Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
47. It worked very well for them.
Sun Apr 17, 2016, 04:34 PM
Apr 2016

It has kept them in control of the House since 2010 and has shifted the political discussion in the Beltway massively to the right, with virtually no pushback at all from anyone in the leadership of OUR party.

Your candidate doesn't want to change the terms of the discussion. She doesn't want to mobilize the majority of the American people who utterly reject the right-wing, corporatist, militarist agenda. Instead, she hangs on to the delusion that wars and trade deals can somehow have progressive, umane results.

Yes. Scuba Apr 2016 #1
No. Incrementalism is getting what you can given the circumstances. Gomez163 Apr 2016 #2
It often has a net outcome of treading water. Chan790 Apr 2016 #7
Worse, it's aiming low when you need to be dreaming, leading.... CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #13
Thanks, Chan790. I agree totally. n/t truedelphi Apr 2016 #27
Well, leaving off the last part of your statement passiveporcupine Apr 2016 #68
Agreed. senz Apr 2016 #78
NO. Incrementalism is bowing down and accepting what the authoritarian gives you. rhett o rick Apr 2016 #53
That's right. Bernie would tell congress to take it redstateblues Apr 2016 #77
Bernie works well on both sides of the aisle. senz Apr 2016 #80
That's why so many of his colleagues are supporting him redstateblues Apr 2016 #82
Political clout and working well are two different things. senz Apr 2016 #85
No incrementalism in a delaying tactic Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #58
Failed policies are regressive. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #3
Nobody is proposing failed policies. n/t. Ken Burch Apr 2016 #34
Really? Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #35
It was projection. The ACA for example has set back single payer a decade at least. rhett o rick Apr 2016 #57
"Incrementalism" is a coward's method of defending the Status Quo. nt Romulox Apr 2016 #4
"Incrementalism" Is Akin To... DOING NOTHING! NO CHANGE! THAT IS WHAT GOLDMAN "PAYS" HER FOR! CorporatistNation Apr 2016 #22
At least the Republicans have the courage of their convictions. A Rightwing Democrat is a fraud. nt Romulox Apr 2016 #23
... or a creature of your own creation. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #37
Third Way = rightwing Democrat. senz Apr 2016 #81
precisely beedle Apr 2016 #69
Leadership requires Vision, not pathetic weasel words like "incremental". Jackilope Apr 2016 #5
Incrementalism reminds me of Zeno's paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise. Chan790 Apr 2016 #15
And yet rock Apr 2016 #59
No. Not according to Zeno. Chan790 Apr 2016 #60
Zeno was wrong, that why it's a paradox rock Apr 2016 #63
Mathematicians are not incrementalists. Chan790 Apr 2016 #65
Well, I guess rock Apr 2016 #73
Or doing Third Way things, a little at a time.....sneakier, is all. djean111 Apr 2016 #6
Incrementalism = "Go ask your father". CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #8
I don't know how anyone expects Hillary... TCJ70 Apr 2016 #9
I don't expect Hillary to do anything except capitulate to Republicans. Chan790 Apr 2016 #17
She agrees with them on their foreign policies and their economic policies. She agrees rhett o rick Apr 2016 #56
political moonwalking Fairgo Apr 2016 #10
NO. Demanding everything now, and getting NOTHING is a symbolic gesture. NT Adrahil Apr 2016 #11
Demanding nothing now and getting even less is a Clintonian gesture. n/t Chan790 Apr 2016 #19
That is not Clinton's approach and you know it. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #41
Oh Please beedle Apr 2016 #70
Thank you for the campaign attack ad. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #71
If Hillary is that vulnerable beedle Apr 2016 #72
The only way to get something is to start by demanding everything. Ken Burch Apr 2016 #38
Tea Party logic. How is that working out so far? Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #43
It worked very well for them. Ken Burch Apr 2016 #47
Nothin was passed. The Tea Party is a failure. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #48
They weren't TRYING to get things passed. They were trying to cut government down to nothing Ken Burch Apr 2016 #62
