Democratic Party

I need someone to sensibly explain the benefits of the Democratic Party to our nation.
Not impressed what Obama did. One scandal after another. What is really so great about the democrat party?
Would they Federally legalize drugs ? Legalize Prostitution?
Would the people have any say about our country at all?I just need to know.what they truly have to offer.
What would the "ultimate" Democrat do/not do?

 

After a week in which the FBI director shot down Trump's claim that Obama wiretapped him, congressional committees are investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Ruskies, and the Great Negotiator had a major pratfall on his first effort to get a bill through a Congress controlled by his own party, ii's understandable Republicans want to shift the focus to Democrats. Trump characteristically has already blamed them for the defeat of his health care bill even though Republicans are in control of Congress. So now lets take the heat off the Republicans once more and focus on the Democrats. Their major advantages are: (1) they're not Republicans; (2) they're the only viable alternative to Republicans; and (3) they have a superior record for protecting the social safety net, civil rights and liberties, and the environment.

I can only speak for myself. I look at it relatively, in comparison with the other major party, the Republican Party. I live in a Red state, in which the governor and both houses of the legislature, not to mention the courts, are controlled by Tea Party Republicans. Their major idea of governing is to give tax cuts favoring the rich and corporations, to try to stick the Ten Commandments somewhere on public property, and to try to make it difficult for women to have an abortion. When the bottom fell out of the oil market, the tax cuts came back to bite us, and our teachers are leaving the state in droves to go to places where they're paid a decent salary.
The Oklahoma Highway Patrol says public safety could become a problem overnight if the state doesn't appropriate money to hire more troopers. Thanks to lax regulation of fracking operations, Oklahoma with no previous history of earthquakes is now ahead of California and comparable to some Pacific islands in numbers of earthquakes. But it's not as bad as Kansas, where the radical right wing Republicans have run the economy into the ground. Since we have both a Republican President and a Republican Congress again at the national level, we'll find out once more what's so wrong with the Republican Party. After G.W. Bush, how easily they forget.: Two wars, the worst recession since the thrities, torture, etc The "one scandal after another" charge under Obama is exaggerated.You're simply parroting fake news from Republican or Alt Right propaganda sources like Fox or Breitbart. The Obama Administration was one of the more scandal-free in decades, although scandals occurred, as they do in any administration. I think Republicans more than hold their own when it comes to scandal. For the on-going scandals of the Trump Administration, see the thread on the Trump political scorecard and the following:
http://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2017/03/20/trump-unprecedented-war-on-ethics-eisen-painter-column/99388636/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/president-trump-sued-watchdog-alleged-constitutional-business-ethics-violations/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-emoluments-clause_us_58794852e4b09281d0eaf212
https://www.theatlantic.com/please-support-us/?next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatlantic.com%2Fpolitics%2Farchive%2F2017%2F01%2Ftrumps-ethics-train-wreck%2F513446%2F#seen
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trumps-russia-scandal-theres-the-smell-of-treason_us_58d3517ee4b099c777b9df0b
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/02/23/trumps-russia-scandal-reaches-a-political-tipping-point/?utm_term=.2fc8c5ee5c4a
Democrats have never advocated legalization of drugs and prostitution. You must have them confused with the Libertarians. People would have at least as much say about our country as they do under Republican Presidents. It's Trump, Pence and the religious right who worry me in that regard).

In addition to not being Republicans, which is commendable enough, Democrats offer positive advantages, as well. They favor protection of the safety net for the least advantaged in our society, and protection of Social Security and Medicare. I think those are good programs, and Speaker Ryan can't resirain himself from going after them in favor of some unworkable privatization scheme. Democrats also recognize the need for environmental protection, which Trump is in the process of gutting in his new budget. Did I answer your question?

 

Without the democrats there's nothing to distinguish the US government from reality TV and Professional Wrestling.

 

Sort of...I understand many of comments. However, the thing I find about the Republicans/Trump thing that wasn't mentioned, is that Trump is not a Republican candidate in the ranks, i.e. "Has not held a Political Office". Therefore the Republicans are not working for him, rather against him to a large degree. The Republicans held Congress the last two years of the Obamma administration and sat on their hands, as they are doing now.

