though with one caveat ... be informed, and specific, in your objection ... If you are merely regurgitating something you read on a blog, somewhere, you will likely be ignored.

Some will not have adequate time to look at the whole thing, of course. There will be plenty of commentary, some of it well-informed and some of it simply a knee-jerk reaction not based on studying the entire agreement.

I expect there to be good and bad in it. I'll be making a judgment on whether its benefits outweigh its drawbacks, but it will take some time for me to learn more about the actual agreement, not just a few leaked parts of it.

I don't expect to form a final opinion until close to the time for the Congressional votes. When I do, I will communicate with the legislators from my state.

I don't plan to engage in lengthy discussion on DU about this agreement, unless they are fact-based and deal with more than the parts being objected to. That's a useless expenditure of my limited time. Instead, I think I'll be looking at what commentators I trust have to say about it and looking at sections where I have enough background to understand what they mean.

I certainly won't make any snap judgments of its merits and faults.

blinded by idealism

Its quite the interesting word choice.

Otherwise it's a completely useless expression. It tells me more about the writer than anything else.

Perhaps someones mask is slipping.

You do not know me, so you have no idea which "people" I'm part of. When you say "you people" about anything you destroy your own argument. So, I'm disregarding your insult.

I doubt all of us are lawyers and can understand
the legalese involved, especially not the so called
small print. I had to read my car insurance several times
to get the main gist of it.

So, when you write :That's how it works
I have to chuckle.

Simply amend one provision and it's done. The agreement is dead without ever coming to a floor vote.

That's why presidents seek fast track authority in these sorts of agreements because it is easy to slip a simple change of the language into an amendment, thus destroying the agreement.

Really simple.

I hope you won't mind.

What's your best guess as to when they be published in paper form to be obtained from representatives or purchased - or strictly on line at CSpan or a government agency?

yet in its final form, I believe. When it is it will be available through a method that has not yet been disclosed, as far as I know. I'm sure we'll know, though.

When it is available, someone will post that information on DU, I have no doubt.

by the Republicans and Democrats who voted for TPA.

The one I made? If so, let's hear it.

The battle over TPP itself is lost. Doesn't mean the war on corporatism is lost.

Time to start mounting primary challenges against the 'establishment' Democrats who shoved this through.

Go for it. Better get started right away, though. Primaries fire up pretty early in some states. Good luck!

Or is it just about getting rid of the ones like in 2010, because that worked out so well.

Our party decided to cower in fear of their accomplishments. Which caused "Hope and Change" voters to stay home.

For the last ~25 years, the party establishment message to the liberals has been "You're fucking crazy. Now go vote for us", coupled with the party working very, very, very hard to stop any primary challenges. And when that plan fails, the same people blame "the liberals".

That abusive relationship has failed quite spectacularly, as you noted. It's time for a different relationship.

They were the cheers in 2014.

The 50 state strategy, unfortunately, elects blue dogs.

To win, we need differentiators. Why pick the Democrat over the Republican?

We aren't going to out-crazy the Republicans, and we're not going to win by being the sane Republicans. If you'd like proof, just keep harping on 2010 and 2014.

There are states where this will not work. They are not the only states, so our national strategy should not be tailored to those states. The actual 50-state strategy did allow for heterodoxy among Democrats in states where it was needed. That doesn't mean we need those blue dogs in all states.

By people causing trouble.

This is setting up for defeat, as per usual, as there will likely not be a campaign to stop TPP to any significant extent (there certainly won't be complaints that the phone lines are jammed or anything like that).

What's your alternative proposal, Romulox? Please let me know.

Congress can refuse to approve the TPP. We can request that our own elected representatives and Senators do exactly that.

That's how things work in this country. How is that ridiculous?

Thanks for taking the time to reply and kick my thread!

Just as I thought. You've already given up. So, do nothing. I will do exactly what I described in my OP. You will do nothing, apparently.

