I am actively following U.S politics, what are the policies the Democrats are pushing for 2018?

[Not2BSubjugated]

They are not putting out enough, but at the same time, Trump is always hogging the spotlight, so even if they do have good ideas, no one gets to hear them unless they're actively looking.

"Hogging the spotlight" is an interesting way to put it. Last I checked, the president doesn't get to tell the news agencies what to cover. If reporters have decided that psychoanalyzing Trump's twitter posts is priority number one, that's on them.

 

[John Shaw]

They are not putting out enough, but at the same time, Trump is always hogging the spotlight, so even if they do have good ideas, no one gets to hear them unless they're actively looking.

"Hogging the spotlight" is an interesting way to put it. Last I checked, the president doesn't get to tell the news agencies what to cover. If reporters have decided that psychoanalyzing Trump's twitter posts is priority number one, that's on them.

Did I say otherwise?

 

[Imissbush]

Of the hundreds of hours of interviews, discussions, debates, press conferences, I am still unaware of the policies that the Democrats are promoting.

All of the alt-left celebrities and supporters always say how could anyone vote for Trump?" I ask the same thing, "just what is it you are apparently voting for"? Just as many on the alt-left didn't know why they were protesting, I assume most don't know why they are supposed to be voting for the democrats.

"Well, people tell me to vote for them because they are better"?

Restoring Constitutional checks and balances to our government since the GOP is awol in their responsibility there

Which check and balance have they been awol on?

Approving totally unqualified judges, not doing ANYTHING to stop his profiting from office with his business, obstructing the investigations into his possible treasonous behavior, not calling him out for his obvious unfitness for office

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

They are not putting out enough, but at the same time, Trump is always hogging the spotlight, so even if they do have good ideas, no one gets to hear them unless they're actively looking.

Hogging the spotlight? That's his fault or the MSM's?

Democrats don't have any good ideas. That's why they are Democrats.

I think that is an oversimplification, but in my opinion it's true that they are doing a poor job of spreading ideas. All they are right now is "anti-Trump". A double-edged blade, made of glass.

And I hope they stay on that message too. I hope they keep calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist, sexist, homophobe that worships rich people. Bring back Hillarys Deplorable remark and make it the theme for the Democrat party.

Considering their love affair with intersectionalism, I'm similarly hoping that they hamstring themselves by speaking honestly about it. Ellison championing Antifa the other day warmed my fucking heart.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

They are not putting out enough, but at the same time, Trump is always hogging the spotlight, so even if they do have good ideas, no one gets to hear them unless they're actively looking.

"Hogging the spotlight" is an interesting way to put it. Last I checked, the president doesn't get to tell the news agencies what to cover. If reporters have decided that psychoanalyzing Trump's twitter posts is priority number one, that's on them.

Did I say otherwise?

Yeah, you kinda did. When you say that Trump is hogging the spotlight, the obvious implication is that he is somehow in control of the spotlight's focus. He is not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Of the hundreds of hours of interviews, discussions, debates, press conferences, I am still unaware of the policies that the Democrats are promoting.

All of the alt-left celebrities and supporters always say how could anyone vote for Trump?" I ask the same thing, "just what is it you are apparently voting for"? Just as many on the alt-left didn't know why they were protesting, I assume most don't know why they are supposed to be voting for the democrats.

"Well, people tell me to vote for them because they are better"?

Restoring Constitutional checks and balances to our government since the GOP is awol in their responsibility there

Any examples?

Checks and balances? We have all kinds of commie judges stopping Trump and his agendas. When a judge tells a sitting President he can't use a law specifically created for a President, that's what I consider an assault on checks and balances.

Boo boo, your racist travel ban is garbage. Heck, you are probably a garbage person

And obviously you are an ignorant one. The law was passed in Congress years ago that a President has the exclusive legal ability to ban anybody for any reason from this country. That includes any group or groups of people for any amount of time he or she deems necessary. In spite of that law, a commie judge ruled that he couldn't use that law. This is also known as judicial legislation.

 

[Avatar4321]

Of the hundreds of hours of interviews, discussions, debates, press conferences, I am still unaware of the policies that the Democrats are promoting.

All of the alt-left celebrities and supporters always say how could anyone vote for Trump?" I ask the same thing, "just what is it you are apparently voting for"? Just as many on the alt-left didn't know why they were protesting, I assume most don't know why they are supposed to be voting for the democrats.

"Well, people tell me to vote for them because they are better"?

Restoring Constitutional checks and balances to our government since the GOP is awol in their responsibility there

Which check and balance have they been awol on?