Frankly I think the majority of the Republicans are getting rich off their positions and therefore should be sent home without their substantial retirement benefits. They have been and still are worthless.

This is why I was asking what the Democrats really have to offer. In Obama's tenure, he isolated Israel, one of our major allies, and has supplied Iran with money, which is being used to build a nuclear arsenal which may one day destroy us. If any American citizens went to visit this country, they would immediately be imprisoned. But they deserve our money? I could go on, but what Obama did has shattered global respect for a once respectable leader in our world. I don't agree with our being in the Middle East in the first place (I by nature am a Libertarian), but I certainly do not approve of a President who seemingly "intentionally" weakens my home country.
Not saying Bush was any better, he couldn't (or wouldn't) get the FBI and CIA to work together, thus the 9/11 incident. In fact I believe Bush had a hand in this (yes, that's controversial).

 

That's funny! Got to admit there's some truth to that statement.

 

Well, I'm not a partisan voter. And at the same time I also believe that many of our leaders put the interest of corporations and banks way way before the interests of the people.

One benefit I can see about the Democratic party I saw in my lifetime was that many of them, were not hesitant to criticize all the wrongdoings of the Bush administration and hold their feet to the fire, meanwhile too many republicans were not willing to do the same, until it was too late. They were the ones willing to step up and say the Iraq invasion was wrong, No Child Left Behind, among many other atrocities. But that all went out the window immediately when the DNC got the house, senate and white house.

In theory, it's good to have an opposition around. Even if their philosophy is backwards. Just so they can keep the other party in line and hold them accountable.
But what's really going on in practice, is that many of the elected officials work for the same special interests even if their rhetoric and party affiliation is different.

 

Another party would fill the vacuum if there would only be the republican party. Ideally more than one. But yeah..

 

Its impossible to create a perfect vacuum, which is why we have both the democrats and republicans.

 

Uhm i wasn't talking about any perfect vacuum. Just IF the democratic party would seize to exist the void would be filled by another political party (either new or one of the many '3rd' parties now), ideally a bunch of different ones so you guys can have a proper choice for once

 

You can't have a choice when your constitutional rights have been suspended indefinitely, the entire voting system has been gerrymandered to death, and even a twenty year study by Princeton university concluded that, no matter who was elected to office, only the top 10% of the wealthiest ever got anything they wanted. The only choice you have is to buy Walmart's "Made in America" brand clothing which is actually made in China. Trump is attempting to change that by bringing in more Russian goods which, no doubt, will be called "Made in the USA".

 

So some more things have to change

Not so pessimistic! Americans can have that choice if enough of them strive to get it. (Im not american btw, haven't visited the states yet either... but I'm certain they can do much better!)

Trump's hilarious presidency might just trigger some citizens the right way.

 

Neither party really represents the middle and working class and poor as a whole. We are essentially an oligarchy now. But overall I do think there are more politicians in the Democratic party who still have a soul and want to represent the average citizen than there are in the Republican party. I'm not hapoy with either party but the Democrats are the lesser of two evils to me.

Both parties want to pursue a foreign policy of endless wars in order to destabilize the middle east, both parties want to pass legislature that benefits their corporate donors

But as mentioned by other posters above, the Democrats generally are in favor of a social safety net. Overall they've indicated they're not willing to watch people die in the streets and be turned away from hospitals to die

Whereas Paul Ryan (for the love of god someone punch that man in the face) said he has been dreaming of stripping Medicaid since his keg days in college. Some of the members of the Republican party truly strike me as evil. There are probably evil Democrats too but overall they seem a more wholesome bunch.

 

Unfortunately, we're stuck with the parties we have unless major constitutional changes occur that are unlikely to happen: (1) reversal of Citizens United v. FEC and the other Supreme Court cases preventing meaningful campaign finance reform on free speech grounds on the bogus theory that "money talks"; (2) elimination of the archaic Electoral College, the major function of which is to discourage third parties; (3) establishment of a national primary system, with balloting held on the same day throughout the country. Unless those changes occur, we might as well get use to our choice of lesser of two evils. I agree that the Democrat Party is definitely the lesser of the two..Well be doing well to survive Trump.

