I am a progressive and consider myself centrist. To want to improve our government is being progressive. I do not expect free health care, welfare, or anything else.

Oh we will loose it! We will unleash the election!! maniacal laughter!

You mean you really want more of trumper U must be kidding!!!!!!

@Marine Dude. It is spelled "LOSE". "Loose" is the skin under my neck.

@Remi Bad joke. I will give you a point anyway.

@Countrywoman Thanks I never caught that one but take a look now.

@Marine That's ok. If not for spell check I would be a mess.

I really hope for the best but I am disillusioned by what we are putting forth right now and these candidates will spawn republican contributions to save their money like we have never before seen.

@Marine I totally agree. It’s the unfortunate residual from our past loss … and the reasons for that loss.. It is SO frustrating listening to experienced ‘Americans’ well versed in the reality of this nation ...having to explain ad nauseum the reason/s leftist extremism doesn't sell.

@Varn i see it differently. i do not see what the right (yes, the right) refer to as "leftist extremism" as extremism. it's what the people have actually indicated, with their voices and votes, that they want. it's the actual center position. the problem isn't leftist extremism. it's rightwing attempts to get us to fight about it. look at the dems in the house right now. there are all kinds of dems in there and they're standing TOGETHER. we can do it.

g

at your level, yes. click the three lines button and choose edit. the opportunity doesn't last forever but you have some time, yes.

g

The republicans are prepared to spend billions if necessary and if they see these way out candidates they will spend as much as needed to protect their money.

@Marine that is correct -- awful, disgusting and unacceptable but correct. now we have to think of how to stop them.

g

@genessa Let's work toward a common goal.. Have a nice dfay.

@powder it's crack, isn't it. It's crack you've been smoking, right? 'Cause that might make sense to you, but...

you think that Hilary is a cross between a communist tyrant and a serial killer? I mean, completely embedded in the Washington money machine, yes, hopelessly compromised by her close ties to Wall Street, ok, but really??
Definitely crack.

@MrBeelzeebubbles hillary was none of that. but david bossie worked for decades to convince everyone she was. meanwhile, the republicans will cheat regardless of whom the democrats run... unless we find a way to stop them.

g

I hope we did learn something. If we run these guys we might loose to a republican as they are to extreme and to full of themselves..

@Marine The people in my circle agree with you...there are enough of the older, more conservative democrats that don't like extremes but want to help out the younger generation in many areas...we also don't want our money squandered on abuse, corruption, poorly managed programs, underfunded policies, etc. I just got my annual contribution request from Perez and the platform seemed more sensible...if the candidates go far off this guideline, they are going to lose a large number of votes from our group. Definitely lose a lot of independents and marginal Republicans and all of the libertarians (forever Rand Paulians...)...I also want to see if anybody is going to run against the orange turd...that will factor in as well...I might just vote for that person for having the balls to do it...JK, but, the dems have to get it together and not go specific issue crazy or count on anti-trumpism to carry them through...he could easily win again, that I am sure of...

@thinktwice We do not want to match an extreme with another extreme. Moderation , compromise and good sense needs to reurn to the Congress as it is lacking ikn both parties. We need a strong progresive middle of the road candidate that will address the many things that need fixing . I do not think all the messed up things can even be fixed in three or four terms of the president they have gotten so far out . My group is there with you and we want the best for our grandchildren who are young adults now.

@Marine you can't compromise with criminals. compromise with an opposing political party. the republicans are not that. the party is, as an entity, a criminal organization. every party, every large group, has bad'uns to be weeded out, but the republican party is AS AN ORGANIZATION criminal. one cannot, nor should one, compromise with such. and i'm not an extremist, either. within the democratic party, for sure we should compromise, and not be purist, oh this one is too far left, oh this one is too centrist. we should compromise there (and i say this as someone who is pretty far left, myself). but with the republicans? they have made that impossible.

g

@genessa I disagree categorizing the Republican party as a criminal enterprise. There are many who are quite upset at how the party has been represented by a few bad apples. Why haven't they stood up? They have...the media as a whole tends to show only the worst and does not focus on so many things...I have watched other sources reporting work being done by both parties that never make the news because they are quiet senators and representatives...the work on criminal justice reform, for instance...the changes in agriculture and food industry standards...if we as democrats continue to completely write off the entire party as being "criminal" or other totally disparaging words, aren't we doing the exact same thing the extremes in the other side are doing? I would guess that there are more people like me and @Marine who are putting our thoughts out there because we are going to be a group to contend with within the democrat party...more middle of the road, more conservative, and able to back up our values with dollars for support

