2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumPetition: Tell the DNC to oppose the TPP.
Add your name to tell the DNC Platform Committee to make sure the party's platform includes our amendment to prevent the disastrous TPP trade deal from ever coming up for a vote.
https://twitter.com/berniesanders/status/751098972928765953
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I think it would be beyond foolish to state in the platform that something cannot even be voted on.
Literally writing anti-democracy measures into our platform would be a bad idea.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Got it. I'll update all the dictionaries.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I'll update all the dictionaries.
Why even respond?
portlander23
(2,078 posts)That's the level or response required by "Literally writing anti-democracy measures into our platform would be a bad idea".
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)You literally just defined neoliberalism as the act of voting. I understand why. Taking away the ability of congresspersons to vote was just directly defined as neoliberalism by you. Well done.
The word "neoliberalism" has taken a beating in this election cycle that it will never recover from. It is now viewed as the first choice of conspiracy theorists.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)We should take a vote on whether or not to surrender a portion of our sovereignty to international trade tribunals. If we take a vote to cancel democracy, that's democratic. Got it. Man, we're going to be working overtime reprinting all the dictionaries.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)The only definition changed here is the one of neoliberalism which you have clearly defined as the act of voting.
The rest seems extremely cut and dry and falls into place with current definitions.
Demanding votes cannot be taken because you would vote no seems a bit fascist to me. Don't need to redefine that one. It works well.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Neoliberalism (or sometimes neo-liberalism) is a term which has been used since 1938, but became more prevalent in its current meaning in the 1970s and '80s by scholars in a wide variety of social sciences and critics primarily in reference to the resurgence of 19th century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism. Its advocates avoid the term "neoliberal"; they support extensive economic liberalization policies such as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, and reductions in government spending in order to enhance the role of the private sector in the economy. The implementation of neoliberal policies and the acceptance of neoliberal economic theories in the 1970s are seen by some academics as the root of financialization, with the financial crisis of 200708 as one of the ultimate results.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)+1
Thanks for the link. Seems you were a far way off.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Period.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)The principle of affordable medicine is more important than procedural principles like up-or-down vote.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Even if there is a debate, and every Congressional Democrat decides the TPP is bad, the Republicans could still pass it.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)You don't get to deny votes because you don't like what's being voted on. That is un-democratic and wrong. Just because assembling a like-minded majority coalition against something is hard work and can't be accomplished over Reddit doesn't mean you don't still have to do it.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Should everything get an up or down vote?
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)It is a comma in the legislative process, not a period.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...which may have the approval of the majority in Congress.
Trying to persuade the president not to submit something to Congress is another. The latter is what people such as Elizabeth Warren are trying to do.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)Adopting that kind of behavior isn't something to be proud of.
benny05
(5,322 posts)Video released today, via CREDO
Her point is that Obama backed away from Keystone and if enough people stand up, he'll back away on this too. I join the OP to stop TPP as there can't be any amendments to it, no compromises.
[link:
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)"But what has mattered more is merely the ability for the public to see whats in these agreements. While there were many civil society groups protesting the deals from the start, it wasnt until WikiLeaks published draft versions of TPP that public sentiment turned against it. The US trade representative even admitted at the time that the administration knew if the public found out what is in these trade deals, public opposition would be significant.
What progressive champion Senator Elizabeth Warren said then is even more true now: If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States.