"And that's ultimately the problem with these 'insiders'; they lose and take progressives with them, and learn nothing."
But these insider's arn't supporting progressive causes, they are as you point out centrist. As that is the case how is it they are taking progressives with them? Wouldn't they be taking centrists with them? Or are progressives supporting these centrists causes? If so why?/doesn't that make them not progressive?
I guess I'm a little confused on the use of the word progressive in this post.
I strongly disagree with the democratic stance on requiring identification for voting. I've actually worked for an election commission, and not as just a polling place worker, but as someone in the main office dealing with all aspects of an election. Under the current system of voter registration and voting procedures in most communities there are SERIOUS security concerns. It would be EXTREMLY easy for someone, or a group of people, to cast ballots for individuals who don't exist or aren't voting. The ability to dramatically change the outcome of an election is within the hands of anyone with a bit of knowledge of election law, a few stamps and a copier. We have a DESPERATE NEED for a unified system of registration, voting, and identification in this country.
I shutter to think how often voter fraud could be happening.
are contradictory or at least conflict each other. How can we (if possible) allow for both. Or better yet should be allow for both?
Though there may be differences on small issues, the convention should present the platform as part of a larger, comprehensive vision.
We need to show the American people that we're not a party of strict ideology and loyalty, but rather a broad-based coalition of like-minded progressives interested in making the world a better place.
conflict each other. How can we both have a unified vision and still allow for differences of opinion with a broad-base of ideas. Its a noble goal but practically I think we need to tighten our control on platform issues and have differences play out only on a local level.
no it means you sterotype people... blacks wear this whites wear that, instead of a persons clothing preference being a product of many thing none of them includes the color of their skin. Skin color is just skin color nothing more so stop making it into something it isn't.
I work for minimum wage (the DC minimum of 6.60) and it's nearly impossible to live on. No health insurance, two maxed out CCs, student loans, had to get rid of my cell phone, no car.... Luckily I don't have kids or other more 'grown-up' expenses. I don't understand how anyone with a family is expected to live on this little. It's gross really. Raising the minimum wage is an important step to help the working class; however I also think we should put a cap on the CEO type salaries. A maximum wage so to speak. Have the wage be some percentage over the average (median wage might be better) income of the employees of the business in question. Say only allowed to make 200% (just an example, ask the economists for what is appropriate) of the average employee salaries. Hopefully the extra money would then be spread around to the other employees (the only way to be able to raise CEO pay is to raise the average wage of employees) or to increase product quality (what ever the product may in fact be).
The new ad playing on mothers fears of pedophiles is gross and the worst form of political campaigning. I can't support any campaign that plays on the emotional vulnerability of people. Its a issue that shouldn't be politicized, and his ad of course tacitly implies that Kaine would be soft on child rapists.