The oligarchs have been fighting workers, unions, regulations, and anything else that might get in the way of endless profits, since the New Deal. They really do have just about full control over the government, universities (through endowments), regulatory agencies (through capture), the news (through outright ownership) and Hollywood (doing its part to float The Blob). I don't see any clear path to undoing the control they now have, and as long as they have that level of control, we will only get a choice between people like Biden and Trump in all elections (or a choice between cholera and gonorrhea, as Julian Assange so aptly put it). Personally, I may just write in diphtheria or diarrhea since I really don't like cholera or gonorrhea. I wish Dennis Kucinich would run for president. I heard an interview with him recently and he would be a great candidate.
I've known Dennis for years. He used to be my congressman, and I canvassed for him. Also supported his two Presidential candidacies ('04 and '08) and one gubernatorial run. The DNC squashed his candidacies ruthlessly. Rumor had it that the total lack of media coverage of his campaigns was the DNC's doing. The DNC definitely saw to it that he lost his Congressional seat, because he wouldn't kowtow to Big Corp.
Yes, he'd be an excellent choice, but it'll never happen.
This is why having oligarchs with more money than most countries have is going to ensure no decent candidate ever gets a chance at a fair election. My question for the last several years is how can the situation be turned around now? The oligarchs have full control over the media, for example, so most people never hear what is actually happening. I am not sure how such a situation can be remedied. People with more money than most countries have end up with nearly unlimited power to control our society, our elections and our lives, and unless they have all their money confiscated (which isn't going to happen) then I don't see any potential remedy. Anyone have any ideas how you fix this mess? If it doesn't get fixed, we will always be stuck with choices between the likes of Biden and Trump.
I agree entirely with your assessment of our current situation, John. Unfortunately, I have no practical, step-by-step suggestions for how to remedy it.
That's incredably sad. He's the only one I would vote for. On the other hand, what could he accomplish with Congress? They all need to go. It's all a very bad joke on us.
From the little that I know of him he was the only one with a functioning brain in politics. Then he.was nullified. Says a lot about our democracy doesn't it?
Not only is he keenly intelligent and well informed, he's never had any corporate ties. Many years ago, a survey was released listing the values of some politicians' homes (it was so long ago, I can't find the source). Kucinich's was at the very bottom, by a lot. Ludicrously cheap, even by Cleveland standards.
THIS JUST IN: Kucinich has announced he's running for Congress again! Not in my district, unfortunately, but he's trying to unseat a Rethug. Bravo! He's running as an Independent, however, so maybe even the deep regard that northeast Ohioans have for him won't put him over the top.
won't vote of either and the duopoly will contine to win so things will stay the same. For don't rock the boaters this works out just fine. But for me and other FED UP WITH THE SYSTEM folks: it sucks.
Even if some "progressive Democrat" ~ whatever that is ~ wins the nomination and somehow gets elected, what is she or he going to accomplish without a Congress committed to the same set of values and priorities? Anything? At all?
Progressive Democrat: think of George McGovern, Jeff. Or Dennis Kucinich. They were/are the real deal. Of course, McGovern was trounced and Kucinich was bounced. Here's hoping DK bounces back.
Again, Bill: Even if DK [or any other "Progressive Democrat"] bounces back all the way into the Oval Office , how is he going to accomplish Anything without a Congress committed to the same values and priorities that put him in the Oval Office in the first place? See Denise's comment on this below.
We've had this discussion before. It's a given that without a significant percentage of progressives in Congress, a progressive would never be nominated for President in the first place. Unless the DNC changed enough to support large numbers of progressives as legislators, then it follows the committee would never back a progressive for the Oval Office.
See my comment to Bill above, Denise. The Real Question, tho, is this:
Even if the DNC was to somehow, suddenly, magically change, and threw All of its financial and propaganda support capability and capacity behind a full slate of "Progressive Democrats" as candidates, starting with the White House:
How would such a slate of candidates with their Progressive Democratic values, priorities, promises, and platforms do in the ballot box against Trump and his Band of Trumpatistas running for the same offices?
That outcome would depend entirely on competing messaging. On his program, for instance, Jimmy Dore has cited a statistic that 70% of the U.S. population backs a public healthcare option (I quote Dore because he's reliably left-wing). Dore has talked about other, similar statistics related to issues that progressives espouse. If the figures he brings out are even close, it's safe to assume that progressive values are generally popular.
