Clinton and Wasserman appointees skewer the Democratic Party Platform: Major policies dropped! - Polidicks

TPP opposition thrown out. 15 dollar minimum wage ADDED Fracking opposition and carbon tax thrown out. Basically all the things Clinton promised she was for when it became popular. Her appointees show their true colors. [url]http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/democrats-begin-working-draft-party-platform-40107459[/url] [QUOTE]Democrats on Friday voted down an amendment to the party's platform that would have opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, avoiding an awkward scenario that would have put its statement of values at odds with President Barack Obama. Members of a Democratic National Convention drafting committee defeated a proposal led by Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., that would have added language rejecting the Pacific Rim trade pact, which has been opposed by presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. The panel, which is developing the party's platform ahead of next month's Philadelphia convention, instead backed a measure that said "there are a diversity of views in the party" on the TPP and reaffirmed that Democrats contend any trade deal "must protect workers and the environment."[/QUOTE]

[quote]TPP opposition thrown out.[/quote] It's sad I have to side with Trump of all people on this, fuck the TPP

B-b-but I thought it was Bernie who was hijacking and going against the DNC's platform??? Hillary wouldn't lie, would she?! Edit: Apparently not [I]quite[/I] as awful as the OP's quoted paragraphs make it sound.

Cue people explaining to me why I need to vote for Hillary because because her winning this time is more important than the long term ramifications of voting her in.

Bernie was the only reason she hung so far to left all this time, now that everyone is focused on voting for "Not Trump" she and the rest of the party can go as right as they want.

Am I allowed to take back my comments about voting third party being a bad idea

I know its a wacky conspiracy theory but why does reality love to make it seem like trump is a hillary plant????

So, Jill Stein for President anyone?

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;50592707]It's sad I have to side with Trump of all people on this, fuck the TPP[/QUOTE] You're acting like Trump actually, genuinely opposes it.

[QUOTE=cody8295;50592689]15 dollar minimum wage thrown out. [/QUOTE] This one actually is in there, as your article says: [quote]Reflecting Sanders' advocacy, the platform also calls for the expansion of Social Security and says Americans should earn at least a $15 an hour, referring to the current minimum wage of $7.25 an hour as a "starvation wage," a phrase the Vermont senator often uses. Sanders has pushed for a $15-an-hour minimum wage, while Clinton has supported efforts to raise the minimum wage to that level but has said states and cities should raise the bar as high as possible. Sanders' allies wanted the draft to specify that the $15 minimum wage should be indexed with inflation. But Clinton's side struck down the amendment, noting that the document already included a call to "raise and index the minimum wage."[/quote] It's also perhaps a bit misleading to say that the other policies were 'dropped' from the Democratic platform, when they were never in there in the first place, and were rejected by a platform drafting committee that has been set up to match the proportions of the vote each candidate received in the primaries: there are 8 pro-Clinton delegates on the panel to 6 pro-Sanders delegates, matching the 43% of the vote that Sanders received in the primaries.

Wait, are you meaning to tell me that she lied this whole time to get voters?

[QUOTE=cody8295;50592689] TPP opposition thrown out. 15 dollar minimum wage thrown out. Fracking opposition and carbon tax thrown out. [b]Basically all the things Clinton promised she was for when it became popular.[/b] Her appointees show their true colors.[/QUOTE] As much as I hate saying things like this, she has never promised to pledge any support to these three things publicly, even on the $15 minimum wage issue she had sent my family a notice earlier this year that had promised to uphold the $12 minimum wage for each state individually despite her saying on the debates that she'd "Fight for a $15 minimum wage" and the fact the she "Has always supported a $15 minimum wage", but never have I heard her speak up for a carbon tax or being part of the opposition of the TPP.

Hillary panders to the populace just to get more voters? Never saw that coming.

