Has The Democratic Party Gone TOO FAR or.....NOT FAR ENOUGH

Jump to Last Post 1-2 of 2 discussions (17 posts)
  1. gmwilliams profile image84
    gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago

    To some Americans, the Democratic Party has metamorphized into socialist, even so-called communistic values.  To these Americans, which include more moderate & centrist Democrats, the Democratic Party is no longer the party of Kennedy & Johnson. They contend that this party was veered too much to the far left.   However, there are others who vehemently contend that the Democratic Party hasn't gone far enough.  They believe that the Democratic Party has become irrelevant, staying in the past instead of adopting more revolutionary methods to solve American ills such as poverty, homelessness, & inequality, particularly in income, gender politics, & lastly education.  What are YOUR THOUGHTS regarding the American Democratic Party?

    1. MizBejabbers profile image88
      MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'm probably going to get blasted for saying this, but I'm so disgusted that I don't care anymore. This country is OVERPOPULATED (thanks to the bleeding hearts) and is run by BIG BUSINESS (thanks to the corporate butt-kissers) No matter what they do, the Dems don't have a solution because nobody has a solution anymore.
      What good does it do to replace the corporate demagogues with socialist dems? Until people with hearts still in their bodies and sense in their heads bring back jobs to this country, we will need socialism to take care of the people who are down on their luck (to Hell with the professional welfare citizens). Tariffs are only making the situation worse by bringing on limited supplies and higher prices on our exports. IF factories and business ARE brought back to the U.S. A. and result in jobs for everybody who desire to provide for themselves and their families, then the millions who want a free ride will need to be retrained to think and have the desire to provide for themselves. There would be no room for socialism among the Democrats if that happened. However, that's all probably just a pipe dream.
      So in reality, I would like to see the Democrats establish a middle of the road base again, work to provide jobs for the working class and get some common sense and work out a good plan for health care for everybody, but keep it separate from Medicare, a true entitlement for which we older folks have worked our butts off, paid our hard-earned money into, and deserve to keep exclusively for ourselves.
      With so many of them clamoring to become President in 2020, they need to take a more down-to-earth approach otherwise we will end up with another Republican President. I, personally, won't vote for a socialist Democrat, but neither will I vote for a Republican because of their pro-corporate and misogynist platform, and now their abject stupidity in blindly following an unfit leader. I suggest that the young lions of the Dems tone down their rhetoric and stop sounding like an American Lenin. That's the best way I know of to keep the Republicans in power. They need to start playing to the conservatives and middle-of-the-roaders instead of the freeloaders. After all, it is the MOTR who support the freeloaders. What if all the working class says "I GIVE UP, LET THEM SUPPORT ME, TOO!"

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        ?? You don't like Republicans because they're pro-business, but you want lots of (high paying) jobs.  You do realize that it isn't the little mom and pop stores that pay the big bucks to their employees?  That it is the same Big Business you (apparently) wish to drive out of the country with punitive taxes and rules?

        1. MizBejabbers profile image88
          MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Guess what, I discussed apples and you came back accusing me of not liking oranges, so it seems to me that we are off subject here. Let me make myself clear, although I did not bring up this subject for discussion in my post. You brought it up. I hate to see small business driven out of business by big corporate companies. WalMart, for instance, has driven out more small business enterprises, including the Five and Dime of my childhood. In fact, a 100-year-old Five and Dime that currently belonged to my children's grandparents couldn't compete with this monster Arkansas based company and went belly-up. The jobs I want to see come back are corporations like the auto industries, steel industries, textile mills and other clothing industries. Factories that make TVs, household appliances, boats, etc. Years ago I built thermostat controls in the factory plant of a corporation that moved overseas. These are practical businesses that provide jobs and don't run the small businessman broke. So I'm not contradicting myself, I'm distinguishing between those that actually provide jobs and those like BIG conglomerates that step on the little guy where ever they go.
          Pardon me, but I never mentioned punitive taxes and rules. Where did you get that? Trump's tariffs are the epitome of punitive taxes because it is the American consumer who pays them with higher prices at purchase, not the exporter in China. I'll admit that I used the word "export" in a sentence when I meant "import". That was an error on my part. Is that what set you off? My apologies then.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry - I just read between the lines and gathered you don't like Big Business.  I didn't mean to open any wounds, just respond to what I thought I was reading.  But with the rant here, about any business that is more efficient than a small mom and pop outfit, you've pretty much confirmed it.

            Yes, we need our manufacturers back.  But we ALSO need efficient, well-run retailers; the days of the small shops are mostly gone forever as they simply cannot compete.  Vendor prices, shipping, regulations and other things are slowly but surely driving them out of business anywhere there is enough market to support a major chain like WalMart.  Internet business (Amazon) is also going to take a huge bite out of small retailers.