All that being said, progressives aren't monolithic, as the MAGAs are. They don't move in lockstep. Therefore, their messaging would have to be very carefully framed and crafted, with advance buy-in from all candidates. It would have to be aggressive, straightforward, and pervasive. In short, progressives would have to be proactive and play hardball, versus sitting back and letting the MAGAs frame all the arguments. Only if they would take the lead in effective messaging could the progressives come out ahead. They'd have to drown out all the extremist, hard-right, dysfunctional noise coming from the MAGAs. All this while continually pounding on the fact that the MAGAs may be loud, but they're definitely in the minority.
Given the fact that very few self-proclaimed/media identified "progressives" have ever been successful at packaging and selling their values, priorities, promises, and platforms in the entire 21st and last quarter of the 20th centuries, what basis is there for assuming that that could, would, can, and will happen now?
And on what basis do You declare that "MAGAs are definitely in the minority"? Have You taken a look at any Trump v Biden poll results lately?
When you consider all the eligible voters, Jeff, the MAGA crowd is a minority.
Recall that roughly 40% of eligible voters typically don't vote in presidential elections. This time around, if NOTC was on the ballot, it would probably win in November if everyone voted.
There isn' t a basis for assuming that progressives could, would, can be successful at messaging. I didn't say they ever would. I said that, for them to get candidates elected, successful messaging would be a minimum requirement. I didn't speak to the probability of that outcome.
As for MAGAs in the minority, there are more registered Ds than Rs, and the MAGAs don't hold 100% of the Rs. Hence, MAGAs are in the minority.
An old Mexican joke ... What do you call a person that speaks two languages? Bi-lingual. What do you call a person that speaks three languages? Tri-lingual. What do you call a person that speaks one language? Gringo.
How about this as a Real Alternative to the 77-year old Trump and the 81-year old Biden?
The 90-year old Ralph Nader.
Wouldn't You just love to see a globally-televised Presidential Campaign Debate involving all three?
To see what kind of cognitive, intelligence, and intellectual shape Nader is in [compared to Biden and Trump], go to his website and read his 5 March "Stop the Worsening UNDERCOUNT of Palestinian Casualties in Gaza," that begins:
"Since the Hamas raid penetrated the multi-tiered Israeli border security on October 7, 2023 (an unexplained collapse of Israel’s defensive capabilities), 2.3 million utterly defenseless Palestinians in the tiny crowded Gaza enclave have been on the receiving end of over 65,000 bombs/missiles plus non-stop tank shelling and snipers.
"The extreme right-wing Netanyahu regime has enforced its declared siege of, in its genocidal words, 'no food, no water, no electricity, no fuel, no medicine.'
"The relentless bombing has destroyed apartment buildings, marketplaces, refugee camps, hospitals, clinics, ambulances, bakeries, schools, mosques, churches, roads, electricity networks, critical water mains – just about everything.
"The U.S.-equipped Israeli war machine has even uprooted agricultural fields, including thousands of olive trees on one farm, bulldozed many cemeteries and bombed civilians fleeing on Israeli orders, while obstructing the few trucks carrying humanitarian aid from Egypt.
"WITH VIRTUALLY NO HEALTHCARE LEFT, NO MEDICATIONS, AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES SPREADING ESPECIALLY AMONG INFANTS, CHILDREN, THE INFIRM AND THE ELDERLY, CAN ANYBODY BELIEVE THAT THE FATALITIES HAVE JUST GONE OVER 30,000? WITH FIVE THOUSAND BABIES BORN EVERY MONTH INTO THE RUBBLE, THEIR MOTHERS WOUNDED AND WITHOUT FOOD, HEALTHCARE, MEDICINE AND CLEAN WATER FOR ANY OF THEIR CHILDREN, SEVERE SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE HAMAS HEALTH MINISTRY’S OFFICIAL COUNT IS WARRANTED.
"Netanyahu and Hamas, which he helped over the years, have a common interest in lowballing the death/injury toll. But for different reasons. Hamas keeps the figures low to reduce being accused by its own people of not protecting them, and not building shelters. Hamas grossly underestimated the savage war crimes by the vengeful, occupying Israeli military superpower fully and unconditionally backed by the U.S. military superpower."
MAINSTREAM MEDIA WARN IF TRUMP IS ELECTED HE MIGHT INDICT HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES, IMPRISON DETRACTORS, AND RIG ELECTIONS IN HIS FAVOR 030424
LOS ANGELES, CA — Mainstream media outlets warned this week that if former President Trump is re-elected, he might indict his political enemies, imprison opposing journalists, and change the voting rules of future elections to favor his party.
