2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumMaybe we SHOULD negotiate with the Rethugs over the debt ceiling.
And bring to the table our own ransom list, starting with Medicare for All.
Let's see. How about:
A doubling of the food stamp program
National $15 dollar minimum wage
An end to the Keystone Pipeline
What else goes on OUR wish list?
Maybe the other side would prefer a clean bill after all . . . .

kairos12
(13,366 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)At least make the effort.
meow2u3
(25,125 posts)Expanding affirmative action to include persons over 40, poor and low-income people regardless of race, and the disabled, for starters.
Full restoration of the Voting Rights Act, plus expanding the VRA to outlaw discrimination on the bases of sex, age, and disability.
Ending "corporate welfare" as we know it.
Steep tax hikes on the rich.
Repeal any and all "right to work" laws, criminalize union busting.
Prosecution of executive boards of banks and corporations who tanked the economy
Prosecution of the Koch Bros. for seditious conspiracy
This is not an exhaustive list.
summerschild
(725 posts)elias7
(4,221 posts)Proud Liberal Dem
(24,846 posts)President Obama should AGREE with all of their demands. Repubs should drop their demands then.
pnwmom
(109,823 posts)whole economic plan?
Huh?
NutmegYankee
(16,406 posts)Proud Liberal Dem
(24,846 posts)Just being snarky by pointing out how Repubs are against something as soon as President Obama is for it
Don't worry. I haven't gone crazy......yet
pnwmom
(109,823 posts)
Grey
(1,584 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
Igel
(36,703 posts)1. The food stamp program cuts aren't in $--that's how the media reports things. For them, all things are money. It would cut the amount paid by the government for food stamps by removing waivers put in place as a result of the recession and restore things pretty much to how they were in 2007. If you're adult and able bodied you need to volunteer or be in a training program.
The comparable way to increase the amount spent would be to remove even more restrictions so even more people qualify. Which gets us back to how things were in the mid-1990s.
2. That's doable, but people on both sides like to cite only studies that support their position. It's a strange science and odd critical thinking that seeks first proof while seeking to avoid challenge to the idea. What would the effect be on the common good? Unknown, if only because no good controlled experiments have been done. (And, yes, people will cite studies. But people on both sides like to cite only studies that support their position. It's a strange ...)
3. Obama's said that the pipeline is in his jurisdiction, not Congress', so this "demand" would undermine his own authority. Granted, the Constitution says otherwise, but Congress has been asleep at the switch so long that it's easy to understand how a scholar with Obama's record of research in Constitutional law could make the mistake. Or, more to the point, how a president--any president--would want to appropriate as much power to his office as possible.