If your view of their goals is correct, they achieved them by doing nothing. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #67
Or by working with others to get the votes to do it- like the senate has bettyellen Apr 2016 #66
You are in a leaky boat and the water is pooling in the bottom. You are beginning to sink. Beowulf Apr 2016 #12
Nonsense. An idiot would use a teaspoon. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #45
Yes. And when Bernie wins, I fully expect them to try to put a "governor" if you will on him silvershadow Apr 2016 #14
I would hardly call Social Security a product of "symbolic gestures" DrDan Apr 2016 #16
How was Social Security incrementalism? KPN Apr 2016 #26
it initially started as a single payment to a retiree DrDan Apr 2016 #30
Very pathetic for a Hillary backer to try to use a New Deal program to support her. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #29
nothing incremental about Social Security? You think the program we have today DrDan Apr 2016 #31
That is pathetic. Sure it has changed. But the initial idea, the birth was a giant step. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #36
so you admit the program we have today is a product of incremental changes DrDan Apr 2016 #39
Geez, IT WOULD HAVE NEVER EXISTED with just incremental changes. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #42
your subject title is pathetic - and you know it - I never used Social Security in support of DrDan Apr 2016 #32
You own pathetic bud. Social securities origin WAS NOT INCREMENTAL. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #40
your own words - "we'd never have had the program to begin with. Let alone incrementally change it." DrDan Apr 2016 #44
Are you really that dense? There would be no Social Security program AT ALL. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #46
take it up with Dr Elizabeth Segal from Arizona State, Professor in the School of Social Work DrDan Apr 2016 #92
She made my point actually. But nice try. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #93
I guess you missed this part DrDan Apr 2016 #94
Its lip service. Sky Masterson Apr 2016 #18
Look at the Clinton presidency. The family leave act, which is NOT paid, is the only thing Skwmom Apr 2016 #20
Taking small steps forward while regressive policy goals like TPP take giant leaps. pa28 Apr 2016 #21
Incrementalism is a deceptive term, because it suggests that the measures Blue Meany Apr 2016 #24
"Some people see things as they are and ask 'why?'... Buns_of_Fire Apr 2016 #25
It occurred to me that "incrementalism" is used because "trickle down" was already taken azurnoir Apr 2016 #28
The powers that be (big money interests and corporations) LOVE incrementalism. BillZBubb Apr 2016 #33
It's conservatism. TransitJohn Apr 2016 #49
Pshaw! History shows us that only incrementalism succeeds RufusTFirefly Apr 2016 #50
It occurs to me RandySF Apr 2016 #51
Bernie has accomplished a great deal in congress senz Apr 2016 #84
Yes, I'd rather have nothing Dem2 Apr 2016 #52
one step forward, one step back MisterP Apr 2016 #54
Most of the "incremental" legislation passed under Bill Clinton and POTUS Obama PufPuf23 Apr 2016 #55
Umm.. every time Bernie is forced to get specific on how he'd implement a policy, ecstatic Apr 2016 #61
of course he can't make dramatic changes - he struggled with minor changes DrDan Apr 2016 #74
Dammit! Stop making sense please! redstateblues Apr 2016 #83
The difference: he will actually WORK to get us there. senz Apr 2016 #87
Do you have any evidence to reassure me that Bernie would "work to get us there?" Because I don't. ecstatic Apr 2016 #88
He is a true statesman and a very accomplished legislator. senz Apr 2016 #89
Incrementalism... JSup Apr 2016 #64
It seldom rises to even symbolism, it's a dirt-cheap pacification technique. nt Umbral18 Apr 2016 #75
Incrementalism noretreatnosurrender Apr 2016 #76
and when your presumed candidate is on video screaming, "There will never be Doctor_J Apr 2016 #79
+1000 senz Apr 2016 #86
Amen! KPN Apr 2016 #90
It's reluctantly making a move when everybody is shouting: make it already, we are waiting! Betty Karlson Apr 2016 #91
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Has it ever occurred to y...»Reply #47