The ideal Senate Democrat should have centrist views, young, a military veteran, articulate, and a family man. Prince Harry would be an example if he were a US citizen and had centrist views.
Maybe, but a centrist will not actually address the underlying issues that make actors like AfD, and the Trump-wing of the Republican party, get bigger and bigger.
To put it differently: a Bill Clinton-type might manage to get elected and be popular, but he wouldn’t do anything to keep inequality from rising even more.
Incorrect. Merz adopted a stricter stance on immigration but not as harsh as the AfD party. Likewise, a centrist Democrat could be tough on border security but give migrants already here a path to citizenship. Inequality can never be completely eliminated because people aren’t equal in talent.
Merz adopted a stricter stance on immigration but not as harsh as the AfD party. Likewise, a centrist Democrat could be tough on border security but give migrants already here a path to citizenship.
This has no bearing on what I said, I’ll repeat myself:
a centrist will not actually address the underlying issues that make actors like AfD, and the Trump-wing of the Republican party, get bigger and bigger.
Inequality can never be completely eliminated because people aren’t equal in talent
Nobody is talking about completely eliminating inequality
We are where we are because we’ve allowed inequality to increase every year since the mid-'70s. Allowing that to continue - especially without establishing an actually leftist alternative (New Deal Democrat or democratic socialist at the least) - will just make the populist right bigger and more extreme.
I did address what you said. Adopting less extreme policies of a far-right group undermine its appeal.
The tax on the wealthy can be increased to lessen inequality but only to a degree because it would decrease the motivation to be rich. Making money is the basis of the capitalist system.
I did address what you said. Adopting less extreme policies of a far-right group undermine its appeal.
Ah, okay, fair enough. In practice, though, since the fundamental problems will persist regardless of immigration policy, I think they’re still likely to keep growing in the longer run. They might also just chose to become even more extreme. I’d say we’ve seen this in Europe, with calls for “remigration” becoming part of the alt-right manifestos as mainstream politics has gotten more restrictive on immigration.
That being said, it’s not impossible to do a very progressive economic policy, combined with restrictive immigration policies.
The tax on the wealthy can be increased to lessen inequality but only to a degree because it would decrease the motivation to be rich. Making money is the basis of the capitalist system.
Well, I personally only want to go back to some version of what was the western consensus in the three decades following WW2 - I don’t think that’s very extreme really, but some people think it means I’m basically the ghost of Yosef Stalin :/
People innovated and worked hard in the 1950’s too
No, Prince Harry exemplifies the qualities of an ideal Democratic candidate. He is young, articulate, has a pretty, intelligent wife and two children, and a war veteran. However, his views would have to be centrist.
Not true. Bernie Sanders was wildly popular before the DNC removed him for not being centrist/right wing enough. He would have won easily. People want a progressive candidate, not a centrist.
I’m more and more sure you’re just a bot or an intern for some pedo bootlicker the more I see your comments. Take your trash somewhere else
Prince Harry exemplifies the qualities of I mentioned except I don’t know whether his views are centrists and of course he is not a US citizen, but John F. Kennedy would be another example.
The ideal Senate Democrat should have centrist views, young, a military veteran, articulate, and a family man. Prince Harry would be an example if he were a US citizen and had centrist views.
Got to say, you lost me at centrist. Why?
Most people do not have extreme left or right views. In Germany, Merz with his centrist views beat the rising far right AfD party.
Maybe, but a centrist will not actually address the underlying issues that make actors like AfD, and the Trump-wing of the Republican party, get bigger and bigger.
To put it differently: a Bill Clinton-type might manage to get elected and be popular, but he wouldn’t do anything to keep inequality from rising even more.
Incorrect. Merz adopted a stricter stance on immigration but not as harsh as the AfD party. Likewise, a centrist Democrat could be tough on border security but give migrants already here a path to citizenship. Inequality can never be completely eliminated because people aren’t equal in talent.
This has no bearing on what I said, I’ll repeat myself:
a centrist will not actually address the underlying issues that make actors like AfD, and the Trump-wing of the Republican party, get bigger and bigger.
Nobody is talking about completely eliminating inequality
We are where we are because we’ve allowed inequality to increase every year since the mid-'70s. Allowing that to continue - especially without establishing an actually leftist alternative (New Deal Democrat or democratic socialist at the least) - will just make the populist right bigger and more extreme.
I did address what you said. Adopting less extreme policies of a far-right group undermine its appeal.
The tax on the wealthy can be increased to lessen inequality but only to a degree because it would decrease the motivation to be rich. Making money is the basis of the capitalist system.
Ah, okay, fair enough. In practice, though, since the fundamental problems will persist regardless of immigration policy, I think they’re still likely to keep growing in the longer run. They might also just chose to become even more extreme. I’d say we’ve seen this in Europe, with calls for “remigration” becoming part of the alt-right manifestos as mainstream politics has gotten more restrictive on immigration.
That being said, it’s not impossible to do a very progressive economic policy, combined with restrictive immigration policies.
Well, I personally only want to go back to some version of what was the western consensus in the three decades following WW2 - I don’t think that’s very extreme really, but some people think it means I’m basically the ghost of Yosef Stalin :/
People innovated and worked hard in the 1950’s too
This comment has to be bait. Prince Harry? The fuck?
No, Prince Harry exemplifies the qualities of an ideal Democratic candidate. He is young, articulate, has a pretty, intelligent wife and two children, and a war veteran. However, his views would have to be centrist.
Fuck centrists. We’ve had 50 years of that and look where it’s gotten us. Pick a side, fascism or the working class.
Most voters are not on the extreme left or right. The centrist Merz became chancellor of Germany.
Not true. Bernie Sanders was wildly popular before the DNC removed him for not being centrist/right wing enough. He would have won easily. People want a progressive candidate, not a centrist.
I’m more and more sure you’re just a bot or an intern for some pedo bootlicker the more I see your comments. Take your trash somewhere else
Because most viewers are sheep that have no balls to do what’s right
You had me until the Prince Harry part.
Prince Harry exemplifies the qualities of I mentioned except I don’t know whether his views are centrists and of course he is not a US citizen, but John F. Kennedy would be another example.