 

I've seen Americans turn their heads each day for over half a century and the fine line between pessimism and realism is when they guy with the gun demands your wallet.

 

The parties we have are nothing more than the illusion of democracy when all the republicans have to do is refuse to allow any democratic president to choose a supreme court justice and threaten to bankrupt the government.

 

Just to keep things in perspective: (1) democracy is always relative; all societies are of elites, by elites and for elites. The United States is not noticeably more elitist than say, Britain or France. (2) it's unlikely that any U.S. government has pursued policies aimed at destabilizing the Middle East. Instability has resulted as an unintended consequence of policies pursued for other reasons. (3) the notion that the country is being run behind the scenes by the same small elite group, and that the party politics we see going on is some kind of charade has no foundation in observable fact.

 

When democrats can't even choose their own supreme court justice, the billionaire mayor of NYC arrests 26 reporters in one day, and 400 people own half the country including the mass media, your claim that we are no more elite than Britain and France is total bullshit.

 

Sorry, bud, but if you look into the politics of Britain and France, you'll find that they are also elitist, and have plenty of problems on their plate.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/15/britains-richest-1-percent-own-same-as-bottom-55-population
https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2015/01/france-growing-income-inequality-problem-201512311224855101.html
http://understandingsociety.blogspot.com/2009/03/inequalities-in-france.html
In the U.S.,he Republicans were able to block the Democratic nominee for Supreme Court because they controlled the Senate, and that happened because the were voted into office by folks led astray by Republican rhetoric. To be sure, the Koch Brothers, the Mercer's and Rupert Murdock had a big hand in that, but how is it then that Obama was elected--twice? Same with Boomberg. If he is so influential, how come he endorsed Hillary and she lost? Your claim that 400 people "own half the country including the mass media" needs clarification. What is the source of your information? What do you mean by "own"? Hold legal title to land, buildings, etc.? How is that translated into political influence? Do you think they all voted for Trump? If "the media" are under common management, why are Fox, Breitbart and The Enquirer apparently out of step with CNN, MSNBC, and the New York Times? Why does Trump, who won the presidential election, call the media enemies of the people?

 

http://www.ips-dc.org/billionaire-bonanza/

The US sets the standard for the rest of the world insisting that even the Jamaicans make marijuana illegal and threatening to bomb tin shacks in Haiti if they don't toe the line. Fifteen billionaires, including Bloomberg, now own the mass media in the US and some 67 individuals have accumulated as much wealth as 3.5 billion. Since the turn of this century, the average American income has not risen at all, while the wealth keeps accumulating at the top with 20 people now having as much wealth as the poorest half of the country. Of course, when Iceland decided to throw the bankers there in jail that committed fraud and contributed to the world economic collapse the US and EU protested but, instead of going into long term debt like the US tax payers did who are twenty trillion dollars in debt, Iceland now have a balanced budget. Thankfully, there is nothing to be gained and everything to loose by bombing them.

 

What exactly is your point, and what does it have to do with Democrats? Let's take them from the top. What is your source for saying that the U.S. is "insisting that even the Jamaicans make marijuana illegal"? According to the U.S. Counselor for Public Affairs in Jamaica, as of Feb., 2015, the U.S. will not discourage Jamaica from implementing its new law legalizing pot as long as it continues to comply with current international treaties. Do you have more recent information? And what is this about the U.S. threatening to bomb Haiti? Never heard of that! As for those fifteen billionaires who own the U.S. media, what is the punch line? As noted earlier, they don't seem to be on the same page.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/05/05/billionaires-battle-over-media-influence-koch-bros-murdoch-vs-sorosbuffettge/#77c788a46fbf
What' s the problem? What's the solution? I think the growing concentration of wealth in this country is a real problem for the future of our democracy. As long as we have a party whose solution to every problem is more tax cuts for the wealthy, that problem will get worse. Iceland imprisoned 26 bankers responsible for the 2008 financial crisis. Good for Iceland! But what was that about the U.S. and EU protesting that? Haven't heard anything about that. I don't think there's any real talk about bombing Iceland. Anyhow, Trump seems to be taking a different approach in giving the wayward bankers cabinet positions overseeing our financial institutions. Who was it who defined insanity as continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result?