lol. this is why Dems are in trouble. It's only other peoples' money. As the essay puts it: "The promise is that Uncle Sam will deliver it all." From forgiving student loans (now and forever? how will you deny future students the same largesse) to promising (read: threatening) compulsory union membership--which btw will only benefit the unions and union-loving Democratic pols in the future--to "affordable health care, affordable child care, and paid family leave,” (READ: CA CHING! CA CHING! CA CHING!) . . . I am dumbfounded no one thinks for just one second, how the hell are we going to pay for all of it? Add a national abortion mandate . . . and an assault weapon ban to boot? raw meat for ravenous leftist progressive libbies, but the essay's point is that NONE of it will likely appeal to the swing voters in the half-dozen states Harris needs in order to win in November. She has won the evict-Biden-now sweepstakes in July, but November is another thing entirely.
I'm going to note that several very economically successful countries do many of those things. I'm very familiar with Singapore and they provide a high level of social services yet also have one of the highest per capita GDP's in the world. Higher than the US. It does take a major rethinking of a lot of things and I'm not going to say that it would be easy to transition the US to Singapore levels of social services but providing a strong social safety net and a vibrant economy are not incompatible.
Also to add if Dems are so much in trouble it's amazing they've won so many elections of date and in this century have only once lost the popular vote for President.
Over $100 million in new donations have been given to Harris's campaign since Biden's exit. This is more than the $95 million that was in the bank for Biden's campaign when he exited. It's staggering when you think about it.
The whole "left" policy is middle-out versus the "right" policy, which is top-down. I think we know which one is directly helping the middle and moderate classes versus the very top. We also have economic data that clearly shows which one works better. WSJ EB is clearly still supporting the same old failed top-down policy.
The specifics of how bills are done and paid for aren't things most Americans concern themselves with. They are things some people worry about, but they aren't usually campaign issues. Pushing for those issues isn't telling anyone that the candidate doesn't care about them.
I'm not a huge fan of the Democrats spending, but if it helps me, and progresses the country, I'm all for it. What I don't like are when covid relief packages end up just lining the pockets of the wealthy, or when I see tax cuts for the wealthy, over and over again. As Yang said, if we can fix tax loopholes, much of this can be paid for. Our medical system, in particular is vastly broken and inferior to many other countries. I can say this as a health professional for 16 years. We can fix acute problems, but we care not about chronic issues and preventative care. This is because acute issues are money makers, as are the drugs given (off a script) for chronic issues. Much of this stuff could be fixed permanently for much cheaper, but we'd rather spend and make money. I would rather spend to make things better, and have it have long lasting effects on the population as a whole than spend on Israel or minimum wage hikes, yes. You have to pick your poison, yes, and that's where the Dems go wrong. In a vacuum, though, there's nothing wrong with what she said Everything is ruled by profit and profit margins and how much money can the rich make. To the point to where when it comes to spending on something worthwhile, it's shot down by the moneymakers and lobbyists with fervent rhetoric. If I am overweight and I only have $100, it's not good to spend $59 on the gym, $60 on junk food, $5 in coffee, $5 in energy drinks, and $12 on ice cream, but I sure as hell would be willing to spend $70 on good, quality healthy food, and cut out the rest of the junk. That's my biggest issue with the Democrats, in a nutshell. That and raising minimum wage will hike inflation -UBI is a much better alternative. My issues with MAGA Republicans are much more and wide ranging.
"New from me: Harris is doing very well and Trumpland is in white dwarf mode. But don’t expect this honeymoon with the press to last or go apeshit when the negative coverage inevitably starts. The media isn’t gonna win this; let her prosecute her case" "For better or worse, this is now Harris’ case to make – or better say, try. She’s got all the evidence she needs and is off to a decent start." Unburdened: On Biden's exit and Harris' anointment (theins.press) The Insider's Michael Weiss analyzes Joe Biden's move to drop his re-election bid, Kamala Harris' chances of taking down Donald Trump, and the role of the media in the upcoming election. The tragedy of seeing a public servant of fifty years exit in the way Biden has is mitigated only slightly by a palpable sense of relief coming from everyone who claimed, through grit teeth and perma-smiles on cable news for the last three weeks, that there was never anything to worry about. The Republican nominee’s confidence in a landslide victory – repackaged, implausibly, as a “unity” platform in the aftermath of his own near-miss assassination – now descends into the familiar sewer of paranoia, conspiracism and hysteria. This is all darkly amusing and would be even more so if the stakes of this election weren’t so high, not just for the United States but, more immediately, for Ukraine and the Middle East. If there is one lesson in Biden’s decline and fall to be learned by Biden supporters it is that the media is not on its honor when it fails to be skeptical, and when it is skeptical it is usually right to be.
Both parties have won plenty of elections. Neither party is the same party from a century ago, much less two decades. Both are in transformation stage. Popular vote for presidency is not a formal measure and really means little in the grand scheme of things. This is not a measure politicians use to lie and manipulate to get elected.