@thinktwice there are individuals who naively still identify as republicans. some of them are even good people. he party itself -- the leadership, the platform, the way it works -- IS a criminal enterprise. as for the middle of the road, the middle as perceived has gravitated so far right it's like republicanism of old, but the REAL middle -- that is, where most americans fall -- is far left of what is perceived as the middle. centrists are really rightwingers. (not everyone who is CALLED a centrist is one, though.) find a good republican? work with that republican, but that doesn't change the facts about the party itself.

g

@genessa I think the middle has changed...I see what you are trying to say...perhaps people like me are more like Republicans of old, but I certainly am not going to change parties...I still support many of what I feel are Democrat issues: climate change, healthcare, wage equality, abortion rights, etc. What I don't support is unrealistic and perhaps a too rapid move on specific issues like taxes, government covering 100% of certain badly managed programs, etc. I think they are fixable to be fair but not how some of the democrat candidates are saying. I will back the candidate that I think has the most boxes ticked for most Americans within a realistic plan to accomplishment them.

@thinktwice i am going to ask you two things. one is an expression thing and one is a thought thing. the expression thing is this: the republicans and the russians together have devised this new language in which "democrat" is an adjective (the democrat party). it is a deliberate ploy to make us seem harsh. please say "democratic." i am not trying to control expression; i am trying to correct the effects of propaganda. so please, pretty please, i ask that of you. the thinking thing is to try to realize that without the democrats' having the majority, even a decent republican elected official has no chance of putting through any realistic plans. it is actually more important to have the majority so things can get done than to have each individual be ideal. that is why i urge people not to vote third party. look at what bills are being passed in the house. compare them to bills proposed, and often passed, when republicans have the majority. it is SO important. so i ask again, pretty please, think about that.

g

@genessa lol I remember the post you did about this and I had typed democratic and went back and changed them all because I thought I got them backwards...sorry...that was just a brain fart on my part so no need to ask...I agreed with your post on this...

I do look at the bills very closely...I read the entire tax bill (I am an accountant) and knew immediately it was a farce...I will continue to do that as well...

@genessa If you start off with the premise that an entire party is crimal you have lost the battle. There are republicans now as before who are very nice and human people to condem the party as a whole is a non statrer. We do not need need extremists in either party to govern a great country and to be so divided works only to reduce this country in it's greatness.

@thinktwice my brain farts stink badly; you are totally forgiven and i am glad you were trying to do the right thing anyway!

g

@genessa It is difficult sometimes to remember to do that when I often feel attacked unjustly as an exception to the evil corporate CEO...

I agree but we have had to much extreme with trump and to run another extreme candidate is going to be to much . We can raise the taxes on the rich in many ways without being greedy. I am not rich but moderation is the key to success.

You need to read an explanation of marginal tax rates.

I think they might be underestimating how many rich democrats/liberals there are...when people start attacking the "rich", I just want to slap them and ask them where do you think they are getting money to even run? If the left is going to attack all of the rich that are working hard to get rid of a toxic administration, well, they better figure out what money is going to do this...I am about to donate my money to any candidate that makes common sense...do I think we could do better with tax reform? Yes...of course, and I don't mind paying more...but some of the suggestions are not going to fly and turn away more fiscally conservative democrat voters...a very large group...

@thinktwice Right on the money! Hi there

@jerry99 Been ther

@Marine Attacking the very people who can make this happen is such a foolish move in so many ways...not all wealthy people are callous pricks...

@thinktwice Very true. Many are normal people who have been fortunate to have made a lot of money and they give it back to society in many ways like the arts, schools and other services like research. We bdo not need to penalize every rich person just because they are rich.

@Marine thank you...exactly...

@Marine it's not penalty. those who help out get credits. everyone focuses on the simplified description. that doesn't work.

g

@genessa Trying to tax them at 99 % ,90% 70% is a penalty. I do not want to rob them because they are wealthy and believe a fair estate tax as well as a fair income tax would do the job. Also corporations once thought that a 10% profit was great now they are looking for 30% 50% and more. Take Sax Fifth Ave clothes for example A women's suit that sells for $2500 cost them a high of $75 to make. This is plain Theft. Corporate taxes also need to be fair and take into consideration subsidies,tax deferments etc. I do not wish to make their lives miserable just fair. and look out for the workers who make them successfut.

@Marine no one is taxing anyone at 99 percent. where did you hear that -- fox? you know they lie, right? 70 percent worked great under eisenhower: we got the whole highway system built across the country with that. you are right about corporations. tax their sorry asses. they are NOT looking out for their workers. the tax proposal takes into account those who DO look out for their workers. if you think someone is trying to tax anyone or anything at 99 percent, you are not speaking from knowledge. learn what's going on before having an opinion on it, please.

g

@genessa Bernie is proposing a 99% tax on the weathy estates which I think is wrong.

