Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Seems too perfect to be coincidence or maybe it's me. (Original Post) Phlem Apr 2015 OP
She hasn't even announced yet and I am nauseated onecaliberal Apr 2015 #1
Just curious as to why this is in the Elizabeth Warren Group... bunnies Apr 2015 #2
I have no idea. Phlem Apr 2015 #3
lol. bunnies Apr 2015 #4
Well, to make it about Warren - I see Hillary is using the "deck is stacked" thing djean111 Apr 2015 #5
You didn't expect the Republicans to oppose Hillary? delrem Apr 2015 #6
Are you kidding me? Phlem Apr 2015 #7

onecaliberal

(36,180 posts)
1. She hasn't even announced yet and I am nauseated
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 12:52 PM
Apr 2015

At the coverage this morning. I fucking despise what passes for the 4th estate in this country.

 

bunnies

(15,859 posts)
2. Just curious as to why this is in the Elizabeth Warren Group...
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 12:59 PM
Apr 2015

Shes not even mentioned in the article.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
3. I have no idea.
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 01:01 PM
Apr 2015

I was thinking EW when I was typing this up. I think something I saw in a thread or two before I got here.


On edit I meant to click the "populist reform of the democratic party". Right below the EW group.

Should I delete this and re-post in the right group?


 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
5. Well, to make it about Warren - I see Hillary is using the "deck is stacked" thing
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 03:39 PM
Apr 2015

that Warren said. A little different take when compared to telling the banks that she has their backs.

delrem

(9,688 posts)
6. You didn't expect the Republicans to oppose Hillary?
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 03:50 PM
Apr 2015

Progressives oppose the third-way program, which is to pander to the rich, the bankers, the war profiteers, to big money, while paying lip service to some abstracted "social issues". As if the latter can and should be paid for by accepting the former. Progressives oppose mindless hawkishness that sees the world purely in terms of brute force, in terms of a "diplomacy" that only kicks in after a country submits to brute force violence and threats. Republicans don't oppose that. Republicans won't mention that. There's no similarity whatsover between Republican objections and progressive objections to third-way warmongers.

It's up to progressives to define the terms of debate -- and progressives will get nowhere by hoping third-way Dems can somehow, on the eve of the election, be persuaded or pressured to in fact "swing to the left". That idea, that all that's needed is to run a token progressive candidate, or even suggest a token progressive candidate, so as to somehow force third-way to change its campaign rhetoric, is totally discredited in 2015. We all know, now, to look to a politician's actions, not just listen in blissful ignorance to their lofty words.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Elizabeth Warren»Seems too perfect to be c...