HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » When President Sanders ne...

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:47 PM

When President Sanders negotiates a trade deal, should he be given the authority Pres. Obama is

currently asking for?

35 replies, 1502 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 35 replies Author Time Post
Reply When President Sanders negotiates a trade deal, should he be given the authority Pres. Obama is (Original post)
arely staircase May 2015 OP
Cheese Sandwich May 2015 #1
Iggo May 2015 #2
moondust May 2015 #3
PowerToThePeople May 2015 #7
cali May 2015 #11
fredamae May 2015 #4
okaawhatever May 2015 #5
cali May 2015 #8
cali May 2015 #6
kentuck May 2015 #9
LondonReign2 May 2015 #10
TheKentuckian May 2015 #12
ibegurpard May 2015 #13
MADem May 2015 #14
ibegurpard May 2015 #16
MADem May 2015 #17
ibegurpard May 2015 #18
MADem May 2015 #19
ibegurpard May 2015 #20
MADem May 2015 #22
Jackpine Radical May 2015 #31
MADem May 2015 #35
Major Nikon May 2015 #21
MADem May 2015 #23
DCBob May 2015 #15
Scuba May 2015 #24
MohRokTah May 2015 #25
arcane1 May 2015 #26
winter is coming May 2015 #28
winter is coming May 2015 #27
Historic NY May 2015 #29
misterhighwasted May 2015 #30
WillyT May 2015 #32
Hoyt May 2015 #33
pampango May 2015 #34

Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:48 PM

1. nope

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:48 PM

2. Uh-uh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:49 PM

3. I doubt he would even ask for it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moondust (Reply #3)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:54 PM

7. this.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moondust (Reply #3)

Sun May 10, 2015, 04:03 PM

11. if it passes and he won the presidency, he'd get it

 

It has a six year life span

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:50 PM

4. Nope n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:52 PM

5. Yes. Too much goes into the negotiation portion. If it isn't a good deal Congress can vote no. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #5)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:56 PM

8. I get that you're a trusting soul

 

Should president walker have it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:54 PM

6. lol

 

When president walker negotiates a trade agreement should l d he be given it? He will be because the tpa has a 6 year life span.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 03:59 PM

9. No.

I don't think so.

I don't like the idea of decision making in the hands of only one person, no matter how much he/she might be trusted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 04:01 PM

10. Hells no!

Just as Bush was denied the authority

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 04:32 PM

12. Nope, the entire structure is counter constitutional, agreements of this scope are what the treaty

process is for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 04:34 PM

13. Of course not!

That's like pushing for a line-item veto.
A very bad idea to give the president that much power...considering who could be wielding the pen at any time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 05:53 PM

14. That would be up to Congress--not the POTUS.

I find it amusing how everyone is making Obama the boogieman on this matter. If you don't like it, stop griping at him and start griping at Congress.

He doesn't have the POWER to make this happen--the CONGRESS does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #14)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:02 PM

16. Oh we're working on congress

same as he is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #16)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:13 PM

17. If the last election is any indication, you need to work a bit harder. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #17)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:15 PM

18. would help if we didn't have to fight third-way Democrats

Oh and start working on the state legislatures...they are generally the ones who draw the lines to ensure which party elects representatives to Congress.
While everyone argues about who gets to be President...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #18)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:19 PM

19. I got bad news for you--the people you call Third Way Democrats are DEMOCRATS.

They donate to the party, they support it and its candidates, and they are the backbone of the organization.

They VOTE.

You might not like that, but that's life.

Calling people names isn't the way that you win any converts to your cause.

Trying to divide Democrats into "good" ones and "bad" ones is what Chaos Kiddies from Rove-ville do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #19)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:26 PM

20. like this?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703808904575025030384695158#printMode

""F—ing retarded," Mr. Emanuel scolded the group, according to several participants. He warned them not to alienate lawmakers whose votes would be needed on health care and other top legislative items."

Just fine when it's one of the third-way "Democrats" that's hurling the insults I guess...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #20)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:38 PM

22. Do you really want to play the "Who's the biggest asshole" game?

When did Rahm Emmanuel vote on the TPP, hmmmmm?