The TPP proposal was defeated because the Democrats, and voters in general, are genuinely split on the issue. The current president of the United States, a Democrat, has vocally supported it It was probably a close vote and considering most of the people at this committee are Clinton supporters, it's inaccurate to suggest that it was a unilateral move on their part. They do reaffirm that any details of the plan are still up for negotiation though; it's certainly not a wholehearted endorsement of the plan as it is. $15 minimum wage was actually approved, what wasn't was an amendment proposed to index the minimum wage with inflation, which was already covered. To say it was thrown out is just a bold faced lie. As far as I can tell Clinton never actually argued for, certainly never promised, a carbon tax and a moratorium on fracking so it's not a surprise this didn't pass. The latter in particular is a fairly far-left bid that has never been a goal of Democrats. What cody conveniently forgot to leave out is the areas where the platform compromised. [QUOTE]In some cases Clinton's side gave ground to Sanders. The panel approved language calling for the abolition of the death penalty, calling it "a cruel and unusual form of punishment which has no place" in the nation. Clinton said during a debate earlier this year that it should only be used in limited cases involving "heinous crimes," while Sanders said the government should not use capital punishment.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]The committee also adopted language that said it supports a variety of ways to prevent banks from gambling with taxpayers' bank deposits, "including an updated and modernized version of Glass-Steagall." Sanders supports reinstating the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act, which prohibited commercial banks from engaging in investment banking activities. Clinton does not support reinstating the law but said her proposed financial reforms would cast a wider net by regulating the shadow banking system.[/QUOTE] There is also the possibility of more revisements in the future, personally I think it's inevitable if the DNC wants to rally undecided Sanders supporters [QUOTE]The document will be debated and revised before the party's July convention and includes a dozen themes, including sections dealing with the economy, climate change, education, health care, national security and other issues.[/QUOTE] I think the platform looks pretty great. I didn't expect the Democrats to go for a $15 minimum wage and proposing something even similar to the Glass-Steagall Act is a great move, even if it's not a full reinstatement.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50592917]The TPP proposal was defeated because the Democrats, and voters in general, are genuinely split on the issue. The current president of the United States, a Democrat, has vocally supported it It was probably a close vote and considering most of the people at this committee are Clinton supporters, it's inaccurate to suggest that it was a unilateral move on their part. They do reaffirm that any details of the plan are still up for negotiation though; it's certainly not a wholehearted endorsement of the plan as it is. $15 minimum wage was actually approved, what wasn't was an amendment proposed to index the minimum wage with inflation, which was already covered. To say it was thrown out is just a bold faced lie. As far as I can tell Clinton never actually argued for, certainly never promised, a carbon tax and a moratorium on fracking so it's not a surprise this didn't pass. The latter in particular is a fairly far-left bid that has never been a goal of Democrats. What cody conveniently forgot to leave out is the areas where the platform compromised. There is also the possibility of more revisements in the future, personally I think it's inevitable if the DNC wants to rally undecided Sanders supporters I think the platform looks pretty great. I didn't expect the Democrats to go for a $15 minimum wage and proposing something even similar to the Glass-Steagall Act is a great move, even if it's not a full reinstatement.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the fix, I saw early on that the draft committee voted against 15$ minimum wage (they did) and I didn't read the rest of my own source. Also I didn't cherrypick the source, I literally just took the first few paragraphs. Thanks again though

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;50592895]Hillary panders to the populace just to get more voters? Never saw that coming.[/QUOTE] Barring the rare Bernie Sanders, most politicians pull stuff like this.

[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50592962]Barring the rare Bernie Sanders, most politicians pull stuff like this.[/QUOTE] That's the joke. Hell, even Trump's been pandering like a mad-man.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50592917]The TPP proposal was defeated because the Democrats, and voters in general, are genuinely split on the issue. The current president of the United States, a Democrat, has vocally supported it It was probably a close vote and considering most of the people at this committee are Clinton supporters, it's inaccurate to suggest that it was a unilateral move on their part. They do reaffirm that any details of the plan are still up for negotiation though; it's certainly not a wholehearted endorsement of the plan as it is. $15 minimum wage was actually approved, what wasn't was an amendment proposed to index the minimum wage with inflation, which was already covered. To say it was thrown out is just a bold faced lie. As far as I can tell Clinton never actually argued for, certainly never promised, a carbon tax and a moratorium on fracking so it's not a surprise this didn't pass. The latter in particular is a fairly far-left bid that has never been a goal of Democrats. What cody conveniently forgot to leave out is the areas where the platform compromised. There is also the possibility of more revisements in the future, personally I think it's inevitable if the DNC wants to rally undecided Sanders supporters I think the platform looks pretty great. I didn't expect the Democrats to go for a $15 minimum wage and proposing something even similar to the Glass-Steagall Act is a great move, even if it's not a full reinstatement.[/QUOTE] I'm not going to hold my breathe. Whatever they throw out as their "version" of the Glass Steagall act won't actually do much. Yeah, that's unsubstantiated, but she is pro TPP like I always said she was so I don't feel much guilt in doubting her as much as I do.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50593085]I'm not going to hold my breathe. Whatever they throw out as their "version" of the Glass Steagall act won't actually do much. Yeah, that's unsubstantiated, but she is pro TPP like I always said she was so I don't feel much guilt in doubting her as much as I do.[/QUOTE] It's better than [I]literally nothing[/I] though, surely?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50593128]It's better than [I]literally nothing[/I] though, surely?[/QUOTE] Will it be? I don't know. I trust Clinton to put in banking protections and exceptions to allow Wallstreet to do whatever it wants, I don't trust her to cut them off with the modern day Glass Stealgal act.