            Nor will pretending that any large business doesn't "step on" the little guys help, for they ALL do.  It's why they are successful; they can afford to sell cheaper because of their size, and do so.  It's what we want, after all; cheap prices.  If it were not so we wouldn't have lost our manufacturing base to cheap overseas labor.

            1. MizBejabbers profile image88
              MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              You mention the need for large retailers because they keep the prices down whereas small retailers can't. True, but if the manufacturers were brought back to this country...and reason along with it (No paying barely literate employees more than college professors as was happening in the 60s and 70s) perhaps there would be room for the little merchant. Also, along with cheap prices, we are getting cheap goods.
              I will make one concession that chaps me where I sit down. I shop at two good department stores in town and at WalMart. I've noticed the quality of Wally World clothing is equal to and sometimes better than that of the "good" department stores. I wonder why because all the affordable goods come from China anyway. Of course the two stores to which I refer also sell some designer clothing that is out of my price range, so I'm referring to their garments that we middle class can afford.
              Again, we're off subject. Maybe the Dems need to work on bringing back industry to this country instead of working on paying reparations to ethnic groups who already received reparations in the late 1800s. To be honest with you, I just don't like either political party right now.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                I missed this when you posted.

                WalMart has cheaper prices, to a large degree, because they buy a boatload from China rather than a pallet of clothes.  They save on shipping costs that way plus they can leverage a lower price for each item.  Smaller department stores, even a chain with 100 stores, just can't compete there.

                There are other savings as well, for WalMart's business plan is to contain costs.  Lots of part time workers, lots of kids and seniors equal lower "bennie" costs while raising management costs (to handle the extra load) only a little.  WalMart doesn't just put some effort into cutting costs; it is a major part of their plan.

                Yes, Dems have (IMO) been responsible for driving out business.  While OSHA, MSHA, ADA and other programs are good things, they can be overdone...and they are.  When small businesses can be blackmailed because their bathroom stalls are a half inch too narrow to meet ADA rules we're going to far.  When MSHA collects big fines for not setting the hand brake on a car with an automatic transmission left in "park" on a prairie as flat as a pancake we've gone too far.  When a large corporation faces huge court penalties because their truck broke down, was moved completely off the shoulder and into grass but a drunken motorcyclist ran off the road, under the trailer and successfully sued because the truck (that was waiting for a tow truck to move it) was there we've gone too far.  When a manufacturing location, without a job in the building that a wheelchair can do, is forced to spend $20,000 to build a wheelchair ramp into the building we've gone too far.  And I have personal experience with all of these but the bathroom stalls.

                Our business needs some rules and requirements to operate safely and cleanly, but we've gone beyond any reasonable limits in far too many cases.

      2. gmwilliams profile image84
        gmwilliamsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        You are RIGHT on premise.   Something needs to be done to have the Democratic Party get back to...…….BASICS.  The basics are helping the middle class thrive by providing livable wage jobs, particularly for the educated middle classes.  The Democratic Party need to establish tough work policies for the ABLE-BODIED on welfare.  Also cut Obamacare & other government health programs.  Slash social welfare programs by at least 80%.   Send illegals back to their country of origin.  Furthermore, curtail immigration for a period- help Americans in need to become self-sufficient.   Yes, the Democratic Party has gone too far to the left- time to return the Democratic Party to logical reasonableness.

        1. MizBejabbers profile image88
          MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          You are so right. Thanks for carrying my discussion farther. I did get blasted, but my Republican friend had to go completely off the subject to do it. Funny how things work out. lol

    2. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Grace, the world of Kennedy and Johnson ended over half a century ago. Virtually everything since then has been subject to a sea-change. The GOP as moved away from moderation to this hard right, reactionary organization that we see today.

      Relative to today, I could no more compare Kennedy and Johnson's Democratic Party with the Republican Party of T. Roosevelt and William Howard Taft. Big changes occurred between 1910 and 1960 in America and around the world, don't you think?

      Besides the labels of socialism and communist, I don't think that it would be anywhere close to revolutionary to curb the power and influence of the corporate class, with a goal of leveling the playing field more so than it currently is.

      So, the status quo is unacceptable and I want things to move in the aforementioned direction to a greater extent. Moderating Capitalism and curbing abuses is neither Socialist nor communist, and may well prove necessary if we are all going to live in peace.

      1. MizBejabbers profile image88
        MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Now, that's a level-headed approach, Credence.

      2. Readmikenow profile image94
        Readmikenowposted 3 years agoin reply to this


        So, how does the playing field become level?  Raise taxes on the rich.  They tried that in many places like Venezuela.  The government there didn't realize capital is fluid.  This means, it goes where its owners go.  They promised many people free things and taxed the rich to pay for it.  They found out their wealthy class left.  They took their capital, business knowledge and money-making skills and went to other countries to continue being wealthy. Columbia was a favorite.

