| | | I believe in the Socratic method of learning and a deeper understanding of ideas.. I believe in the honest exchange of ideas, but that requires people to not get upset with "facts" they don't like and have tolerance of other peoples ideas.
I also believe in "context" and looking for correlations and patterns and observations of behavior for understanding.
E.g. looking at the difference between Bernie and Bloomberg, using context and observation.
Yes Bernie is not a Democrat, but neither is Bloomberg. And one should ask why and is there a difference and what is the difference? There is a huge difference that I guess is hidden to some, but should be obvious.
Bernie is not a Democrat, but he votes with Democrats 95% of the time and shares their basic social philosophy, because he is a true "progressive". And to a progressive being a progressive is more important than being a Democrat because it is a more pointed expression of one's ideology.
Bloomberg is basically a moderate Republican, and does not share the basic ideology of the more liberal Democratic party. Progressives don't go back and forth between parties on a whim. A progressive knows what they believe and seldom votes or flirts with either conservatives or the Republican party.
Warren is a true progressive and generally they cannot consider either moderate or conservative ideology. There are generally speaking progressives, moderates and conservatives. Moderates being between progressives on the left and conservatives on the right.
A moderate is generally more in sync with conservative ideology than a progressive e.g. all the moderates who were ready to jump on the Bloomberg band wagon, while virtually NO progressives were willing to jump on the Bloomberg bandwagon.
And what is obvious is that people under 50 are mostly progressive, and people over 50 are generally more conservative.
And it is also obvious the future of the Democratic party is to become increasingly progressive as new young Democrats come of age, and old Democrats die.
Cheers
<
I am explaining the obvious.
Wait, I thought you just expressed your opinion, not "the obvious", which sounds like it is something that everyone should agree about.
Here is a fact: Bernie is not a Democrat. Liz is. Bernie is the leader of the Socialist party in the US. If Liz doesn't endorse him, she will incur the wrath of that party (many of whom pretend to be Democrats, like Bernie does when it is expedient for him). But, as she has said in the past, she is not a socialist, she is a capitalist, she just wants to make capitalism more just. That is what a Democrat does.
Personally, my opinion is that she shouldn't be VP, she should remain in the Senate where she can have a louder more independent voice. I suppose if she thinks she will run for President again and Biden will only serve one term, VP would be a good position to have. I suppose if Biden comes asking for her, she could cut a deal where he would push for some of her plans. But I think several of her plans are just dumb (her wealth tax, which has failed in other countries) and others don't add up (MfA) and just scare way more people than are for it. His position is having a medicare option, which is a better plan. Amy would be a better white female VP if that is the way Biden wants to go. Kamala or Stacey would also make excellent choices. |
|