"If none of the Democrats' 73 indictments against Trump work, Trump might gain the power to have political opponents indicted," warned MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow. "It's terrifying to think what could happen if a President were to wield the power to bankrupt opponents with bogus charges or intimidate journalists with legal threats. We are talking a danger the likes of which we have never, ever seen."
Other outlets were reportedly quick to also sound the alarm, with CNN running a four-hour segment on how the DOJ must jail Republicans in order to keep Republicans from gaining the power to jail political opponents. CBS News, having recently seized confidential records from a journalist, called for the imprisonment of any journalist who does not write what the government tells them to write. "It's the only way to stop Trump from threatening journalists," explained CBS News President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews. "We have to bend or break every moral and ethical rule in existence to keep Trump from breaking the rules."
As of publishing time, Trump had been indicted for mass murder after telling his supporters that he promised to drain the D.C. swamp and get rid of all the corruption in the federal government.
If Trump does not follow the instructions given to him by his owners, operators, commanders, controllers, handlers, and script writers of that Deep State, he will not survive for 4 years.
That's the only reason he survived his first term on the throne for 4 years from 2017 to 2021. And that is the only reason he is up for consideration for 4 more years in 2024.
In that regard, there is ZERO difference between Biden and Trump. Just as there was ZERO difference between Trump and Clinton in 2016. Or Obama and everybody who ran against him. And so forth back to Cheney/Bush the Lesser, Clinton, Bush I and Bozo, or The Peanut Farmer.
IN MAJOR BLOW TO DEMOCRACY, SUPREME COURT RULES VOTERS CAN VOTE FOR FAVORITE CANDIDATE 030424
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a stunning unanimous decision that dealt a shocking blow to democracy, the United States Supreme Court affirmed that people can vote for the candidate they want.
The landmark ruling, issued just as the 2024 Presidential Election prepared to ramp up, presents a grave new threat to American freedom, as all nine justices declared that voters can, in defiance of what the ruling authorities may want, select their preferred candidate.
"We've never seen democracy in such danger," said black and gay White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who is black and gay. "Today's ruling from the Supreme Court now adds credence to the belief held by fringe extremists that they are allowed to select the candidate they want in an election. This is terrifying."
The state of Colorado had boldly and bravely attempted to preserve democracy by removing former President Donald Trump from the ballot, but the nation's highest court ended all hope that freedom and liberty would reign.
"We don't have a country anymore," said a despondent Rachel Maddow. "You mean to tell me that — in a DEMOCRACY — people can just go out and vote for whoever they want?! Why don't you just burn the Constitution already? No, seriously, can we burn it?"
At publishing time, Democrats at all levels of government across the country decried the ruling as the end of America as we know it, ushering in a new and dangerous era of people getting to vote for the candidate they want to be in charge.
DEMS QUIETLY ASK SCOTUS IF THEY CAN BAN BIDEN FROM BALLOT 030524
WASHINGTON, DC — According to unnamed sources, Democrats have discreetly petitioned the Supreme Court to keep current President and presumptive Democratic nominee Joeseph Biden from appearing on the ballot in any state.
"They were able to keep states from barring Trump from the ballot," Senator Chuck Schumer told reporters. "What we were wondering, I mean quietly of course, if it wouldn't be too much trouble that is, to, um, keep President Biden from being on the ballot in, say, all 50 states?"
Democrats explained they still very much support the President in his bid for reelection and think he's totally mentally fit to run, but that if some sort of legal maneuvering prevented him from running, as much as that would be a tragedy, they might be able to run a candidate who is a little more alive and slightly less dead.
"I love our President and wish he could run for 10 more terms," California Governor Gavin Newsom said. "But if the Supreme Court could find some sort of mechanism to keep him off the ballot nationwide I'd have no choice but to step in and run in his place. It would be a great sacrifice, but I'm literally sitting by my phone 24 hours a day in case SCOTUS does find a legitimate reason to keep him from running."
As of publishing time, Kamala Harris was seen quietly slipping a crisp $20 bill under Chief Justice Roberts's office door.
