Full Version: Democratic platform
What should the democratic platform in the 2004 election be? Should it be more or less liberal than last time? What key issue should it stress?
I say, a lot more liberal. Standing on middle ground is a pretty risky move because you alienate a lot of your party in an attempt to grab independent votes, it's my opinion that it is the reason Gore lost 2000, because many of the more liberal voters that would have voted democrat went green.
I still like, "It's the economy, stupid." Jobs, health care, education, infrastucture, the environment. The domestic scene is being neglected.
Repairing the infrastructure in Iraq while neglecting our own should contribute to Bush's downfall. His tax cut move is ludicrous in light of all that needs to be addressed.
Repairing the infrastructure in Iraq while neglecting our own should contribute to Bush's downfall. His tax cut move is ludicrous in light of all that needs to be addressed.
Whatever it is, we must 1.) look strong on security issues, and 2.) present a clear economic alternative to Bush's policies. I think it's also important that everything not be framed in terms of the current Iraq situation or the state of the economy, as they could turn around and negate the point. It needs to be clearly different from the GOP platform while not offending moderates on big issues.
1.) Repealing the tax cuts, at least partially. Makes us the party of greater fiscal responsibility, and that deficit's not going away before '04, sadly.
2.) Honoring our commitment in Iraq, improving international relations, and not looking soft on terrorism. Credibility here will depend on our candidate.
3.) Partial repeal of specific parts of the Patriot Act. Pick the most offensive parts to highlight and we delight civil libertarians while not alienating pro-authoritarian paranoids who think we need the gov't spying on all of us to protect us from our neighbor's copy of High Times.
4.) Restoration of Clinton-era environmental polices. Easy win.
5.) Civil unions. If the distinction is made that this is a tax convenience issue, and not gay marriage, I don't think most people would be scared, but it gives us legit civil rights cred.
6.) Some restriction/review/moratorium on the death penalty. Risky, as people love the death penalty, but a well-argued case for something short of complete ban can probably appease anti-DP lefties (like me), look somewhat bold, and fly under the radar screen of voters more concerned about economic issues.
7.) Prescription drugs: whatever our plan, it has to make the distinction stark enough that the GOP looks like it wants to subsidize greedy pharm. companies with monster profits while allowing granny to die a slow, agonizing death. Something limited in cost would be nice, but it should cover the poor better than the GOP plan and focus on the greed of GOP donating- pharm. companies.
8.) Campaign finance reform. Bush reluctantly signed it, and will outspend us significantly. We need to have people know we're the underdog financially going in. If we're up in polls and behind in money at any point, we need to loudly ask if how much higher we'd be if Bush wasn't trying to buy his way out of incompetence.
9.) A sensible middle ground between complete free trade and protectionism, to balance the union desires against Clinton-era free trade. Work with the WTO on fair trade agreements. Try to bring some businesses back home with carrot and stick proposals. Try to be pro-business and pro-labor at the same time.
1.) Repealing the tax cuts, at least partially. Makes us the party of greater fiscal responsibility, and that deficit's not going away before '04, sadly.
2.) Honoring our commitment in Iraq, improving international relations, and not looking soft on terrorism. Credibility here will depend on our candidate.
3.) Partial repeal of specific parts of the Patriot Act. Pick the most offensive parts to highlight and we delight civil libertarians while not alienating pro-authoritarian paranoids who think we need the gov't spying on all of us to protect us from our neighbor's copy of High Times.
4.) Restoration of Clinton-era environmental polices. Easy win.
5.) Civil unions. If the distinction is made that this is a tax convenience issue, and not gay marriage, I don't think most people would be scared, but it gives us legit civil rights cred.
6.) Some restriction/review/moratorium on the death penalty. Risky, as people love the death penalty, but a well-argued case for something short of complete ban can probably appease anti-DP lefties (like me), look somewhat bold, and fly under the radar screen of voters more concerned about economic issues.