@Marine source?

g

@genessa that's not true exactly...political donations are limited...and even charitable donations are limited as deductions...deductions made from an S-corporate account are non-existent anymore (passed through to the owners, who are then limited)...

@genessa It was on his web site when I wanted to see his platform. I will gladly retract if I am wrong but this was what was recieved.

i wanted to find out his platform

@thinktwice we were not talking about political donations, but rather the tax rate.

g

@genessa That was not what I understood. 45% seems fair to me.

@Marine from his website: Sanders' bill would only apply to the wealthiest 0.2 percent of Americans. It would establish a 45 percent tax on the value of an estate between $3.5 million and $10 million; a 50 percent tax on the value of an estate between $10 million and $50 million; a 55 percent tax on the value of an estate in excess of $50 million; and a 77 percent tax on the value of an estate above $1 billion – a return to the top rate from 1941 through 1976.

no 99 percent tax rate.

the name of the bill is "For the 99.8% Act" and maybe you mistook that for a tax rate. it refers to the fact that the bill applies only to the top 0.2 percent of americans. the rest of us represent 99.8 percent of americans. that is not a 99.8 percent tax rate!

g

@Marine i copied and pasted directly from his website. i sincerely think you mistook the meaning of the name of the bill.

i think maybe other people are doing this too and i am going to make a post, NOT tagging you, just a post out of nowhere, of my own, explaining how it is possible to make this mistake. maybe some people will find that helpful.

g

@genessa Thank you that is different than what i received. However even this seems like it wants to penalize weath just for wealth's sake. I would like to know what else that.2 % did with their money Did they donate to charities,art their communities. I do not wish to destroy the wealthy just have them pay theuir fair share for being so successful because they did not do it by themselves.Acually I believe we are on the same side maybe with a few different views. Have a nice day.

@Marine then you should read the bill itself instead of the description. you can do so with ANY bill, at any stage, even bills that have been killed, at congress.gov. you have the exact name of the bill now and can look it up and read both the summary and the complete text, as well as who supports it, who sponsors it and what its status is. i am sure there are provisions there, credits as i have said, for those who do contribute.

g

@genessa Thanks I will do exactly that. Nice talking with you.

@genessa i was responding to your saying that the rich can get credits for donations and other contributions...

No way am I paying 50% and also donating money to the arts, etc. I am going to read that proposal as well...

@Marine no problem )

g

@genessa I would like to see that definition of fair...

@thinktwice i think you know what is fair. when the ceo of a company lays off workers and won't raise their wages, but takes a huge bonus at the end of the year, that's not fair. when he avoids paying taxes by hiding his money in off-shore tax shelters, that's not fair. when on the money he admits having he pays a tax rate lower than that a teacher or factory worker pays, that's not fair. when he is not taxed on money he makes by investing money because he didn't WORK for it, and workers are taxed on their wages because they DID work for it, that's not fair. you can extrapolate from what's not fair what would be fair.

g

@genessa But what about the hundreds of companies that do pay fair wages? That provide benefits and child care? The ones who support the arts and music and volunteer at the homeless shelter...the ones who take care of the families of veterans that are serving overseas? What about the ones who started with nothing and used every bit of savings to start their companies and continues to invest in new technology so that people will have jobs in the future? Everyone seems to focus on the negative and it is making people who are wealthy and don't fit into that category a bit leary and perhaps more conservative than they normally would be...just speaking hypothetically...I know what is not fair...and I also know that people are using those examples across the board unfairly...

@thinktwice well, what about them? they would get tax credits for doing that. i keep mentioning this and no one pays any attention. no, the ones who are wealthy and don't fit into the negative category are actually saying that taxes should be raised on them!

and no, most of us are not using the bad examples across the board unfairly. the problem is rampant. it IS prevalent.

g

@genessa Well, you can count me in as one of those who will vote for fair taxes and will even be willing to pay more to help programs that will help those in need...If they reward people who are helping this country and our fellow Americans, then it would be something to consider...I am not going as far as saying taxes should be raised on them...not until I see the actual plan...I can tell you that I see my fellow business women and minority business owners leaning more to the right because of what they are reading that appears to be unfair analysis of the wealthy...Marine is correct in saying that this is the group that the party is going to lose if they aren't careful.

@thinktwice Thanks, we do not need to punish those who jave been successful and I am not opposed for breaks for the small business owner. It is the tax write off my neighbor receives for a farm for the ten show animals he maintains (Long Horn Steers)

@Marine Yep...I see abuses all the time as an accountant and it really makes me mad...it gives those who are trying to do the right thing a bad name...while I know I will benefit from the current tax cuts, it does not sit well with me when I don't see the same breaks for my struggling nieces and nephews...