Approving totally unqualified judges, not doing ANYTHING to stop his profiting from office with his business, obstructing the investigations into his possible treasonous behavior, not calling him out for his obvious unfitness for office

So you want them to stop him from doing things he isn’t doing... right

And many republicans have called him out

 

[John Shaw]

Of the hundreds of hours of interviews, discussions, debates, press conferences, I am still unaware of the policies that the Democrats are promoting.

All of the alt-left celebrities and supporters always say how could anyone vote for Trump?" I ask the same thing, "just what is it you are apparently voting for"? Just as many on the alt-left didn't know why they were protesting, I assume most don't know why they are supposed to be voting for the democrats.

"Well, people tell me to vote for them because they are better"?

Restoring Constitutional checks and balances to our government since the GOP is awol in their responsibility there

Which check and balance have they been awol on?

Approving totally unqualified judges, not doing ANYTHING to stop his profiting from office with his business, obstructing the investigations into his possible treasonous behavior, not calling him out for his obvious unfitness for office

There has been no real evidence of treasonous behavior from Donald Trump. I find the man arrogant, obnoxious, distasteful, and even corrupt in many ways, but he's right in that this whole thing has the stink of a witch hunt. Not necessarily from Mueller, but from the left.

There is no way Trump is smart enough to commit treason and not have it come roaring back on him. No way.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Of the hundreds of hours of interviews, discussions, debates, press conferences, I am still unaware of the policies that the Democrats are promoting.

All of the alt-left celebrities and supporters always say how could anyone vote for Trump?" I ask the same thing, "just what is it you are apparently voting for"? Just as many on the alt-left didn't know why they were protesting, I assume most don't know why they are supposed to be voting for the democrats.

"Well, people tell me to vote for them because they are better"?

Restoring Constitutional checks and balances to our government since the GOP is awol in their responsibility there

Care to expound? I keep hearing vague accusations that the republicans are letting Trump get away with murder, but I'm not seeing the murder part whatsoever, and I'm also not seeing any excessive amount of cooperation between the legislators and the executive. Perhaps you could show me what I'm missing?

 

[John Shaw]

They are not putting out enough, but at the same time, Trump is always hogging the spotlight, so even if they do have good ideas, no one gets to hear them unless they're actively looking.

"Hogging the spotlight" is an interesting way to put it. Last I checked, the president doesn't get to tell the news agencies what to cover. If reporters have decided that psychoanalyzing Trump's twitter posts is priority number one, that's on them.

Did I say otherwise?

Yeah, you kinda did. When you say that Trump is hogging the spotlight, the obvious implication is that he is somehow in control of the spotlight's focus. He is not.

He isn't, but he knows the media. He knows how to dominate the headlines. Basically, all he has to do is say something ridiculous and all eyes are on him again.

So it's really both of them. No, the media chooses what to run, but they are beholden to run that which makes them money. And Trump is a big money-maker for them, because when it comes to being the center of attention, he truly is a god.

 

[tycho1572]

They are not putting out enough, but at the same time, Trump is always hogging the spotlight, so even if they do have good ideas, no one gets to hear them unless they're actively looking.

I’d listen. But I don’t know that I’ve seen a good idea from them

So many good ideas, I lost count:

Watching democrats pretend to care about anyone has always been comical.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Hogging the spotlight? That's his fault or the MSM's?

Democrats don't have any good ideas. That's why they are Democrats.

I think that is an oversimplification, but in my opinion it's true that they are doing a poor job of spreading ideas. All they are right now is "anti-Trump". A double-edged blade, made of glass.

And I hope they stay on that message too. I hope they keep calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist, sexist, homophobe that worships rich people. Bring back Hillarys Deplorable remark and make it the theme for the Democrat party.

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

Many in the GOP are against illegals coming to this country. There is nothing wrong with that. There is no coded languages for black people. That's the media and liberals that constantly try to make conservatives seem racist which in many cases, race wasn't even part of the subject.

The protesters in Charlottesville were merely trying to preserve history and were trouble free until ANTIFA showed up. They applied for a permit to protest and did exactly that, just like any other group who legally holds protests.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Hogging the spotlight? That's his fault or the MSM's?

Democrats don't have any good ideas. That's why they are Democrats.

I think that is an oversimplification, but in my opinion it's true that they are doing a poor job of spreading ideas. All they are right now is "anti-Trump". A double-edged blade, made of glass.

And I hope they stay on that message too. I hope they keep calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist, sexist, homophobe that worships rich people. Bring back Hillarys Deplorable remark and make it the theme for the Democrat party.