7.) Prescription drugs: whatever our plan, it has to make the distinction stark enough that the GOP looks like it wants to subsidize greedy pharm. companies with monster profits while allowing granny to die a slow, agonizing death. Something limited in cost would be nice, but it should cover the poor better than the GOP plan and focus on the greed of GOP donating- pharm. companies.
8.) Campaign finance reform. Bush reluctantly signed it, and will outspend us significantly. We need to have people know we're the underdog financially going in. If we're up in polls and behind in money at any point, we need to loudly ask if how much higher we'd be if Bush wasn't trying to buy his way out of incompetence.
9.) A sensible middle ground between complete free trade and protectionism, to balance the union desires against Clinton-era free trade. Work with the WTO on fair trade agreements. Try to bring some businesses back home with carrot and stick proposals. Try to be pro-business and pro-labor at the same time.
It should simply be...fixing the mess Bush made! 
QUOTE(Rancid Uncle @ Aug 10 2003, 08:21 PM)
What should the democratic platform in the 2004 election be? Should it be more or less liberal than last time?
The platform isn't too bad already. I would like to see it stressing corporate accountability a bit more. Perhaps inserting a provision like some states have, in regards to the right of private individuals to start a process to have a corporation's charter revoked if they get too far out of line. On other issues, I would like to see a greater focus on the need for international cooperation and facilitation when it comes to international disputes. I think that would be wildly successful, given the tragic missteps that the current administration is engaging in.
This must be added to every Democratic candidates platform.
Right now only one can see straight enough to say it and put it in writting!
Dennis Kucinich IS the only candidate that passes the litmus test.
http://www.kucinich.us/issues/marijuana_decrim.php
MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZATION
Edited to remove possible copyrighted material, per the Rules, Section B, V. (I looked at Rep. Kucinich's website, saw no clear policy and defaulted to the "no liability" option); Plus, we're all capable of clicking links
Right now only one can see straight enough to say it and put it in writting!
Dennis Kucinich IS the only candidate that passes the litmus test.
http://www.kucinich.us/issues/marijuana_decrim.php
MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZATION
Edited to remove possible copyrighted material, per the Rules, Section B, V. (I looked at Rep. Kucinich's website, saw no clear policy and defaulted to the "no liability" option); Plus, we're all capable of clicking links
GCW while I feel that marijuana usage should be legal I don't think this is a must be added to every democratic candidates platform. For several reasons, first there are republicans and democrats against this policy. And making it a platform topic that you cannot get a majority of the political party to agree with will only pull us apart.
Second, while the pharmacutical companies have so much power in Washington and would not be able to make a buck on this cause people could grow there own the lobbiest will fight this.
Third, there are so much more important issues that all the candidates are pushing that they all agree on with the little differences on how to get there. For instance, universal healthcare for all is much more important then legalizing marijuana.
I would much rather the states tackle this issue first so that the constituency is heard better then in congress and there are several states that are already doing so. Although I don't agree that once a state determines to decriminalize marijuana usage the federal government can come in and basically say your state law does not apply and the federal government does what they want.
Second, while the pharmacutical companies have so much power in Washington and would not be able to make a buck on this cause people could grow there own the lobbiest will fight this.
Third, there are so much more important issues that all the candidates are pushing that they all agree on with the little differences on how to get there. For instance, universal healthcare for all is much more important then legalizing marijuana.
I would much rather the states tackle this issue first so that the constituency is heard better then in congress and there are several states that are already doing so. Although I don't agree that once a state determines to decriminalize marijuana usage the federal government can come in and basically say your state law does not apply and the federal government does what they want.
