Nope, it's not. Obama won, and what does the youth movement think of him? Disappointment because he turned out not to be the messiah that would overturn the world that they were looking for. He managed to play to the youth enough and unify the party, and that was a great thing, but that's a rare thing...and the truth is that if he hadn't been able to unify the party he'd still have won...as long as he abandoned the youth movement. But if he had played the messianic leader that never compromises and follows the demands of the naive instead of directing them, he would have lost. Because the numbers don't lie...the youth vote by itself doesn't elect anyone.
It's not. Bernie's loss of MN, TX, and MA tells me he ain't gonna win. I think it's less because of his strategies and more because young people don't vote (and while I do think forms of voter suppression are partially responsible for that I don't think it can all be explained that way).
The problem is, though, that his strategy was that young people would vote. It's tempting to say that he had a winning strategy if the field didn't winnow, but in hindsight there were clear problems even in Iowa and New Hampshire with youth turnout being less than he bargained for.
I didn’t get a chance to read the article, but why wouldn’t the KGB try to influence Sanders? I’m sure the CIA did similar clandestine persuasion efforts with more liberal elements of the CPSU.
I wouldn’t hold it against Sanders unless he was actively cooperating with the KGB.
Regardless of Russia's interference, whether it exists or not, it benefits their strategy to spread FUD about as many people and subjects as possible. Surprised they didn't act on anything wrt Hunter Biden
also I know it's been a few pages but re: mean bernie supporters
Regardless of Russia's interference, whether it exists or not, it benefits their strategy to spread FUD about as many people and subjects as possible. Surprised they didn't act on anything wrt Hunter Biden
also I know it's been a few pages but re: mean bernie supporters
I think that drawing would be more accurate if the bernie supporter were lined up next to the others on the track somehow, while still being able to pull the lever.
I think that drawing would be more accurate if the bernie supporter were lined up next to the others on the track somehow, while still being able to pull the lever.
I viewed the person at the lever as a corporate dem supporter and the people on the tracks as the disenfranchised who are like working two jobs just to eat and sleep under a roof. Maybe that was just me.
I viewed the person at the lever as a corporate dem supporter and the people on the tracks as the disenfranchised who are like working two jobs just to eat and sleep under a roof. Maybe that was just me.
Thought about how to word exactly what happens here about five different ways, but all of them fall short of the absolute goddamn audacity.
White woman with a business degree extremely-condescendingly gaslights a black woman with a history degree about MLK's own words, which are written in print and exceedingly unambiguous, and then continuously tries to talk over her response for like 30 seconds. Turner did not interrupt Rosen. Rosen did not let Turner get a goddamn word in edgewise.
I viewed the person at the lever as a corporate dem supporter and the people on the tracks as the disenfranchised who are like working two jobs just to eat and sleep under a roof. Maybe that was just me.
The American people really need more viable parties to choose from. You only have two viable parties, who rig and corrupt the electoral system as thoroughly as Mugabe or Putin, but allow a competitive, two-party only system, similar to old Spanish "Turno Pacifco," or Argentinian or Colombian, "Gentleman's Agreement," where both parties have, and do, fail, screw over, lie to, and betray the trust of, the people, and then watch as the voter crawl back to the ballot boxes to beg one or the other of these two monstrous cartels who should have been voted out as died as parties in a healthy and truly competitive political system, for another term of lies and abuse, like classical domestic abuse victims. And these two parties are interested in covering the high criminals in their number and protecting them from any sort of justice or consequences, and kowtowing to plutocratic oligarchs, than serving their constituents or abiding the Constitution. If the U.S. political system is EVER to improve AT ALL, two things have to go first - the Republican Party of the United States AND the Democratic Party of the United States. Until the power of the Duopoly has broken, the American people will have no true choice in leaders and no accountable government that truly has a reason to care about them or obey the laws they themselves make and enforce on citizens.
The only way I see that ever happening is literal armed revolution or a massive BDE executive action spamming, court-justice packing president who will later in history be regarded as a tyrant because that is the only way to get things done.
I didn’t get a chance to read the article, but why wouldn’t the KGB try to influence Sanders? I’m sure the CIA did similar clandestine persuasion efforts with more liberal elements of the CPSU.
I wouldn’t hold it against Sanders unless he was actively cooperating with the KGB.
Also, to answer this one, it's obvious. The KGB doesn't exist anymore. It's successor, the GRU, doesn't work for a Communist World-Revolution-spreading-Soviet Government, but for Putin, whose actually sharply right-wing politically.
The only way I see that ever happening is literal armed revolution or a massive BDE executive action spamming, court-justice packing president who will later in history be regarded as a tyrant because that is the only way to get things done.
The US had more than two organized parties in the past, so it can happen again.
I think it should, cause at least that way you can have people voting for what they like, not for some brands which are bought and paid for by big company interests (pharma, wall street etc)
No, it's been two party since inception. Sometimes those parties change. We've had whigs and federalists in addition to republicans and democrats. I can't think of any others at the moment. Never more than two viable at a time. Teddy Roosevelt tried to make a Bull or Moose party? didn't work.
Basically, you create a coalition (initially of convenience for this purpose - I understand this can get messy after) for this purpose of Independent and Third Party candidates to fill Presidential, Congressional, and State Gubernatorial and Legislative slots, and create a mass grassroots movement to boycotts major party primaries, donate nothing and volunteer no time to major party campaigns, and vote for this coalition for every office. And, as a campaign promise of this coalition will be a new Constitutional Convention - only second in the nation's history, and the first in over 230 years, to deal with the glaring flaws that led such an abusive political system to form and stay in power, and a convention that will have input and consultation from, and full binding and required referendum approval by, the populace - unlike the first, where a few wealthy, educated, elitist White men only separated from aristocracy of Europe they condemned by lack of formal noble titleage, created on their own, and didn't really care about the common citizen's consent or contribution.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
