Saturday, November 29, 2014

Dante Atkins — Senator Schumer: Labor's share of profit should be core of 2016 Democratic agenda

Bingo! That's not only a winner politically, it's also the correct response economically.

Daily Kos
Senator Schumer: Labor's share of profit should be core of 2016 Democratic agenda
Dante Atkins

See also Paul Rosenberg, Why are these clowns winning? Secrets of the right-wing brain at Salon.

The Democrats need a strong story more than a compelling rationale. More people tend to respond to a moving narrative rather than deep reasoning. It's the framing, stupid.


Matt Franko said...

Exhibiting indignation is not an agenda...

What is the Dem agenda? Tax increases? No drilling? More cuts? "At least it is not as bad as the Hunger Games"?

I think the Dems own the messaging as far as being identified as the party with the better message that exhibits indignation at the sight of socio-economic injustices. ... but what is their plan/agenda?

The voters have gotten impatient with them...and have flipped it back over to the GOP. .

The most US labor can take from profits is $75B as that is all the firms retain domestically.. that is not enough to really turn this thing around.... so this is another loser idea..

Tom Hickey said...

I wouldn't fault them for not have a plan just yet. Schumer is saying that they need a different plan that addresses working folks, which is a big step forward since Schumer is a Wall Street guy being from NY.

Can they come up with a plan and story that sells it? We'll see. At least this is thinking in the right direction. Obama never really got the economy thing.

The problem is that Hillary is the odds on favorite and she is more neoliberal and neocon than Obama.

On the other hand, Romney is the GOP favorite at present and he is even worse then HRC as far as working stiffs are concerned.

On the other hand, it looks like military expenditure is likely to increase markedly, so that could provide a stimulus, especially if there is more war instead of just Cold War 2 and pivot to Asia spending.

"The voters have gotten impatient with them...and have flipped it back over to the GOP. ."

I don't think that is necessarily the case. Very low turnout in the midterms and usually the dominant cohort of voters are elderly. The elderly are now heavily GOP, so this was not the wave election that some view it as being. Demographics are not on the GOP side in presidential elections.

But the Democrats have to play this carefully since there are a lot of people that would support them that are either apathetic or pissed off.

But at this point neither party is putting forward much of a vision for where they want to take the country — unless there is either war or the threat of war. That would heavily influence the dynamic, along with how well the economy is doing in the second and third quarter of 2015 as the election approaches.

Matt Franko said...

The agendas come together around the Presidential elections Tom.... so we have to wait...

In the mean time we can enjoy the cheaper oil and the current increase in other areas of real terms of trade (which have resulted in the stronger USD)... and now that the Fed has stopped the QE, even lower interest rates for borrowers which looks like is starting over the last 30 days since QE ended..

So we should have a somewhat better economy going into next election...

Idiot Romney made that 47% comment and chose the pinup boy for cuts Ryan and he was doomed the last time...

I hope it is not Hillary for the Dems there would be insufficient contrast with her on the Dem ticket.... we need need increased contrast in these contests as much as possible. .. rsp

Peter Pan said...

Romney, Hillary, Republican, Democrat. Business as usual, folks.

Tom Hickey said...

The challenge for both parties is to take the center (independents) while keeping their bases motivated. So candidates are selected not only on the basis of fundraising ability but also appeal to the center.

That's good because it keeps extremists away from the levers of control but it also means policy stability that works toward preservation of the status quo and against change other than in areas where there is widespread public demand.

For example, Obama didn't pull healthcare out his hat. There was popular dissatisfaction with the status quo and widespread demand for change. Obama delivered on it with a centrist (GOP) program that the base of both sides rejected but which many people like when they get into it.

Peter Pan said...

Can you describe a typical independent (centrist) American?

Tom Hickey said...

A centrist is anyone that doesn't identify with the base of either party and doesn't consistently vote by party, for example, splits the ticket.

Centrists are often either center left or center right. For example, the center right cohort is a target of Democratic triangulation.

Reagan Democrats are examples of center right, for instance. W appealed to the center with compassionate conservatism.

Peter Pan said...

I guess that was not the demographic Romney was appealing to when he talked about the takers.