D. Kucinich, wants to give statehood to D.C. that has no representation in Congress.
"On January 9th, 2004, Congressman Dennis Kucinich announced that he will be introducing legislation to obtain DC Statehood once Congress reconvenes for the 108th Session. This announcement has brought in praises and support from local DC statehood activist and elected officials. DC Shadow Senator Paul Strauss said, "I am elated with Congressman Kucinich and his team for making such a significant step on the behalf of DC and its residents." Sean Tenner, Executive Director of DC Democracy Fund states, "Congressman Kucinich has shown that he is a great friend of the District of Columbia. He deserves the gratitude of every disenfranchised resident of DC for working to end our unequal status."
http://www.kucinich.us/pressreleases/pr_011204.php
420
Jeb Bush's Forida:
US FL: Miami Federal Court Has 'Secret Docket' To Keep Cases
Pubdate: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 Source: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n070/a07.html?397
(Part of the Democratic platform should be to remove every little bush. Prohibit the Bush and RE-legalize the plant cannabis.)
420
In case anyone hasn't heard,
Kucinich, put in writing that as PRESIDENT He WILL: "DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA" -"in favor of a drug policy that sets reasonable boundaries for marijuana use by establishing guidelines similar to those already in place for alcohol."
(POSTED ON His website!)
http://www.kucinich.us/issues/marijuana_decrim.php
(As a cannabis activist and obedient Christian, ending the policy of caging Our brother for using a plant is an important issue who’s time has come.)
"On January 9th, 2004, Congressman Dennis Kucinich announced that he will be introducing legislation to obtain DC Statehood once Congress reconvenes for the 108th Session. This announcement has brought in praises and support from local DC statehood activist and elected officials. DC Shadow Senator Paul Strauss said, "I am elated with Congressman Kucinich and his team for making such a significant step on the behalf of DC and its residents." Sean Tenner, Executive Director of DC Democracy Fund states, "Congressman Kucinich has shown that he is a great friend of the District of Columbia. He deserves the gratitude of every disenfranchised resident of DC for working to end our unequal status."
http://www.kucinich.us/pressreleases/pr_011204.php
420
Jeb Bush's Forida:
US FL: Miami Federal Court Has 'Secret Docket' To Keep Cases
Pubdate: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 Source: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n070/a07.html?397
(Part of the Democratic platform should be to remove every little bush. Prohibit the Bush and RE-legalize the plant cannabis.)
420
In case anyone hasn't heard,
Kucinich, put in writing that as PRESIDENT He WILL: "DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA" -"in favor of a drug policy that sets reasonable boundaries for marijuana use by establishing guidelines similar to those already in place for alcohol."
(POSTED ON His website!)
http://www.kucinich.us/issues/marijuana_decrim.php
(As a cannabis activist and obedient Christian, ending the policy of caging Our brother for using a plant is an important issue who’s time has come.)
How about a provision about a more hard-line approach to breaking up concentration in industries? What about indexing the minimum wage to inflation? Does anyone here think those would be good ideas?
I'd love to attach minimum wage to inflation. Due to practical concerns, it'd probably have to be on a considerable delay, based on very concreate indicators, and one way, but it might be passable- if we promise those across the aisle to not raise it again for awhile afterwards.
yes of course we need more liberal action in this Election, if we would have had more in the last bush wouldn't be in office now in my opinion, And John Kerry Represents the liberal attitude that we need in off 
We have to hit the Republicans where they live. Sure, I believe in environmentalism and think it's vitally important, but you're just not going to get people to sit up and take notice on it if you lead with it. We have to match them issue for issue and stand apart from them with better ideas on the topics they seem to own.
1. National security. We have to have a strong stance or the right will beat us every time. Being a Democrat must not be seen as sysynonymousith being submissive. That said, we need to espouse a better plan than anything the current administration has going. This plays into my next topic.
2. Foreign policy as it relates to terrorism. Example: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Mar16.html
You know, in my book, you don't win the war on terrorism by alienating many of your own allies, not to mention further enraging your enemies. You do the opposite. You work to gain support. In that way, you encourage cooperation in sussing out the terrorists. What is the Bush administration likely doing by angering foreign countries? Creating incentive for more terrorism.
3. The Economy. Jobs, jobs, jobs, people.
4. Family Values. How in the world did the Republicans walk away with this? Ain't nobody more interested in family values than the Demos. We need to get people to associate family values with this party.
