” sign rests on the window pane. Volunteers meet here after work and on weekends to phone their fellow union members and knock on doors.

Steelworkers make up the largest segment of union members in the district — nearly 18,000 voters are in steelworker union households, according to Waters. Roughly 80,000 people in the district are union members or members of union households.

Waters and Mikus, the strategist, estimated union members tend to comprise 20 percent to 25 percent of the electorate —and that percentage needs to increase to 30 or higher to make a difference for Lamb.

But union leaders say Saccone’s record in the state House will hurt him with their members. He was endorsed by Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Work Committee in 2014 and he voted against a bill that expanded access to unemployment compensation.

“They don’t forget that,” Grinko said of union workers, noting painters rely on unemployment when work is scarce in the winter. “It’s not a Trump issue. It’s who’s doing best for their paycheck and who hurt them the most.”

So what can Democrats hoping to win back blue-collar workers and union members learn from this race? Focus on the economy, leaders and workers said.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/3/8/1747412/-Two-dozen-unions-are-rallying-together-to-power-Conor-Lamb-s-campaign-in-PA-18

[FAH1223]

One of the false equivalencies I sometimes see here and on the OT board is subtly or more explicitly characterizing criticism of the Democratic party or Clinton or Obama as of a piece with voting for and supporting Trump. I never really want to have that conversation, and a number of seemingly smart and well-informed (and occasionally quite witty) people sometimes seem to be going in that direction. It frequently does effectively derail discussion regarding Democratic Party and liberal platform shortcomings, a kind of knocking over the chessboard rather than risk defeat.

If anyone here said Clinton and Trump were basically the same, that had to be at least a little bit of have-I-made-my-point audaciocity, yeah?

There are an infinite number of people who think Clinton and Trump are equally corrupt. If you ask Nate or SDtard (for dotard), they'll tell you Hillary is far more corrupt and should be in jail.

When it comes to folks like dckingsfan - I know he doesn't think Hillary/Trump are the same, but I find it to be extremely tone deaf when the country is facing an existential and likely constitutional crisis, and somehow it's high time we dig into the shortcomings of the Democratic establishment.

I am very much aware of the Democrats being deeply flawed and sometimes even fraudulent, but we kind of need to overthrow this fascist imbecile and his minions before we start digging into policy.

It is because the Democratic establishment has succumbed to the corporate powers that be completely and helped descend the country to where it is right now. The Dems don't even exist in half the states anymore.

[gtn130]

It is because the Democratic establishment has succumbed to the corporate powers that be completely and helped descend the country to where it is right now. The Dems don't even exist in half the states anymore.

Do you think the vast majority of voters actually care about political outcomes? Why is it exactly that the Kentucky electorate simultaneously despises Obamacare while being some of the foremost beneficiaries of the law?

Not everyone is super WOKE about corruption among establishment elites. Lots of folks just watch Fox News and do what Hannity tells them to do even when it's hilariously against their own interests (literally always). It's all identity politics.

The key difference is that Fox News and Republicans in general are just better at playing the game and more willing to break the rules. Firing up their base with propaganda, making wild empty promises, drawing from a bottomless well of intellectual dishonesty - those things are really successful short-term strategies! That, along with the fact that they own the most important voting bloc - retirees who reliably vote because of they have nothing else to do.

The idea that Democratic establishment elites being phonies is what has lead to their recent decline is definitely not a fair statement.

[dckingsfan]

This shows how misguided it is when you think that taking a bad side actually helps.

The thing is, I might agree with this if Trump didn't exist and the Republicans weren't enabling and empowering him.

That's fair. But that seems to be why we have this seesaw going on, no? Maybe after a few more cycles it may change your mind.

[Pointgod]

PA18 is in the news what should have been a walk in the park for the Republicans has turned into a horror show. The Republican candidate is almost mirror image of the Trumpster and boasts he was Trump before Trump. Conor Lamb is not the darling of the progressives in the Democratic party but much more of a centralist. VP Biden campaigned for him this week and the consensus is that he is marginally in the lead for March 13th. The Republican party and others have poured in more than $8 million in a district that will no longer exist in 2018. For a true BLUE WAVE more candidates like Conor Lamb need to run in Red States while progressives have a message it doesn't resonate everywhere.

Roughly two dozen unions are mobilizing workers like Sparks in the final days of the race to help Lamb do the improbable — win.

...

Two miles down the road from the rally is a local International Union of Painters and Allied Trades training center in Carnegie. It’s one of four union buildings in different corners of the 18th District hosting phone banks and organizing canvassing efforts.

Maps of the district line three of the four walls in one room, where stacks of papers cover the table and a “Steelworkers for Lamb” sign rests on the window pane. Volunteers meet here after work and on weekends to phone their fellow union members and knock on doors.

Steelworkers make up the largest segment of union members in the district — nearly 18,000 voters are in steelworker union households, according to Waters. Roughly 80,000 people in the district are union members or members of union households.

Waters and Mikus, the strategist, estimated union members tend to comprise 20 percent to 25 percent of the electorate —and that percentage needs to increase to 30 or higher to make a difference for Lamb.

But union leaders say Saccone’s record in the state House will hurt him with their members. He was endorsed by Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Work Committee in 2014 and he voted against a bill that expanded access to unemployment compensation.

“They don’t forget that,” Grinko said of union workers, noting painters rely on unemployment when work is scarce in the winter. “It’s not a Trump issue. It’s who’s doing best for their paycheck and who hurt them the most.”

So what can Democrats hoping to win back blue-collar workers and union members learn from this race? Focus on the economy, leaders and workers said.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/3/8/1747412/-Two-dozen-unions-are-rallying-together-to-power-Conor-Lamb-s-campaign-in-PA-18

It ain't over till it's over, but this race seems pretty interesting. It's funny that if Conor Lamb loses, the far left wing of the party will be like "see corporate Democrats can't win!" but if he pulls off an extrodinary victory all you'll hear is crickets from the so called Progressive wing. The bigger point is that you need both far left and centrist Democrats to course correct the country! What's the point in tearing down each other when Republicans are the biggest problem. Slowly moving the country left should be the goal of all Democrats.