One of us is suggesting taking action. Again, how is that ridiculous or nonsense? That is what we can do, if we want to do something. We can all do nothing, though, as an alternative, which appears to be what you're suggesting. I guess I'm more active than you are in political matters.

Again, thanks for your reply.

your position prevails, other than allying yourself with the rich and powerful.

I haven't seen what's in it. All three of the people who represent me in Congress voted against the TPA. That's what I encouraged them to do. Al Franken, Amy Klobuchar, and Betty McCollum. Each got emails from me encouraging them to vote No.

Once again, you have decided where I stand without any knowledge of where I stand. I want to see the TPP agreement. Once I do, as I suggested in my OP, I will decide what I think and recommend that my representatives act accordingly. They'll decide how to vote. But I will tell them how I hope they vote.

You apparently think you know me. I assure you that you do not. You have demonstrated in your posts that you do not on many occasions. Your insults are unwarranted.

know nothing about me. I think we're done with this sub-thread. I am, at least.

Good day to you, Romulox.

I think that it is important to read it for myself rather than rely on another man's judgment.

It's will be a very long document. I'll read portions of it, certainly, but will rely on people with more knowledge than I have to read it all and interpret it. None of them are bloggers or political commentators, though. Most of those know no more than I do about international trade agreements. None of the people I will listen to are DUers, either.

Once I understand what the benefits and drawbacks of the TPP are, I'll let my representatives in the Senate and House how I think they should vote. Until then, I'm holding off.

I did ask them all to vote NO on the TPA fast track bill, though. All three did that, not because I asked them, but after they used their best judgment. Since it passed anyway, the next step is to try to understand the agreement and communicate with them again.

Even if I don't make it to the end, I consider it important.

As I have aged, I trust other people to tell me what is happening less.

I opposed the TPA but supported the TAA.

I refrained from following the leaked documents closely. I have no way of knowing real leaked documents from fakes, nor could I trust the motives of leakers when I did not know their identity.

Lacking the final language, I don't understand how anyone can take a permanent position on the TPP.

Also, we have President Obama, who is strongly supporting the agreement. When I ask myself why that is, it makes me more interested in actually seeing what's in it. I'm sure he has been advised by experts about the agreement, although I doubt he has read much of it himself. He seems to be a smart fellow who understands the give and take nature of all such multi-national agreements. He seems to think it's a good agreement on balance.

I have to give some consideration to that opinion. I suspect we'll be hearing more about the beneficial aspects of the TPP from him, once it has been finalized. That final version will appear sooner, I think, since the TPA passed. We'll see.

if this thing is as bad as the leaks make it out to be, the only thing I can ACTUALLY do is to never vote for anyone who had a hand in it. Got them all lined up, here in Florida, and in the upcoming elections that I can vote in.

We cannot compete with big money, corporations, corporate Democrats and BFFs like Jamie Dimon. I understand that. All I can do is withhold my votes, and at least not be guilty of enabling those politicians that I consider are DINOs and do not represent me.
Not even angry any more.

Not at all. The people I helped elect to the Senate and House all voted NO. It passed anyhow.

Now, it's time to study the final version of the agreement, when it is released.

TPP will be posted on-line for all of us to read (or not). We can debate facts, pros and cons, what is best.

Then both the Senate and the House have to pass TPP by simple majority vote.

Smells like - democracy.

than what I think should be. What is is the TPA. It passed and was signed by the President. Now, we either move on or throw up our hands in despair. I'm not big on despair.

No one person would be responsible for the whole megillah and more voices would help with the interpretation.

As soon as the final version is available, those groups will all begin the analysis process. I'll bet the President will have a group like that to advise him. In fact, I imagine that group has been working at the job all along, don't you?

We'll hear from that group, along with all the others that are set up or that have been studying this all along.

The fix is in. Corporate States of the Trans Pacific. Good bye USA.

Never mind.

But you know that, don't you? Or you should by now.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

to be listening. They're the ones I've been talking to. I helped get them all elected.


GOTV!

I don't think rolling on the floor, laughing, will accomplish much.

Looks like you've given up.

OK.