Winning would be not what we have had for a political economy for decades now.

Spare me the 100% reliant on government stuff. If you want to discuss how resources get divided between both political parties and how they could be different then I'm down with that conversation. Capitalism is 100% supported by government. No one in either party cares to address that reality or insinuates a morality to it.

Keeping people bare arse broke over medical debt while racially targeting other areas of the world with weapons systems for no reasonable purpose except making money would be where I would start that conversation. Propping up the MIC by maintaining forever wars for stock market returns seems to be a path towards fascism we are heading down. Trump has paused that progression. I see that progress restarted under Biden. Where would the win be with either of those two candidates with this state funded violence?

Remember when the liberals rolled their eyes and belittled the 2 trillion price tag over 10 years to do health care in the country, during the primary? AKA Medicare for all? What Joe Biden had pledged to Veto if it should get near his desk as president?

Not so much as a whimper throwing out 5 trillion dollars from a helicopter over the Hamptons to make several thousand families whole during a predictable pandemic. Sound like a rational distribution of resources? Backstopping Exchange Traded Fantasy Football Funds and Taking all the bad loans off the mega banks books? Again?

But yeah, making people reliant on gubmint? Heavens!

No, there's no upside to a restoration of murderous neoliberalism or neoconservative. You could even make the argument that, much like you need a democrat to deregulate finance and media or criminalize poverty, your going to need a republican to pass some kind of humane, rational health care system or end the ethnic murder abroad bythe MIC. I would not rule out the possibility of Trump doing that. That's what helped get him elected IIRC.


Last edited by chunkstyle; 10/19/20 08:46 PM.