        It happened similar to the fictional story Atlas Shrugged by Ayan Rand.  Excellent book.

        So, when the wealthy class left, the Venezuelan government tried to run things.  The country soon discovered government bureaucrats do not make successful business people.

        So, then they had all these people angry at the government for what they had promised and could not deliver.  Their economy was in a shambles.

        So, what did they do?  They started instituting limited capitalistic principles, and things are still bad but becoming more stable.

        So, what is the solution?  Tax the rich to pay for the poor? Government intervention?  Neither of those have worked or ever will work. 

        I once heard a well-known economist give a lecture and say "Since there have been civilized modern societies there have been poor and there have been rich.  In communist countries this is true, in socialist countries this is true and in Capitalistic countries this is very true.  Capitalism offers opportunities the others don't to achieve wealth.  It is a system that creates the largest middle class."

        It was a long speech but I'm sure you get the gist of it.

        I have no ideas on how to change things. Is it possible people need to live with their life choices? I believe everything has been previously attempted and failed.

        What do you think should be done?

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Mike thank you for challenging me with this question.

          Here are some examples of how we can level the playing field.

          Equal justice also demands that everybody – no matter how wealthy or well-connected – is held accountable when they break the law. That means new laws and a new commitment to prosecuting giant corporations – and their leaders – when they cheat their customers, stomp out their competitors, or rob their workers. It means judicial nominees that follow the rule of law

          It’s not equal justice when a kid with an ounce of pot can get thrown in jail while a bank executive who launders money for a drug cartel can get a bonus. It’s not equal justice when, for the exact same crimes, African Americans are more likely than whites to be arrested, more likely to be charged, more likely to be convicted, and more likely to be sentenced. instead of catering to the wealthy and the well-connected.

          (A little more Justice within the criminal justice system might be a step in the right direction regarding leveling the playing field)

          Washington works great for the wealthy and the well-connected, but it isn’t working for anyone else. Companies and wealthy individuals spend billions every year to influence Congress and federal agencies to put their interests ahead of the public interest. This is deliberate, and we need to call this what it is—corruption, plain and simple. That’s why my candidate, Elizabeth Warren, has proposed the most ambitious set of anti-corruption reforms since Watergate to fundamentally change the way Washington does business.

          (You and I agreed about the corrupting influences in Washington, do we just talk about it or put someone in charge that will act?

          We will start by ending lobbying as we know it by closing loopholes so everyone who lobbies must register, shining sunlight on their activities, banning foreign governments from hiring Washington lobbyists, and shutting down the ability of lobbyists to move freely in and out of government jobs.

          ( A nice place to start to rein in the unearned advantage of the corporate class in using their influence and naturally corrupt and selfish tendencies to buy off our elective representatives.)

          Another way to level the playing field?

          We will also shut the revolving door between Wall Street and Washington and permanently ban Senators and Congressmen from trading stocks in office and from becoming lobbyists when they retire – not for one year or two years, but for life. We will make the justices of the Supreme Court follow a code of ethics and strengthen the code of conduct for all judges to make sure everyone gets a fair shake in our courts. And we will force every candidate for federal office to put their tax returns online.

          Together, these sweeping, structural changes will end the dominance of money in Washington, taking power away from the rich and powerful and putting it back where it belongs – with the American people themselves.

          (Yet, another example of leveling the playing field)

          The huge student loan debt burden is crushing millions of families and acting as an anchor on our economy. It’s reducing home ownership rates. It’s leading fewer people to start businesses. It’s forcing students to drop out of school before getting a degree. It’s a problem for all of us.

          Once we’ve cleared out the debt that’s holding down an entire generation of Americans, we must ensure that we never have another student debt crisis again. We can do that by recognizing that a public college education is like a public K-12 education — a basic public good that should be available to everyone with free tuition and zero debt at graduation. My plan for universal free college will:

          Give every American the opportunity to attend a two-year or four-year public college without paying a dime in tuition or fees.
          Make free college truly universal — not just in theory, but in practice — by making higher education of all kinds more inclusive and available to every single American, especially lower-income, Black, and Latinx students, without the need to take on debt to cover costs.

          So, I figure that if I have enough money to bail out banks to the tune of billions of dollars, or can afford to lace the globe with redundant (800-900)military Installations when our real challenge for world leadership has nothing to do with who has the biggest battleship, maybe we can afford to invest in our workforce with low cost public college education or trade schools. That rubs most conservatives the wrong way, but again that is the difference between the priority of progressives verses that of conservatives. Why should little Dodsworth have the advantage of higher education solely because his daddy has all of the money? We need to get real and provide opportunity for all to tap talent that we are going to need to compete and that has to go beyond who has gobs of money to start, because we all know that the system is rigged to give to some and deny others, we are not children. You can bet that China and its command economy is not wasting time in preparing its people to take the reins for the future.

