- Sep 16, 2012
- 59,756
- 53,672
- 3,605
Yep. From what I can tell, we appear to have somehow gone from collaborating and innovating to "beat the other side, no matter what".I am increasingly finding both parties are leaving no space for moderates.I don't know if this madness is temporary or permanent, and I don't know for sure how representative it really is of the party.How can he "save the party" when it was under his watch that the party's fortunes fell to generational lows? The Republicans took control of the majority of state and federal government during his leadership of the party and one could make the case the he shares some of the responsibility for Trump getting elected in the first place.
IMHO the Democrats probably need a Bill Clinton v2.0 to lead the party back towards the center not a encore of ex-President "It's all about Me and Nobody Else" Nimrod at the party helm.
In any case, personally I hope the Democrats destroy themselves with this nonsense and take the Republicans down to hell with 'em.
I'd say they need an Andrew Jackson, someone to purge the party of globalist billionaire banking collectivists, racist agitators and freaks of nature.
.
Maybe the primaries will tell us.
.
It's not just moderates. . . . it is the whole notion of compromise that is missing from American governance and political discussion.
If folks enter discussing issues from the perspective of trying to find solutions, rather than going into it with the whole notion that either one side or the other HAS to have their way, and there will be no compromise solution, then the only true solutions that can be had is dissolution or stalemate.
Evidently the thinking is that, once the other side is somehow destroyed, we'll be able to implement everything "my" tribe wants.
So, this gives the tribes the excuse to not collaborate with the other. That's my guess, anyway.
.
This is mostly the fault of the corporate media, which at it's heart is a propaganda machine and a profit making endeavor for the global oligarchy. It has no responsibility to report the truth accurately to either those of a left leaning persuasion, or to the right leaning persuasions.
Creating hard biases is what will generate the most revenue, both for eyeballs, attention, and for the military/industrial/corporate/Deep State/inter-locking directorate. There is no profit in the truth, nor is there anything to gain by informing a citizenry to be enlightened to the point of critical thinking about real issues that genuinely affect them.
This then is reinforced in social-networking echo chambers.
The end result will be a violent revolution, or gradual merging of this paradigm with a global technocratic police state. It will all depend on the gathering power of the stake holders.