Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) urged her Democratic colleagues to stop attacking the "oligarchy," arguing that the word did not resonate with most Americans.
I get that you prefer the word oligarchy. That’s fine. I’m not sure I feel strongly that we call them oligarchs or if we compare them to monarchs in our messaging how they’re bad.
I’m just not seeing how a disagreement on verbiage without a difference in content makes someone as awful as people seem to be reacting.
Its about who she is.
You keep trying to frame this narrowly and we all need to keep an eye on who people are with their actions, what their record is, and who is paying them.
Slotkin is a member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, and a member of the New Democrats Coalition. She’s also far right as zionist supporter as they come, and she’s already chair on a committee on terrorism and intelligence-- as a jr senator elected 2 months ago.
The new democrat coalition is what the blue dog dems became, and inherited the members of that group. They are extremely pro business and anti immigration, and deficit focused (aka, republicans)
Remember the blue dogs? Their brand became so toxic they had to rebrand as new democrats. But its the same well funded group that is always for tax cuts for the rich, but shuts down anything for the people based on a vague deficit/fiscal austerity argument. They consistently block any advancements on health care, citing cost even though the CBO says it would save money and propel the economy-- but limit the complete market control of health insurance companies. (new democrats work for them, never us)
I’d urge you to actually read up on the new demcrts coalition and the problem solvers caucus and tell me how either one are good for the democratic party. Those are the only two caucuses Slotkin identifies with.
I’m not trying to frame it narrowly. The headline is misleading click bait. Everything you say could be 100% true and it wouldn’t change that she didn’t say what you’re saying she said.
I really don’t care if you want to make it about segments of the democratic party. You’re going to be hard pressed to convince me that suggesting a different word for criticism inverts the criticism, even if they are already on an intelligence and terrorism committee (which I have no idea how that relevant to anything).
Argue she’s awful if you want, I honestly don’t care, but that doesn’t make her statements in this case pro business, pro oligarchy, or anything particularly interesting.
And yes, I’ve looked at her voting records and donors. I don’t like everything I see, but it’s mostly fine, and definitively better than the other candidates.
I’m really not.
I get that you prefer the word oligarchy. That’s fine. I’m not sure I feel strongly that we call them oligarchs or if we compare them to monarchs in our messaging how they’re bad.
I’m just not seeing how a disagreement on verbiage without a difference in content makes someone as awful as people seem to be reacting.
Its about who she is.
You keep trying to frame this narrowly and we all need to keep an eye on who people are with their actions, what their record is, and who is paying them.
Slotkin is a member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, and a member of the New Democrats Coalition. She’s also far right as zionist supporter as they come, and she’s already chair on a committee on terrorism and intelligence-- as a jr senator elected 2 months ago.
The new democrat coalition is what the blue dog dems became, and inherited the members of that group. They are extremely pro business and anti immigration, and deficit focused (aka, republicans)
Remember the blue dogs? Their brand became so toxic they had to rebrand as new democrats. But its the same well funded group that is always for tax cuts for the rich, but shuts down anything for the people based on a vague deficit/fiscal austerity argument. They consistently block any advancements on health care, citing cost even though the CBO says it would save money and propel the economy-- but limit the complete market control of health insurance companies. (new democrats work for them, never us)
https://theweek.com/articles/713180/why-blue-dogs-destroy-democratic-party-again
https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/blue-dog-democrats-arent-making-sense-on-health-care-reform/
I’d urge you to actually read up on the new demcrts coalition and the problem solvers caucus and tell me how either one are good for the democratic party. Those are the only two caucuses Slotkin identifies with.
I’m not trying to frame it narrowly. The headline is misleading click bait. Everything you say could be 100% true and it wouldn’t change that she didn’t say what you’re saying she said.
I really don’t care if you want to make it about segments of the democratic party. You’re going to be hard pressed to convince me that suggesting a different word for criticism inverts the criticism, even if they are already on an intelligence and terrorism committee (which I have no idea how that relevant to anything).
Argue she’s awful if you want, I honestly don’t care, but that doesn’t make her statements in this case pro business, pro oligarchy, or anything particularly interesting.
And yes, I’ve looked at her voting records and donors. I don’t like everything I see, but it’s mostly fine, and definitively better than the other candidates.