No, it's really not.
docAvid
joined 2 years ago
So, writing stateless functions, or working in declarative languages doesn't count?
A primary challenge strengthens the successful candidate in the general. Our democracy is deeply flawed, but it always has been. It's not worse than in the past when only a tiny fraction of the population was allowed to vote. This is the first time in history that we're seeing serious national discussion of ranked voting, and some states and localities have implemented it.
Approval voting is actually worse than first past the post, in my opinion. We need ranked choice, IRV or STV as appropriate.
Where's your degree from, Hillsdale? I can't imagine it would be any serious school.
- If you had a legitimate degree, you probably would be able to make a coherent argument, instead of announcing that you have a degree, like it's a magic talisman, to always make you right.
- If you had a legitimate degree, you would probably know that there are people with more education than yourself who are socialists, and not believe that having a degree in economics necessarily makes one pro-capitalist.
- If you had a legitimate degree, you would almost certainly have had at least one or two socialist professors on your way to that degree.
- If you had a legitimate degree, you probably would have learned more intellectual discipline than to call anybody who doesn't agree with private capital a "tankie".
- If you had a legitimate degree, you probably wouldn't be so unwise as to assume you were the only one. This thinking shows a really sheltered life, like somebody who has never even been to a university, or encountered new ideas. It connects back to the "magic talisman" view I mentioned above.
Sure, language is complex, and it isn't broadly wrong to refer to the US as a "capitalist country", as capitalism is certainly the dominant economic power, here, but that's intentionally dodging the point. You were the one speaking in absolutes, saying "But socialism is a stupid inefficient system, so it's a non starter." That statement alone indicates a complete lack of understanding of what socialism is, an understanding rooted in absolute systems, which in turn heavily implies a lack of understanding of what capitalism is. What do you think these words actually mean? Come on, show me what that Hillsdale degree was worth.
It's not that simple, though. Yeah, those reactions will be there, large portions of MAGAts are already indoctrinated for that, but with the right messaging in the right places, some people will get mad and at least stay home. No group is homogenous, and I think this has potential to eat into a significant portion of his ravenous base. The messaging has to look like it's coming from their own, a kind of "Trump betrayed us to get in with the liberal elites" narrative. Throw in some pics of men kissing and Trump rubbing elbows with the Clintons. It's all about hitting the emotional weak spots and diverting some people here, some people there, into a new narrative. Whether a good long shower afterward will wash away the dirty feeling is another matter.
Undecided voters aren't influenced by anything as far out as the primaries. There are, however, a large block of angry voters who are tired of holding their noses in the general election, who will absolutely be influenced, badly, by people telling them that now they aren't even allowed to vote their conscience in the primary.
Did you know that the US does not have a capitalist system? In fact, it's silly to think of "capitalism" and "socialism" as systems at all. They aren't. They are broad systemic feature sets. You've probably heard the phrase "mixed economy". That's actually what nearly every nation has, a mixed economy, meaning that we have socialist, as well as capitalist, elements. In fact, without socialist elements, the capitalist elements of our economy would have self-destructed a long time ago. You clearly have no idea what capitalism or socialism even are. That's fine, most people don't, it's pretty much the norm, but now that it's been pointed out to you, you have a choice: learn, and grow, or be a stubborn fool. Hopefully you choose well.
Capitalists depend on the threat of hunger and homelessness. UBI undermines that.
It's also just a ridiculous proposition. So much media tells us this is possible, but no, it's not, not even if you find a virgin jungle. Professional survivalists who train and study for it still wouldn't be able to actually live a full life - at some point you're vulture food without society. We're cooperative, tribal animals. That's our strength, and we've built economic systems designed to take that strength from us.
Theirs was better, but I salute (and upvote) your effort, it's good to try and improve our messaging.
This other commenter did pretty good though:
Lol I came so close to downvoting. You really need a /s in there.
I didn't say there is...