Warren’s Agenda for Economic Patriotism
After Trump (who announced with great fanfare a “space force” last summer and thinks we could buy Greenland), it seems voters are hungry for actual policies. Warren has a great industrial policy that all Democrats should get behind.
Agenda for Economic Patriotism.
Warren’s proposal does nothing less than turn inside out the globalist assumptions pursued by the past several administrations, Democrat and Republican alike. Where they have pursued more globalization of commerce as an end in itself (and as a profit center for U.S.-based multinational corporations and banks), Warren’s goal is to bring production and good jobs home.
Even better, she knits it all together with a coherent plan, beginning with a new Department of Economic Development “with the sole responsibility to create and defend quality, sustainable American jobs.”
The new Department will replace the Commerce Department, subsume other agencies like the Small Business Administration and the Patent and Trademark Office, and include research and development programs, worker training programs, and export and trade authorities like the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. The new Department will have a single goal: creating and defending good American jobs.
Globalization didn’t just happen, Warren points out.
America chose to pursue a trade policy that prioritized the interests of capital over the interests of American workers. Germany, for example, chose a different path and participated in international trade while at the same time robustly—and successfully—supporting its domestic industries and its workers.
Warren proposes that every tool of American national policy be directed towards the goals of reclaiming domestic industry and producing good jobs for American workers.
Reminder: Joe Biden has told supporters that “nothing will fundamentally change” under a Biden administration.
SPRINGFIELD, MA – JUNE 2: Elizabeth Warren speaks during the 2012 Massachusetts Democratic Endorsing Convention, held at the MassMutual Center in Springfield. (Photo by Aram Boghosian/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
I like it as well, globalism has been a disaster for the American worker, and as noted a bonanza for the rich and the corporations they own. Should be noted this was one of the great sources of the Dems losing the labor vote, they shipped the jobs out and the Dems said little or nothing. As for Joe he’s a corporatist non starter for me, I’ll vote for him if I must, but we can do much better.
Yawn. Create another government bureaucracy from a series of government bureaucracies.
“Industrial policy” Please.
She doesn’t know the first thing about industrial policy. A career academic and a lawyer who has never had an original thought in her life. Has never started a company, met a payroll, or run a project producing anything other than paper.
The idea of a Harvard law school professor making $500,000 a year teaching at a school that charges $35K a semester and admits more 1%ers than those from the bottom 60% as a “a champion of the middle class” is laughable and shows just how out of touch the Democratic elites have become.
She is a combination of Michael Dukakis in a pantsuit and Hillary 2.0 with even less personal charm.
Lots of words, no point beyond the insult. Yawn.
“Never started a company.”
Which any moron can do. Law school professor: Something you can’t do. Which one do you prize? Why, the one you can do, of course.
This is a good working definition of arrogant asshole. Thanks. Want to provide a photo for the dictionary entry?
Shorter Alby: I can’t really refute any of the points just made, so I’ll resort to personal insults.
I gave it all the thought it deserved. To wit
“She doesn’t know the first thing about industrial policy. ”
This is not a statement of fact, just an insult.
“A career academic and a lawyer who has never had an original thought in her life.”
This is not a statement of fact, just an insult.
“Has never started a company, met a payroll, or run a project producing anything other than paper.”
So what? These are not qualifications for the job. Indeed, most people who took the job and had such experience were and are failures at it.
“The idea of a Harvard law school professor making $500,000 a year teaching at a school that charges $35K a semester and admits more 1%ers than those from the bottom 60% as a “a champion of the middle class” is laughable and shows just how out of touch the Democratic elites have become.”
FDR was a champion of the middle class, too. Lots of rich politicians are. And beside the point on top of it.
“She is a combination of Michael Dukakis in a pantsuit and Hillary 2.0 with even less personal charm.”
Just another pointless opinion.
Happy now?
Your entire comment was insults, you hypocritical asswipe.
Her academic portfolio consists primarily of research related to middle class finances and bankruptcy law. Useful, but hardly “industrial policy”.
Fair point about FDR but when he took office unemployment was around 20% and the economy was a complete shambles. It was clear something dramatic had to be done.
Unemployment right now is at about 2% and the economy is as strong as it’s been in a generation. She’s going to run on a platform of completely revamping this economy? Please.
Her “drink a beer with me” video was as cringeworthy as the Dukakis tank photo. She completely mishandled the entire Pocahontas affair. She doesn’t quite have the Clinton sleaze factor but hard to see her as likeable, with the shrill voice and constant scolding.
So noted, but so what? Unless you’re registered as a Democrat, you get no actual say in the matter.
I stopped trying to guess who the Party of Greed would nominate a long time ago. Irrational minds resist rational analysis, and that’s true on both sides of the aisle.
I think that in politics it’s less about who you are than who you’re for. Remember, Trump is a rich guy who claimed to be for the little guy. A lot of people who voted for him believe that.
“Cringeworthy” is an apt description of Sir Gaff-alot telling his rich patrons that nothing is going to change during a Biden Administration.
Mr whistling through the graveyard guy shows up on cue.
Biden is a dead man walking
OK genius, who is going to beat him?
Anyone and everyone. He’s a burnt-out husk of the original Biden, who was the husk of a Kennedy.
So how come he has led by a comfortable margin in every single primary poll since entering the race?
You could research this yourself, you know.
The answer is that he’s No. 1 with black voters. So was Hillary until Obama won Iowa, at which point they concluded he was electable and they switched to him.
If you spent more time researching such questions and less time trolling liberal sites, you would know things like this without asking.
He’s No. 1 with all voters. Male, female, white, non-white, college grads, non-college grads. Essentially tied for the lead with self identified liberals and crushing with self identified conservatives.
Warren is probably the strongest competitor at this point but she has a long way to go.
The one factor that works in her favor is the early primary schedule. I could see her squeaking out a win in Iowa and beating out Bernie or getting close in NH. Then maybe with that momentum she maybe gets within single digits in NV and SC, and then it’s wide open.
But I could also easily see Biden with a low single digit win in IA, Bernie with a comfortable win in NH, and then double digit wins for Biden in SC and NV. At that point Warren is lost in the noise.
Will be interesting to see the next Selzer poll in IA. The others have been all over the place for the last few weeks.
If you’re going to invest that much time into reading polls, I would hope you’re investing in the futures markets on this.
I have little to no interest in trying to predict the future except when horses are involved, because I find out if I’m right in about a minute and a half.
Most Democrats are too busy trying to pick a candidate to worry about who’s ahead in the walk from the paddock.
The real monkey wrench for Democrats in November 2020 will be the third-party candidates. If they pick a centrist, there will be a Nader type on the left. If they pick a leftist, there will be a Bloomberg type in the middle. Either one could/would siphon off a good number of voters, allowing Trump to win with 45% of the popular vote again.
This is such an obvious problem for Ds that it’s inconceivable such people won’t be put forward by malicious actors. It happens all the time in local elections, so there’s little reason to think it wouldn’t work on a national scale.
^this^