          As far as I am concerned Capitalism as practiced in this culture needs a make over of the sort my candidate is talking about. Instead of this top down, trickle down, tinkle down approach, maybe we need to build  a strong middle class from the middle out. That, instead of waiting for Thurston Howell to see fit to shower us with his charity and job creation in exchange for being released from his tax burden.

          Making the adjustment in the system to make the corporate class more accountable, controlling their unwarranted influence in Washington, along with giving workers a fighting chance, will not turn America into Venezuela.

          You are right, there will always be poor and rich. I would like to see less of that based on structural disadvantage instead of the distinction made by people simply choosing not to participate after given ample opportunity. Then their poverty is of their own making.

          As far as I am concerned the capitalist class will desert  the American worker anyway, because the lure of cheap foreign labor and automation
          in a Capitalistic system will not allow for an  alternative course of action. So, why not save your breath, they will always whine about oppressive taxation, ad Nausea.

          I don't claim to have all the answers either, Mike. I do believe that the status quo as it currently exist will prove unproductive in the long term.

          I may have problems with extent of Warren's proposed reforms as to whether they are palatable, politically. But I will chance the direction provided by her or Bernie Sanders over the centrist Democrats and definitely, any Republican.

          So, why I may not attain to everything that I would like to see, someone recognizes my concerns and that, in its very admission, is a leveling of the playing field.

          If you have time, I offer another interesting article to make my point.

          https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … admissions

    3. Ken Burgess profile image80
      Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      You are correct, the Party is split.

      And what happens if Biden is selected and wins the 2020 election is the Party remains split, and its corrupt leaders remain in power of the Party.

      80 year old Pelosi and 78 year old Biden will have control over our government, and the 'far left' will be caged and left in the corner to stew in their lack of control for many years to come.

      The alternate is Biden loses in 2020, and Pelosi loses her control of the House shortly thereafter. These corrupt relics will be ushered out of power in D.C., finally, and new voices and new ideas will emerge in control of the Party.

      For anyone that wants real change in the system, who believes in the progressive ideals put forth by the likes of Sanders, Warren, or even Yang... the only way that comes about is with the cleansing of the Party of the old guard, and ushering in new leadership and new ideas.

      1. MizBejabbers profile image88
        MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Ken, the new leadership I'm seeing that is trying to emerge in the Democrat Party is Socialist in nature. While I agree that it's time for new blood in the party, I can't support Socialist extremists in any party. Neither can I support stark uncaring Capitalism in the other party. So maybe it's time to consider a third party if what you say is true.

        1. Ken Burgess profile image80
          Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Well a decision has to be made on the direction of the Nation, so the two sides MUST solidify into very obvious and differing choices.

          The reasons for this are many, mostly due to tech advances that are changing our world at breakneck pace, including industry and warfare.

          And due to the fact China has surpassed America in all things related to trade and industry.  China today is far more capable of building the best tanks, rockets, jets, etc. it has surpassed America and our politicians helped it happen over the last 25 years.

          So as a nation we can either put our focus on reclaiming that position, as global leader in trade, industry, technological advancements... in which case the Republican way of Nation first, Made in America, Capitalism and Corporatism is the direction we need to go.

          Or we choose as a nation to step aside, let China take the lead, and be a lesser economic force on the world stage.  In which case we DO need to become a more socialistic state, more akin to a European nation, because we won't have the jobs or the economy to be a Middle Class centric society, we will be a welfare/socialist state where the majority are given their pittance by the State.

          So considering these are the two directions we can strive to go, we should have the two Parties aligning themselves towards those ends.

          The Republicans with Trump dragging them in that direction are fulfilling their part... what we need is for the Democrats to dump the corrupt old cronies, and embrace a new more socialistic position. 

          Old Democrat supporters need to give up the idea of trying to go back to the 'old' Democrat party, that ship has sailed, the world has changed and the Republicans have embraced being the 'Middle Class' champions.  The Democratic Party abandoned them more than 20 years ago... it just took a while for most voters to figure that out.

  2. The0NatureBoy profile image58
    The0NatureBoyposted 3 years ago

    Because when congressional party members serves for a long time they generally becomes members of the "Deep State" therefore they didn't do enough. Look at Article 2.4s impeachment article I have in bold, The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors., and you can see what they should have included everyone who obstructed Justice like the President. If they were doing their jobs they would have composed Articles of Impeachment on them all.


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)