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

 

[John Shaw]

I think that is an oversimplification, but in my opinion it's true that they are doing a poor job of spreading ideas. All they are right now is "anti-Trump". A double-edged blade, made of glass.

And I hope they stay on that message too. I hope they keep calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist, sexist, homophobe that worships rich people. Bring back Hillarys Deplorable remark and make it the theme for the Democrat party.

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

Many in the GOP are against illegals coming to this country. There is nothing wrong with that. There is no coded languages for black people. That's the media and liberals that constantly try to make conservatives seem racist which in many cases, race wasn't even part of the subject.

The protesters in Charlottesville were merely trying to preserve history and were trouble free until ANTIFA showed up. They applied for a permit to protest and did exactly that, just like any other group who legally holds protests.

You have a right to your opinion, but I don't think most people, especially black people, would agree with it. The whole "save a statue" thing was just an excuse to go on a tear, yelling nazi and KKK slogans and waving torches around. Plus, the only person who died was a counter-protester.

 

[John Shaw]

I think that is an oversimplification, but in my opinion it's true that they are doing a poor job of spreading ideas. All they are right now is "anti-Trump". A double-edged blade, made of glass.

And I hope they stay on that message too. I hope they keep calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist, sexist, homophobe that worships rich people. Bring back Hillarys Deplorable remark and make it the theme for the Democrat party.

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

 

[Norman]

The DNC deputy chair weighs in with a whole book of great ideas:

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

They are not putting out enough, but at the same time, Trump is always hogging the spotlight, so even if they do have good ideas, no one gets to hear them unless they're actively looking.

"Hogging the spotlight" is an interesting way to put it. Last I checked, the president doesn't get to tell the news agencies what to cover. If reporters have decided that psychoanalyzing Trump's twitter posts is priority number one, that's on them.

Did I say otherwise?

Yeah, you kinda did. When you say that Trump is hogging the spotlight, the obvious implication is that he is somehow in control of the spotlight's focus. He is not.

He isn't, but he knows the media. He knows how to dominate the headlines. Basically, all he has to do is say something ridiculous and all eyes are on him again.

So it's really both of them. No, the media chooses what to run, but they are beholden to run that which makes them money. And Trump is a big money-maker for them, because when it comes to being the center of attention, he truly is a god.

I still disagree. This isn't the sort of case where anybody's being pressured into action by anything other than their own desire for the benefits gleaned from their actions. The fact that Donald Trump knows how the media is likely to respond does not put a share of responsibility for their actions on him. They alone choose what they report on, period.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And I hope they stay on that message too. I hope they keep calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist, sexist, homophobe that worships rich people. Bring back Hillarys Deplorable remark and make it the theme for the Democrat party.

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

Many in the GOP are against illegals coming to this country. There is nothing wrong with that. There is no coded languages for black people. That's the media and liberals that constantly try to make conservatives seem racist which in many cases, race wasn't even part of the subject.

The protesters in Charlottesville were merely trying to preserve history and were trouble free until ANTIFA showed up. They applied for a permit to protest and did exactly that, just like any other group who legally holds protests.

You have a right to your opinion, but I don't think most people, especially black people, would agree with it. The whole "save a statue" thing was just an excuse to go on a tear, yelling nazi and KKK slogans and waving torches around. Plus, the only person who died was a counter-protester.

You mean everybody that protested were screaming Nazi and KKK slogans? I must have missed that part.

Many blacks are ignorant to politics which is why they vote Democrat.

Ask a black man how he votes, and he will tell you Democrat.
Ask him why, and he will tell you because Republicans are for the rich white people.
Ask who told him that, and he will tell you the Democrats.

If blacks ever started to take an interest in politics, the Democrat party is screwed when blacks learn what Democrats have done to them the last several generations.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

And I hope they stay on that message too. I hope they keep calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist, sexist, homophobe that worships rich people. Bring back Hillarys Deplorable remark and make it the theme for the Democrat party.

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

What numbers are these? And has it become old white people vs everybody else, or has it become the left vs old white people?

 

[John Shaw]

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

What numbers are these? And has it become old white people vs everybody else, or has it become the left vs old white people?

How the 2016 Vote Broke Down by Race, Gender, and Age – Decision Desk HQ

As I said, I don't like the idea of categorizing people based upon characteristics that are beyond their control, but ... the numbers don't lie. Even among whites, Clinton and Trump were pretty much even in the 30 - 44. It wasn't until you get beyond 44 that it becomes really lopsided in Trump's favor.