By Sal Gentile and Katherine Guthrie
On tomorrow's show, we'll preview the upcoming Democratic National Convention by taking a close look at the state of the modern Democratic Party -- the voters, delegates, funders and interest groups that make up today's Democratic coalition. We'll examine the decline of organized labor and President Obama's relationship with Wall Street, and we'll have a blockbuster panel of House and Senate candidates from across the country, to tell us what they're seeing in their battleground districts as they interact with voters.
Joining Chris tomorrow at 8 AM ET will be:
Van Jones (@vanjones68), the former special adviser for green jobs in the Obama White House and co-founder of Rebuild the Dream.
Rob Zerban (@robzerban), the Democratic candidate challenging Rep. Paul Ryan in Wisconsin's first congressional district.
Cynthia Dill (@dillesquire), a state senator from Maine and Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by retiring Sen. Olympia Snowe (R).
New York State Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries (@TeamJeffries), Democratic congressional candidate in New York's 8th district.
Arizona State Senator Kyrsten Sinema (@kyrstensinema), Democratic congressional candidate in Arizona's 9th district.
Nate Shinagawa (@nateshinagawa), the vice chair of the Tompkins County Legislature in New York and Democratic congressional candidate in New York's 23rd district.
Robert Wolf, former president of UBS Bank, member of President Obama's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, and host of the weekly webcast "Impact Players" on the Reuters YouTube channel.
John Nichols (@nicholsuprising), Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor for The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin.
Neera Tanden (@neeratanden), president of the Center for American Progress.
Rose Aguilar (@roseaguilar) radio host of "Your Call" on KALW radio in San Francisco and op-ed contributor to Al Jazeera English.
Sal Gentile (@salgentile) is a segment & digital producer for Up w/ Chris Hayes. Katherine Guthrie (@kguth1130) is a production assistant.
Leave a Comment:
Wont miss it. Tell Van to call me . We need to talk about Green Veterans of Detroit!
Jupp green is what Detroit needs, as in Green Money.
Hey twit....the headline says "Romney's Yacht Flies the Cayman Flag" Your report says it belonged to someone else. God you guys are grasping at straws.
Hey Bullied Dweed, 90% of all yachts are flagged in the Cayman Islands. You liberals really don't have time to investigate anything do you??? Is is still Lance Armstrong. OH MY GOD!!!
Perhaps there is something also wrong with expensive yachts flagged in the Cayman's. Sounds like an illegal tax dodge to me -at least immoral - how many poor people in America live poorer when the billionaires don't pay their taxes.
DNC should not invite Cardinal Dolan to speak.
Democrats should be appalled at this.
Glad to see Rob Zerban on your show. Hope it will give him some good national exposure. Wisconsin law allows Paul Ryan to run for his seat in Congress at the same time he is running for VP. Rob Zerban is a successful businessman who has had to meet a payroll and draw up actual budgets, unlike Ryan. Zerban is the first serious challenger to face off against Ryan and so far Ryan has not agreed to debate Zerban before the election. So what is Ryan afraid of? That he will be caught in more lies?
Sociopaths spend their lives manipulating others, all for selfish motives, yet they have the ability to make themselves appear to be some of the most impressive people around, including those of high morality and integrity. They seem to have many friends, yet none of those ‘followers’ actually know the real person, nor does the sociopath consider them a friend. Those “friends” only know the public persona, a very convincing personality that the sociopath creates to use and manipulate others.
The danger of ignorance.
Sociopaths are also very dangerous because of ignorance — not theirs, but everyone else’s. Virtually no one without real, first-hand experience is able to comprehend the reality of a cold-hearted, though seemingly charming sociopath.
A successful sociopath has their group of followers, but they will also have some who have been so completely suckered, that I call disciples. These are the people who have shown to be extremely gullible and easily manipulated.
They are such misguided believers that they become defenders of the sociopath, protectors from those persons they believe are trying to hurt their [sociopathic] friend because of their popularity and success. They truly excel in living a life of denial, as well as setting a new standard for ignorance.
Sounds like Ryan & Mitt
Ezra Klein brought up the point on one of these shows that near 800,000 "public jobs" have been lost these three years. Is that any way to create demand?
Re: #7
Short answer - No!
Goverment workers cost tax dollars!!!
I am a liberal - actual to be precise an "individualist communitarian"*. I have always voted for Democratic candidates.
The conversation on Up With Chris Hayes is pointing out that the Democratic party has relied heavily on the organization and structure of unions to support and get their candidates elected.
Now that union membership has been drastically reduced, this means that the unions can't be relied on - because they don't exist.
OK - so what do we do?
Throw up our hands and give up?
Or get off of our butts and - each of us - get involved!!
Is unionizing the only way to improve pay and working environment and work rules?
------------------
*"Our Divided Political Heart" by E.J.Dionne
My goodness Chris, you're beginning to sound as illiterate as the Republicans saying the "Democrat Party". It's the Democratic Party. I'm sure you're so use to hearing that insulting and dumb wording from those right wingers that you're not even sure you've erred. We all know you are a highly educated and intelligent man and you know better.
Hayes is a democratic apologist.
Same for van jones. Awesome prince is doing a show in Chi-town.
Chris, re banks' reaction to having their bacon saved over the last three years and Robert Wolf's comments. See Prince Felix of Schwartzenburg's comments after the Tsar saved Austria in 1849: "Austria will shock the world with the depth of her ingratitude."
And 120 minuets of hate the republicans.
Conservative voters are fools, Romney/Ryan con men are LYING to them on a daily basis. Romney/Ryan treating Conservative cowards like punk tools, if someone was lying to me I’d hold them accountable.
Republicans haven’t taken responsibility for last silver spoon trust fund baby they voted for now want to burden Americans with ANOTHER? Mitt tjhe Twit and Lyin Ryan... cyberbitchslap2.blogspot.com
PS. There's really only one way to solve America's problems... people with huevos got to volunteer to whck the Koch Bros, Karl Rove, Dick Army and all those *******'s at the Council for National Policy, Heritage and all those Conservative idiot think tanks
And just were do the Koch bros do business?
They are not in all 50 states.
The Koch Brothers sell goods internationally.
And the panel of democrats think it's government jobs is what we need.
Someone should tell chris he needs to iron his new shirt before he does his learn forward TV ad's!!!
Holy cow, you really need to get a life besides being a troll.
Perhaps you can ask the Romney family to send their ironing board over NBC way?
Surprise most of us do think that to have a military, school teachers, public service workers who pick up trash, dog catchers, fire fighters and police make living in society that little bit better. I like my utility company don't you? They are usually a hybrid and I assume that people who have been in the path of Isaac are more concerned with their power being turned on than some new shirt on TV.
Cow boy, emphasis on boy, no more Lone Ranger for you and all of your ilk who live in a fantasy world where co operation is not the way to go forward. It is a dumb man thing and the problem is that you guys are being left behind, made redundant, and are really mad because your obsolescense is on the rise. Women tend to get this working together thing most likely because to survive, we have had to figure out a way to get support, to raise our children, and help us maintain a job where we work hard and make less money than men. I really have to thank the Republican party of NO for going for the final straw of alienating modern thinking women. Granted there is still the cosseted country club ladies married to their powerful men who put up with their obnoxious husbands so to maintain their status in the community. As much as they spend their time looking down on the Help, that is exactly who they are to their husbands, a useful appendage, not a partner to a Lone Ranger.
Extinction looms.
You should know that the nation magazine makes no money, it operates in the RED.
In not for the editor running around begging for money to keep that fish wrap afloat,
hayes & his homeies would be out of work!!!!!
Just think if your pay check came from hand outs!!!!!!!! Like hayes and the rest of the nation magazine
Maybe you have no money cow boy because it seems to be your holy grail of value. Perhaps those people who have money have learned that there is more to life than the almighty dollar and a way of living where values such as love and caring and action to help your fellow human being counts for the ingredients of making what is a good life. Money really does not buy happiness and probably those who do not have money think if only I had money I would have no problems. Au contraire. We are a nation of addicts. For people like Romney and the Koch brothers there is never enough money to fill that hole in the soul.
Holy cow, I'm really impressed how diligently you click the "like" arrow on your on posts. That really takes some dedication to detail.
test
Great show Sunday, Chris. You and Neera Tanden summed up the situation perfectly. There are two parts. As you suggested in your final comment, the super rich are not unhappy with the macroeconomic status quo, including an 8% plus unemployment rate. Wall Street, unlike Main Street, isn't lacking for customers. They can ignore the odious Romney, tolerate the not unfriendly Obama and look forward to 2016. The only reason they are funding Romney in 2012, as Neera said, is purely transactional -- it's a long-shot bet that he'll eliminate the estate tax and capital gains tax -- two acts that would be worth far more to them than the millions of dollars they're putting behind Romney. Finally, your congressional candidate guests were terrific.
Many in the electorate also don't understand why corporations often contribute large sums to both candidates in an election. It provides entrance to meetings they wouldn't otherwise get.
SCOTUS was right that money in an election a form of speech- but they were confused which part of speech it is.
It's the loud throat clearing sound one makes to get attention before your speaking will be heard.
It was nice that Robert Wolf was on the C.H. program to actually bring a little "UP" to the extravaganza. The Wall Street guy offered some optimism and some realism re; Obama's economic record. It was a nice moment of positivety. Hayes is a "The Nation" dude. "The Nation" smacks everybody around and compares actual reality to their notions of euphemistic liberal perfectionism. Reality falls short and "the Nation" is there to always cite the disparity. That's probably why Hayes is at MSNBC, He's a far out left catbird. He's sort of a quasi Democrat. He'll probably vote for Obama whilst continually taking the Democratic Administration to task, along with the GOP. "The Nation" type of folks are neurotic and idealistic, and smack Dems around with Repubs., and are therefore apparently preferred as hosts at MSNBC. Actual regular, usual, everyday mainstream Democrats like O'Donnell and Al Sharpton are in relatively short supply within the corporate MSNBC confines. Corporate America prefers it that way. I prefer Obama, he's an actual Democrat, existing in the actual world, fighting actual battles. Pundits are among the politimedia that 80% of Americans disapprove of. Some of them deserve a lot higher rating. The catbirds who neurotically simply live above reality on their lofty perches ... perhaps represent the 10% of folks who actually approve of American politi-media. They just want to smack everybody around while comparing reality to liberal perfection notions. I'm gonna vote thankfully for Obama in spite of America's lack of liberal perfection. Pundits are mostly potentates, pot stirrers, and corporate employees. They're a world apart, in their own little universe, and they really do not care for the most part. They're doin' their corporate jobs in Corporo-World and hauling home their dough. They're the side show. but the tent is almost empty of fans. . People have absolutely had it with corporate political media. It's too corporately convoluted and contrived. . . President Obama is real.
I agree it is always interesting to have actual players on the show, because of their ability to point out the areas of friction between ideals and reality, and the areas of complete lack of any contact whatever.
But is your point that we should have no use for people who compare "actual reality" to ideals? It seems to me that you can disagree philosophically with particular ideals, or point out that particular ideals have no practical realization, or that particular analysts are bad at pointing out what "actual reality" is like and/or connecting the dots with the set of particular philosophical ideals they favor.
Look, I think many people here have been or currently are in positions of some measure of power- whether that is over activities of 10s, hundreds or thousands of people. It is in everyone's experience to be affected by some nitwit armchair quarterbacking of a particular decision that you or a peer has made. This happens constantly in organizations where it is often the case that the external depiction of what is going on is radically different than what actually was going on. It is frustrating what destruction these commentators can do, and how disconnected from reality they can oftentimes be. As soon as one is utterly discredited in a high level meeting, there is always several more to take their place.
But oftentimes there are elements of what the critic is saying that has some validity.
So what are you saying- that critics have no value? Are you making a generic case for any writer who points out that reality is falling short of an ideal- regardless whether that ideal would get labelled Left or Right?
If we saying that only the players have any credibility in commenting on a situation, then logically, haven't you made an argument that any oversight by any outside party is illegitimate? If you aren't then are you proposing some system whereby some authority adjudicates which outsiders are allowed credentials to perform oversight, whereas others are excluded? Sure the MSM has messes up constantly in managing the quality of their content. It is an ever more rare experience to find quality anywhere. But if you have some other system in mind, let's hear it. What system are you proposing?
I hope Senator Cynthia Dill mentioned the treatment she is getting from Patty Murrah, and Debbie Wasserman Shultz, they have not endorsed her, great Democratic women, they are waiting to see which way the polls will go, how courageous. I have called their offices several times to no avail.
Enjoyed the general conversation, but was annoyed by the lack of any mention in the ever growing disparity in laborer vs. executive compensation. Conventional wisdom tells us that, in order to stay competitive in a global market, corporations need to keep executive salaries high in order to attract the best and brightest talent, while keeping wages stagnant, despite record corp. profits. A conundrum, no?
No one on the panel discussed this gross disparity. Take Caterpillar for example; profits are at an all time high, its CEO's compensation has skyrocketed 60%, yet you'd think the laborers would share in the company's bounty -- nope, they alone took a Draconian hit to their wages and benefits.
This is the corporate trend now, and its mantra. My question is that if it's necessary for corporation to cut laborers' salaries and benefits to stay competitive, why doesn't the same apply to executives? Are we to believe that there are no competent executives outside the the U.S. who would be willing to come in and manage these corporations at say, only 30 - 50 times what the lowest corporate wage earner makes? Why aren't we looking outside the U.S. for executive talent -- talent that doesn't demand obscene wages and benefits, while demanding its workforce produce more for less?
I welcome any discussion of the actual nuts and bolts of economic issues. While I welcomed Sunday's discussion, it was like a Whitman's sampler of particular interest groups who are affected by US economic policy.
Central questions were mentioned but the discussion passed them over. While they may be familiar and perhaps uninteresting to those in studio and on satellite feed, viewers have not clear grasp or opinion of their substance. If there is one policy question I would like the Dems to make clear, it would be regarding the US's relationship to the free trade regime. The question can be asked many ways:
Sunday's show came up short but at least some of the fundamental questions were touched on, but Zakaria and Charlie Rose go into a great deal more substance with their guests. Up should be able to do that, and we should have at least one hour devoted to that level of discussion at least once before elections. We don't need more Carville Carny speak- to base sentiments, or Obamaesque populist sounding bromides and empty slogans. Connect the dots between the political platitudes and concrete actionable policy proposals. That's what reasonable voters both on the left and right want to understand. That's what making informed choices is about. Last week's convention proved the GOP is unable to speak frankly. Can the Dems do any better?
It's the economy. Or shall we remain stupid.
Regarding the treatment of outsourcing in the DNC speech, consider these points:
.
.
Oh? Is the proposition that this asserted American worker's comparative advantage in working "harder and smarter" makes our engineers more valuable than Chinese engineers of comparable knowledge who are paid 1/10 to 1/30 the compensation of US workers?
Flattering the US Worker is a stock Democratic party talking point, but let's get real. If we accept that the rules of the game are that businesses should find the lowest cost way of producing their products, then it doesn't matter how much the US educates its workforce.
We will lose.
The rules of the game have to change. The solution is tax law which rewards increasing the economy's purchasing power, and provides strong tax disincentives for reducing it. What does this mean? If you picture the US consumer purchasing power as a river, we treat it like any other public resource. This "river" has new wealth entering it, so all companies along its bank can extract more wealth than it returns in the form of wages and lower price goods. However, when they extract more than their proportionate share, then the purchasing power contracts as it has in the US since the 70s- then the the result is that consumers don't buy in Europe and the US, and the global economy repeatedly goes into bouts of recession.
So if a domestic or global corporation profits from sales of goods in the US, then they are free to hire labor from anywhere- but if they do not pay out in US salaries a fair share of that extracted wealth, then there is a federal tax on that excess. It's their choice whether they avoid the tax and adding more US payroll, or whether it is more convenient to pay the money into the US government who in turn can use it to generate jobs on infrastructure or medical and other science research.
Mitt should run for "wealth grabber" in chief. Or "chop-shop guy" in chief. I would vote for him. He would be great. Maybe you need someone to load up your company with dedt, pay themselves huge management fees, and cash out your company? Then leave what is left of your company with huge dedt and laying people off to survive. He is your man.
The way I see it, the Republicans can not stand on their own record and they certainly can not parade George W. Bush around like Bill Clinton, so they formulated various methods to suppress votes by eliminating early voting and requiring id to have specific details that they know some ID do not have.