2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumMartin O'Malley characterizes economic plans of his rivals.
In NH today, O'Malley said we shouldn't "scrap capitalism and replace it with socialism," nor should we ignore "crimes on Wall Street and take orders from Big Banks."
Is that a fair characterization of the respective plans of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)He's either very unaware of political thought, cynically manipulative, or desperate or all three.
As for Clinton, well, I'll accept that stereotype he is throwing out.
aidbo
(2,328 posts)Too bad it wasn't in a debate where either Hillary or Bernie could rebut his assertions.
Crystalite
(164 posts)We live in a hybrid socialist/capitalist system.
Sanders isn't promoting scrapping capitalism.
bigtree
(85,999 posts)...he's defending his own populist economic appeal. Everything isn't about projecting around the Sanders campaign.
Besides, Sanders made his own cheap shot in the last debate lumping Clinton and O'Malley together while ranting about Wall Street. O'Malley didn't name anyone in his speech.
Should he stop criticizing Wall street to protect Hillary's sensibilities? Or, should he shy away from defining his own economic philosophy because it might reflect negatively on Sanders' political identification? He's not in this race to carry either of the two's murky water for them.
Crystalite
(164 posts)...is out of thin air if not directed toward Sanders.
Like, do we really have a concern about socialism in our country, as we dismantle one public program after the other?
I really like Mike and that seemed out of character.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)from his rivals. I doubt he'll be anyone's running mate. He brings a lot of good to the democratic party, especially on criminal justice reform, in my opinion.
bigtree
(85,999 posts)...but he's also defining himself.
It's as if critics of that line in his speech who are defending Sanders expect he should mold his message to suit Bernie's or Hillary's campaign. He has as much right to defend his own populist economic policy from charges of anti-capitalism as Sanders does; as much right, as you say to distinguish himself from the others.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)I don't see some awful negative with the words democratic socialism or socialist nor would the woman from moveon who he's addressing. As you say, O'Malley is defining himself as he's entitled to do.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)He doesn't do proposal by meme, and this is an example of why.
As an MOM fan, I think that was a bad answer, and I assume he's going to walk it back. I do still think his economic plan is parsecs ahead of the other two's, though.
bigtree
(85,999 posts),,,Bernie had this practiced medley during the debate about: this or that proposal of his 'isn't radical'.
He also went on a rant about how, unlike his rivals, he wasn't beholden to 'Wall Street'.
Why is it fine for him to distinguish himself that way and not fine for O'Malley? Unlike Sanders, he didn't identify his remarks with anyone but himself.
Don't you think he'll need to (deserves to be able to) defend his own populist economics from the same charges from the right, of anti-capitalism, that Sanders is being subjected to?
riversedge
(70,246 posts)Hillary was ahead of game and thinking of the GE--knocks down her Republican rivals--the real opponents.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)But if GHWB can land the VP slot after his "voodoo economics" jab at Reagan, maybe O'M hasn't crossed the line of being a persona non grata just yet.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Maybe it's time to drop out instead of acting the fool.
marble falls
(57,114 posts)crony of Wall Street and Big Banks - look at who her big donors are.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)It is a good place for him to position himself. Would have worked better if he were louder about it a couple of months ago. Heads up, he is quickly joining Clinton with scorn from Sanders supporters. lol.
I knew it was coming, sooner or later.