[QUOTE=UserDirk580;50592775]Cue people explaining to me why I need to vote for Hillary because because her winning this time is more important than the long term ramifications of voting her in.[/QUOTE] Because we vote in a system that results in only two realistic possibilities and the other possibility, Trump, has far more negative long term ramifications for this country. [QUOTE=GammaFive;50592799]Bernie was the only reason she hung so far to left all this time, now that everyone is focused on voting for "Not Trump" she and the rest of the party can go as right as they want.[/QUOTE] As far right being, apparently, slightly to the left of where she was weeks after California. [QUOTE=bdd458;50592865]Wait, are you meaning to tell me that she lied this whole time to get voters?[/QUOTE] No that's Trump. And Clinton I guess, I dunno, conventional wisdom seems to be that both of them are lying but Trump is lying about the bad things he will do and Clinton the good things she will do. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50593184]Will it be? I don't know. I trust Clinton to put in banking protections and exceptions to allow Wallstreet to do whatever it wants, I don't trust her to cut them off with the modern day Glass Stealgal act.[/QUOTE] There's no real need for the "I don't know". You and I and everyone else knows the answer to my question; of course it's better than nothing. If your goal is financial regulation and reform, you have to favor the party who says they support it over the party who has said absolutely nothing to that effect and based on their party platform historically would just deregulate it further. I mean maybe Clintons allies in Congress would water down the bill from something like what I or you would want, or maybe Congressional Democrats would push forth a satisfactory bill that Clinton would just veto to protect Wall Street, but atleast with the Democrats you have them taking a stance on the issue and putting it into words on their platform. That's more appealing to me than a party who isn't even going to bother with the issue and, more insidiously, doesn't think it's an issue at all.

I just seriously doubt they'll be hamstrung. I'm guessing they'll be empowered despite the calls for weakening.

[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50592962]Barring the rare Bernie Sanders, most politicians pull stuff like this.[/QUOTE] Sander's entire platform was populist pander.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50593431]Sander's entire platform was populist pander.[/QUOTE] pandering implies that he would go back on his promises. His long history of being in our government proves otherwise

[QUOTE=da space core;50593774]pandering implies that he would go back on his promises. His long history of being in our government proves otherwise[/QUOTE] I just donated 500 CAN, want to top it up for the Bernmeister?

I understand the TPP thing, since it's awkward that the platform would go against Obama. I'm sure it would have been approved otherwise

Its a shame, TPP getting iced was the one thing I looked forward to this upcoming presidency.

It's almost as if politicians are made of cardboard with brains and hearts composed of a single thin sheet of wet tissue paper. [editline]d[/editline] [QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50592844]You're acting like Trump actually, genuinely opposes it.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Saxon;50594267]Its a shame, TPP getting iced was the one thing I looked forward to this upcoming presidency.[/QUOTE] Look, I don't want to sound like a Trump canvasser but he really is the only candidate who has very strongly come out against the deal consistently when asked about it. [sp]excluding Bernie of course but that ship sailed long ago[/sp] [QUOTE]The TPP is horrible deal. It is a deal that is going to lead to nothing but trouble. It’s a deal that was designed for China to come in, as they always do, through the back door and totally take advantage of everyone. It’s 5,600 pages long. So complex that nobodies read it. It’s like Obamacare; nobody ever read it. They passed it; nobody read it. And look at mess we have right now. And it will be repealed. But this is one of the worst trade deals. And I would, yes, rather not have it. With all of these countries, and all of the bad ones getting advantage and taking advantage of what the good ones would normally get, I’d rather make individual deals with individual countries. We will do much better. We lose a fortune on trade. The United States loses with everybody. We’re losing now over $500 billion in terms of imbalance with China, $75 billion a year imbalance with Japan. By the way, Mexico, $50 billion a year imbalance. So I must say, Gerard, I just think it’s a terrible deal. I love trade. I’m a free trader, 100 percent. But we need smart people making the deals, and we don’t have smart people making the deals.[/QUOTE]

There needs to be some kind of law put in place for polititians getting punished for lying about crucial issues.

Come drink the kool-aid and join the Trump side.