Dems Rebuild

[zoogs]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernies-record-220508

[RedDenver]

2 minutes ago, zoogs said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernies-record-220508

So Warren was instrumental in the CFPB.

 

Bernie was instrumental in the Veterans' Affairs modernization act. And that politico article is opinions of establishment politicians, which seems like hot air when considering:

Quote

But the sparse number of bills isn’t surprising. Volden and Vanderbilt University’s Alan Wiseman assess the legislative effectiveness of House members by comparing their records to a benchmark. According to this analysis, Sanders has either met or exceeded expectations during his tenure in the House

 

But none of that says why Warren shouldn't have to answer questions from the left.

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Moiraine]

Another reason for me never to become a Democrat.

[Danny Bateman]

Nice.

[TGHusker]

On 9/28/2017 at 9:13 AM, RedDenver said:

So is there now any way to criticize Warren without being part of the "bro left"? Her meetings with Wall Street and the bankers are concerning to me.

That is a problem with political discussion today. When Obama was President, those who criticized his policies were often accused of doing so because he was African American.   This is an unfair accusation.  A person can have honest doubts about policy without it being a racist thing. But that is our culture today.  One should be able to criticize Warren because of policy and action and not have it labeled as being sexist.  Of course the old argument is that if you can't refute the charges, attack and label the messenger. 

[Danny Bateman]

If that's the case, lots of people criticizing Warren (and other women in politics) need to reconsider their word choice as well.

[Moiraine]

Maybe criticize her without mentioning the tone of her voice or how angry she seems when she speaks?

 

When people focus on policy and make good arguments, I'll believe people don't like the policy.

[Danny Bateman]

5 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

Maybe criticize her without mentioning the tone of her voice or how angry she seems when she speaks?

 

When people focus on policy and make good arguments, I'll believe people don't like the policy.

 

Bingo.

 

Words like "shrill" or "scold" or "frazzled" or "scrambles" bury any legitimate argument people have to make. Implying a woman can't handle the same job a man can or attacking them with traditionally gendered descriptors? Why not just come out and tell them to stay in the kitchen point blank?

[RedDenver]

9 minutes ago, dudeguyy said:

 

Bingo.

 

Words like "shrill" or "scold" or "frazzled" or "scrambles" bury any legitimate argument people have to make. Implying a woman can't handle the same job a man can or attacking them with traditionally gendered descriptors? Why not just come out and tell them to stay in the kitchen point blank?

I agree.

 

I was pushing back against an article earlier in the thread that lumped the things you're citing in with her meetings with Wall St and big donors and not having explained why she didn't back Bernie (or Hillary) during the primary.

[Danny Bateman]

2 hours ago, RedDenver said:

I agree.

 

I was pushing back against an article earlier in the thread that lumped the things you're citing in with her meetings with Wall St and big donors and not having explained why she didn't back Bernie (or Hillary) during the primary.

 

Ahhh. I figured. And if it wasn't clear, my criticism was in no way directed at you. It was at the other bits in the article you're talking about (the non-Wall St stuff).

 

What you're talking about is completely fair game, IMO. I'm just also with zoogs in that I wish women weren't criticized lazily with that type of gendered language but rather on the merits.

Not that I want to go down this rabbit hole again, but as cold and robotic and uncharismatic as she was, I noticed some of that type of language creeping into the discourse about her last year and it always bugged me. It's like, criticize her for the legitimate reasons that deserved scrutiny, not just lazy gender-specific drive-bys. It made it very clear to me that some portion of the population is just uncomfortable with a woman being in charge.

[knapplc]

I've been saying this for years. Pelosi doesn't resonate with voters outside her district, and hasn't for a long, long time.  The Democrats absolutely need new leadership.

 

 

[Moiraine]

I don't even know that much about Pelosi. I just know lots of people hate her, and that there should be a 12 year maximum in the Senate and House (combined).

[TGHusker]

I just heard an interview on the radio with some Pro-Life Dems (yes there really are some and they are listed on the "Endangered Species List").  When ask why don't you just switch parties to the prolife party, one Pro-life female Dem said "I prefer to have a "whole life" party and feels that the Dems will eventually see the light.  By whole life she means having policies that provide for the well being of the person from womb to the grave.  She believes many people would switch to the Dem party if they were more open to  pro life concerns.   I would agree - I think there would be many disillusioned repubs that would be open to the Dem party if it was more pro-life.  I think many "Compassionate Conservatives" would be willing to take that step.  As one, I've recognized that the Rep party has only given lip service to it.  They also have not address the 'compassionate societal needs' as they should - preferring a 'hard conservatism' over the needs of many common Americans.  I think there needs to be a balanced discussion on prolife/woman rights issues that doesn't shut down the voices on each side.  The party that finds that balance will benefit. 

[RedDenver]

And the divide increases as "Berniecrats" are purged from the DNC.

 

Quote

Sparking concerns that party leadership is making the same mistakes that have rendered them increasingly powerless and without an inspiring vision, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is reportedly carrying out a massive staff shake-up in which veteran progressives are being purged and "left out in the cold."