Haha. What an odd dream you just had. Go back to sleep. |
Have we not learned our lesson regarding elderly presidents being a very, very bad idea? |
He can be our leader in helping the population understand what is going on. That doesn't mean he would be our next president. In fact, he is such a good man, I doubt he would propose that. |
Good point. Bernie is a genuine and consistent messenger to the people. One of few Federal level politicians out there that hasn't sought to divide the people. He instead has reminded us time and time again how money's toxic influence on society and politics is public enemy number one and he is 100% correct about that. Too bad his honest and bold rhetoric has rendered him an outcast among our two major political parties. |
You sound ungrateful for all the work George Soros has done for the left. We have plenty of uber wealthy people -- the problem isn't money. |
And Alex Soros is probably the number one most influential Dem donor now. He’s funding and grooming Jasmine Crockett for big things. |
Dems still have all the Google and Goldman Sachs donors. |
Bloomberg is very smart and political savvy. |
What about Dan Goldman? Attorney for Dems in first trump impeachment and now a member of Congress. Heir to Goldman Sachs. He is personable, smart, and good looking. |
This +100 |
Generation z and alpha are very much into the old fashioned media like the daily newspaper instead of doom scrolling, books over kindles and ipads for reading, polaroids over iphone pics, and records/cds over apple music. |
lol, no they’re not |
No. We don't "need" the dems, a billionaire, or anything else you think we need. What we need is the equivalent to the Sons--but also Daughters--of Liberty. We did not get here just because of trump or the tea party before them or whatever. We got here because we threw away the fairness doctrine, we let corporations in too many tv stations, radio stations, newspapers--and in the last 25 years internet media--even though the internet was created by govt and academic resources that really were publuc assets. We didn't use to have networks identified as right or left.
Tbh as a dem boomer I do not think the dems "went too far" re gender rights. At the same time I am rethinking the government's role in shaping social change. I would like to figure out stuff like that in terms the founders could understand, and I'd like to figure out the legacy of slavery and colonialism and imperialism in a way they could understand. We need to become citizens rather than partisans. Or, if partisans, a new party. It's only with the re election that I have really thought we are at a precipice. Before I could see the possibility, but it didn't feel like it was looming. We don't need "a" leader, we need leaders. We need to be certain people historical pushed to the edge are part if it, but articulating this in terms of principles of society and government rather than as particular causes. Israel and Palestinians became causes not defined by principles. I was actually shocked (shouldn't have been) by hegseth saying the bombing wasn't about the houthis at all, it was about displaying power. That is a savage and craven concept. I can't articulate this as I wish I could, I don't quite have the rhetorical skills or deep political understanding (Politics as such, not party or electoral politics). If anyone can point me to a person, author, speaker, whatever who does and can sense what I am trying to speak to, please suggest. |
Yep. People who are really successfully rich are not the nicest of people. There's got to be a ruthlessness to be that rich. It's not like just running a successful business. It's so much more than that to be able to make billions. Most people cannot do it or maybe wouldn't want to do it. |
Tell me you don’t know anyone in Gen Z or Alpha without telling me. |