I miss the days when Democrats were Trust Busters instead of Corporate Stooges. Biden has a chance to follow in Teddy Roosevelt's footsteps. I'm not holding my breath.
https://thehill.com/lobbying/3862071-apple-flexes-lobbying-power-as-apple-watch-ban-comes-before-biden-next-week/amp/
Same here pal, though Biden has accomplished much that I support as well. Depending on who runs in the primaries I might jump ships temporarily, however, once that is complete I'd have little choice to go with Biden were he the nominee as seems to be likely, especially after the primary changes (I thought perhaps they should all be on the same day) if he is able to maintain support in Democratic demographics in the early states.
It wasn't absolutely grotesque also, Michigan was moved up and that's a bone to lefties and gives a chance to organize something in a state that went for Bernie in a past primary, so it's possible with some work. A key would be convincing the African American community in Detroit and the larger cities to go along with the liberals in Ann Arbor rather than supporting a more corporatist candidate. There are some figures who present leftism as scary and anti-religion, which tends to pull those communities closer to the center than the left... after which it seems as if promises are forgotten until the next election requires the votes.
As a last note I like the state figures such as the Governor and Secretary of State, I was referring to the presidential race.
Here are things that displease me a great deal. The Moderate PAC isn't a big deal, the amount raised apears to be low. However I think that swamping allies in this way isn't a wise move, winning primaries on the issues is a better route and one that moderates are fully capable of without getting their hands dirty. The last link of the three is particularly disturbing, greedy, callous, and short sighted. Note that it is the Intercept, which lost some credibility not long ago, but still has what appear to be solid articles at times as well. It leans a little farther left than say msnbc as well, just as a heads-up.
https://theintercept.com/2023/01/25/jeff-yass-megadonor-moderate-pac/https://www.axios.com/2023/01/20/moderate-pac-progressives-2024-electionshttps://theintercept.com/2023/02/03/china-americas-frontier-fund/The UK may have something similar to the motivation behind the Moderate PAC shaping up as well:
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/starmer-tells-labour-left-back-me-or-leave-343627/Late Edit after re-reading the tone of the link above: Note that the crackdown on anti-semitism I have no complaints about. I am just unsure of the scale of the problems at the time in Labour (though really any scale at a given time is something to be countered, so if somehow my lack of knowledge is risking that I'd appreciate informative links about it), as evidence on the wiki for the issue is on both sides on Corbyn's page.
As a note the London Economic seems to lean towards what is known as
"soft-left" such as Starmer rather than Corbyn's own faction known as Corbynites or the "hard-left" if I am understanding correctly. Corbyn's bout of antisemitism according to wikipedia was from writing a foreward to a book republished from the early 1900s that contained undoubtably anti-semitic language, as a passage from the book was quoted on wikipedia that clearly was; I don't know how prevalent that was throughout the book; presumably Corbyn read it. I'm tempted to say maybe he didn't realize due to it not being a frequent occurrance in the book, but I'm not going to defend him like that and say it was still a wrong thing to do even as an accident. In addition for saying he did not believe Labour had an anti-semitism problem. A report found that Corbyn was heavily criticized in the press at a rate that outpaced his "soft-left" competitors, however I do not know enough about the circumstances having not followed it closely to have a sense of how appropriate this was. From Corbyn's wiki page it seems I would like some or many of Corbyn's positions, but disagree with his position on NATO, at least in the current time. Starmer doesn't seem bad from the wiki but I worry there may be small signs (that I may be misinterpreting of course) of a political shift towards the right in play very recently as a way to bludgeon lefty competition with newfound voters dissatisfied with the Tories.
Here is Corbyn's response to being removed from the Labour party.
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/jeremy-corbyn-sends-stinging-statement-to-the-labour-party-343675/I mostly mentioned Corbyn because he is a figurehead, but there was an earlier article on the Intercept that described the removal of another Labour member or members, a few months ago. I can't find the article in my bookmarks, I need to organize them better; I also can't recall if the issue was the same or different in that.
I guess that is, though not on the specific issue Labour is grappling with necessarily, what to expect once the Trumpists complete the disintegration of the GOP and the remnants of the moderate GOP are welcomed as they should be into the Democrats.
If that were to occur, it's maybe time for a new faction! Hopefully one that runs on fixing things the moderate democrats seem to have little interest and will for, or if not that then ability to rectify. I suppose the GOP might turn around at some point, but it seems like the GOP moderates are being treated by the Trumpists with a much more severe form of what lefties sometimes are by some allies, and at some point I assume it becomes less trying to win than trying to defeat the Trumpists. That's sort of how I've operated the last few years, though also in regards to Trumpism and not in the Dparty, so I haven't raised as big a fuss as I normally would here on this forums about some things I've seen that troubled me. However Trumpism remains a much bigger problem IMO and I'm maintaining. I also learned from Obama's time that criticism bordering on undercutting is not the best practice when it leads to a Trump rather than your desired results.
There is also the age demographic that would entail serious changes to Republican policy in the coming decades if it wishes to remain competitve...
Author
Topic: AmeriPol thread (Read 4469347 times)