He's a STATE governor. He has nothing to do with national politics, and hasn't for some time.

Try to stay on point, anyway. Conflation is tiresome and exposes the weakness in your argument.

Pretty poor attempt at distraction, that.

Yelling at Democrats (and I see you had to drag out your Quickly-Becoming-Meaningless "Third Way" Whine yet AGAIN) isn't the way to bring them to your point of view, you know. Scolding isn't an effective strategy to exhort people to join your team. You just sound nasty and angry and entitled.

Huffing, puffing, name-calling, stomping feet...it just makes people want to get as far away as they can manage.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #22)

Sun May 10, 2015, 08:02 PM

31. DEMOCRATS - YES (8)



Sen. Michael Bennet (Colo.) — Voted for the TPA bill in the Senate Finance Committee

Sen. Maria Cantwell (Wash.) — Voted for the TPA bill in the Senate Finance Committee

Sen. Ben Cardin (Md.) — Voted for the TPA bill in the Senate Finance Committee

Sen. Tom Carper (Del.) — Voted for the TPA bill in the Senate Finance Committee

Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.) — "Murray supports the package of bills that came out of the Finance Committee. She will be working with colleagues on ideas for improving the legislation and managing its path through the floor," said a Murray representative.

Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.) — Voted for the TPA bill in the Senate Finance Committee

Sen. Mark Warner (Va.) — Voted for the TPA bill in the Senate Finance Committee

Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.) — Wyden, ranking member of the Finance Committee, helped negotiate the fast-track trade deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #31)

Sun May 10, 2015, 09:35 PM

35. Instead of hollering on DU, maybe it would be a better trick to

lobby those guys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #18)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:36 PM

21. Results...


On Sun May 10, 2015, 06:19 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

would help if we didn't have to fight third-way Democrats
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6652313

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusation that MADem is a 3rd way is OTT, and out of line. By logic you can assume MADem voted for Warren so I highly doubt he is the problem. This post is pure trolling.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun May 10, 2015, 06:33 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Strawman
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The alerter reads the post entirely different then how I read it.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It doesn't seem over the top, and I don't think MADem should see it as a personal accusation .
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Where does this say that MADem is a third-way Dem.?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Get grip. Cripes.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This isn't "trolling" - posting something just to get a response. An the poster doesn't accuse MADem of being 3rd way, although I'm not sure that is technically a slur anyway, the poster states that "working on congress" would be easier if not for having to fight 3rd way democrats.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #21)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:41 PM

23. FWIW, I didn't alert on that--I think it's great that intolerant POVs get the full light of day.

We know them by their attitudes.

The DNC is a big tent. People who don't like it, well, too bad. They don't get to be "the deciders."

It has been ever thus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 06:01 PM

15. Yes.. otherwise few trade deals would ever happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 07:35 PM

24. No.. that way no trade deals simply written by corporations would ever happen.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 07:48 PM

25. You lost me at "President Sanders".

 











Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 07:50 PM

26. Nope. And he shouldn't have Patriot Act powers either n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #26)

Sun May 10, 2015, 07:55 PM

28. +1,000,000. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 07:55 PM

27. No. This isn't about individuals. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 07:56 PM

29. Name one President who didn't have the authority????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 08:00 PM

30. Haahaa.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 08:05 PM

32. No... We Got Rid Of That Concept With The American Revolution...

 

And if we were talking about the trades of Cobblers, Clothiers, and Machines... it would be one thing...

But THIS deal is trying to pervert the ideas of Patents, Copyrights, and Sovereignty... to name a few.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT TRADE.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 08:09 PM

33. Yes, but it's not something that will become an issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 10, 2015, 09:06 PM

34. I would prefer a Sanders-negotiated trade deal to one picked apart by a republican congress

if he had to deal with one.

I think a Boehner/McConnell congress would totally rewrite or just reject any trade agreement that a President Sanders sent to them since it would probably have high labor and environmental standards - things that republicans are not generally too fond of.

That is what congress did to FDR and Truman when the latter submitted the ITO to congress, with its linkage of trade rules and labor standards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread