Zardnaar
Deity
So Clinton just threw Tulsi under the bus with no real proof?
Then what do they see themselves as?The rest of the GOP hate his guts. He's seen as a phony opportunist, a bit of a dimwit and an obtuse obstructionist extraordinaire.Ted Cruz!
So Clinton just threw Tulsi under the bus with no real proof?
Well I'd assume she has some info on russian troll farms promoting gabbard but idk that.
She's just trying to get attentionSo Clinton just threw Tulsi under the bus with no real proof?
IDK it's just crappy timing as well.She's just trying to get attention
Let's say Trump is impeached and removed from office, who would they run?
Russia is just too powerful to be stopped."They are also going to do third party again," Clinton, 71, said. "I'm not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate," Clinton said, referring to Gabbard, without mentioning the Hawaii representative by name.
"She is a favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. That's assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she is also a Russian asset.

So Hillary went full insane or something? That is quite the bizarre statement. Also, obviously ridiculous that she didn't use a name, when she said "she".
Tulsi will have no luck running as a third party - which makes this statement all the more ludicrous.
John Kasich. is not really seen as a rightwing extremist. I don't follow him, so I don't know if that perception is true or not.

I'm not sure that neoliberalism has been a success even on its own terms. The essence of neoliberalism is using the power of the state to create markets, which the state can then laissez faire. But the core assumption was that these interventions would create competition, and thus efficiency, and this has failed. What it's produced instead is a lot of very profitable tax-farming operations. The mechanisms which were supposed to create competition are ineffective, and the sectors in which these reforms are made are often impossible to authentically marketised, with the outcome that marketised services are notoriously inefficient, and don't consistently result in saved costs for end users. Neoliberalism as an economic project has been a manifest, self-demonstrated failure, and persists largely because those in power don't have anything to replace it.The part of your post I'd argue against is where you say that neoliberal policies have failed. They have succeeded. It's just that people somehow thought that they, individually, would be the ones to come out on top.
They were neoconservative, i.e. they sought to undo the New Deal, destroy social housing, public healthcare, public transportation and energy sources other than fossil fuels. A return to the gilded age in which price and worth were synonymous.
What a load of commie garbage

Yeah, well, i can tell that every single person with little enough to do to be posting to a gaming site using advanced technology has somehow benefitted from this completely failed system.....
China is neoliberal?
Fair enough, i was looking at more on individualistic termsNot in the classic sense. In terms of environment yes.
Probably for consumer protections as well.
Top down with very limited regulation.
Lots if scams, polution , shoddy goods and 50 million substandard vacant residential units.
Fair enough, i was looking at more on individualistic terms