5. Healthcare. It's all over the news, all the time. People really want this one solved. Let's solve it.
6. Taxes. The Replicans have branded usRepublicansd the "tax and spend" party. Yet the Bush administration has outspent previous administrations by a wide margin--and cut taxes at the same time. Massive deficit spending. Take a look:
http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-31-03.html
7. The Environment. It's important, lest anyone think we've forgotten. We haven't. Best way to save the environment right now is to concentrate on getting Bush out.
1. National security. We have to have a strong stance or the right will beat us every time. Being a Democrat must not be seen as sysynonymousith being submissive. That said, we need to espouse a better plan than anything the current administration has going. This plays into my next topic.
2. Foreign policy as it relates to terrorism. Example: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Mar16.html
QUOTE
Opinion of U.S. Abroad Is Falling, Survey Finds
Majorities Doubt War in Iraq Is Quelling Terrorism
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 17, 2004; Page A22
A year after the invasion of Iraq, anti-American views have hardened in Europe and in Muslim countries, where lopsided majorities oppose President Bush and are suspicious of U.S. motives, according to a new nine-country opinion poll.
The survey, the largest of its kind, found slipping support for the U.S. war on terrorism in Europe and negative views of the United States in all foreign countries polled except Britain...
Majorities Doubt War in Iraq Is Quelling Terrorism
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 17, 2004; Page A22
A year after the invasion of Iraq, anti-American views have hardened in Europe and in Muslim countries, where lopsided majorities oppose President Bush and are suspicious of U.S. motives, according to a new nine-country opinion poll.
The survey, the largest of its kind, found slipping support for the U.S. war on terrorism in Europe and negative views of the United States in all foreign countries polled except Britain...
You know, in my book, you don't win the war on terrorism by alienating many of your own allies, not to mention further enraging your enemies. You do the opposite. You work to gain support. In that way, you encourage cooperation in sussing out the terrorists. What is the Bush administration likely doing by angering foreign countries? Creating incentive for more terrorism.
3. The Economy. Jobs, jobs, jobs, people.
4. Family Values. How in the world did the Republicans walk away with this? Ain't nobody more interested in family values than the Demos. We need to get people to associate family values with this party.
5. Healthcare. It's all over the news, all the time. People really want this one solved. Let's solve it.
6. Taxes. The Replicans have branded usRepublicansd the "tax and spend" party. Yet the Bush administration has outspent previous administrations by a wide margin--and cut taxes at the same time. Massive deficit spending. Take a look:
http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-31-03.html
QUOTE
July 31, 2003
'Conservative' Bush Spends More than 'Liberal' Presidents Clinton, Carter
by Veronique de Rugy and Tad DeHaven
Veronique de Rugy is a fiscal policy analyst and Tad DeHaven a policy researcher at the Cato Institute.
The Bush administration's newly released budget projections reveal an anticipated budget deficit of $450 billion for the current fiscal year, up another $151 billion since February. Supporters and critics of the administration are tripping over themselves to blame the deficit on tax cuts, the war, and a slow economy. But the fact is we have mounting deficits because George W. Bush is the most gratuitous big spender to occupy the White House since Jimmy Carter. One could say that he has become the "Mother of All Big Spenders."...
'Conservative' Bush Spends More than 'Liberal' Presidents Clinton, Carter
by Veronique de Rugy and Tad DeHaven
Veronique de Rugy is a fiscal policy analyst and Tad DeHaven a policy researcher at the Cato Institute.
The Bush administration's newly released budget projections reveal an anticipated budget deficit of $450 billion for the current fiscal year, up another $151 billion since February. Supporters and critics of the administration are tripping over themselves to blame the deficit on tax cuts, the war, and a slow economy. But the fact is we have mounting deficits because George W. Bush is the most gratuitous big spender to occupy the White House since Jimmy Carter. One could say that he has become the "Mother of All Big Spenders."...
7. The Environment. It's important, lest anyone think we've forgotten. We haven't. Best way to save the environment right now is to concentrate on getting Bush out.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.