THE POWER BEHIND THE THRONE AND THE BANKERS’ FOREVER WARS by Alex Krainer / Global Research 030424
Last week, former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss gave us a stonker of a revelation which, I believe deserves to be set to the record. Truss appeared in Steve Bannon‘s War Room and said this:
“WHAT I FOUND OUT WHEN I GOT INTO NO. 10 IS, I THOUGHT THAT IF I GOT TO THE TOP OF THE TREE, I WOULD BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THOSE CONSERVATIVE POLICIES… AND WHAT I DISCOVERED WAS THAT I WAS NOT HOLDING THE LEVERS. THE LEVERS WERE HELD BY THE BANK OF ENGLAND, BY THE OFFICE OF BUDGET RESPONSIBILITY, THEY WEREN’T HELD BY THE PRIME MINISTER OR THE CHANCELLOR…”
Truss goes on to point out the obvious problem with this: you can sack the Prime Minister, but you can’t sack the BOE officials who hold the levers of power. Around the same time of this revelation, GLENN BECK DROPPED A SIMILAR CLUE. IN HIS INTERVIEW WITH TUCKER CARLSON PUBLISHED ON 21 FEBRUARY 2024 HE SHARED A STORY OF HIS ENCOUNTER WITH GEORGE W. BUSH:
“I THOUGHT OF SOMETHING GEORGE BUSH TOLD ME IN THE OVAL OFFICE. I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE POLICIES AND HOW THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE, AND HE SAID, ‘GLENN, DON’T WORRY, WHOEVER SITS BEHIND THIS DESK, IN THAT CHAIR, IS GOING TO HAVE THE SAME ADVICE GIVEN BY THE SAME ADVISORS AND THEY’LL REALIZE, THE PRESIDENT’S HANDS ARE TIED.’ I WALKED OUT OF THAT ROOM HORRIFIED… WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE ELECTIONS?”
What G. W. Bush had revealed to Beck and what Liz Truss discovered when she got to the top of the tree, has been the defining feature behind our “democracies” for a very long time. Former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli said in 1844 that, “The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.” Sir William Pitt, Prime Minister in 1770 said that, “There is something behind the throne greater than the King himself.”
The Power ‘Behind the Throne’ Are the Bankers
In untangling the causal factors behind the many crises we face today, the trail of breadcrumbs always leads to the international banking cartel which appears to have the determining influence shaping the system of governance under which our societies operate. This network likely constitutes the very “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” that President John F. Kennedy had warned us about.
As a famous member of that cartel proclaimed, “Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!” At the money power’s receiving end, Napoleon Bonaparte understood that relationship all too well: “When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation.” This, it would seem, is how it is today.
In his 1965 book “Tragedy and Hope,” Carroll Quigley warned us that, “The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. … The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and direct injury of all other economic groups.” That world system of financial control is what’s today being promoted as the “rules based global order.”
Bankers and Forever Wars
In particular, the banking interests appear to be the key movers behind the perpetual warfare we are witnessing today. The better we understand the way the systems work, the more the saying, “all wars are bankers’ wars” rings true. US Congressman Ron Paul said that IT WAS NO COINCIDENCE THAT THE CENTURY OF CENTRAL BANKING COINCIDED WITH A CENTURY OF TOTAL WAR.
Today we know, for example, that Adolf Hitler and his National Socialists were cultivated and lavishly funded by prominent Wall Street bankers (including George W. Bush’s grampa Prescott Bush) and that the multinational corporations they controlled provided the technology and assistance for Germany’s rearmament… .
Does anybody here at Bracing Views ~ or any place else, on the internet, social media, or in the real world down on “Main Street,” etc ~ actually, really, honestly, and sincerely feel, believe, and/or think that it will make ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER to and for the future of this Nation ~ or of this Planet ~ WHO the next President is? Or who controls the United States Senate and House of Representatives?
What changed when Biden took over from Trump, except for things to get worse by any and every possible measurement or criteria regarding Anything: the Economy, the National Debt, Foreign Affairs, the health, welfare, and well-being of the MICC and the Imperialist Warfare State, private, corporatist, or governmental Crime, or anything else? What changed for the better, as opposed to what changed except to get worse? Can anybody name even one thing?
And what changed after Trump took over from Obama, except for things to continue to get worse? Or after Obama took over from Cheney/Bush the Lesser? Or after those War Criminals took over from that other War Criminal Clinton? And after Clinton took over from those other War Criminals, Bush the Elder and Bozo? Except to get worse?
America is on a Collision Course With Reality, and when that Collision happens, it is going to be not merely Ugly, but Dangerous and Deadly to a significant number of Americans, if not a majority.
But America’s Ruling Political Class will continue to Roll and Rule On. And the American Peoples ~ or what’s left of them ~ will go right along for the ride, just as they have since America’s defeat in Vietnam under Nixon and Johnson, if not the end of World War II.
A Nation and a People get the system of government and governance that they deserve; and that is exactly what is happening in and to the United States today. And has been for a long, long time.
If the best America can come up with to be its next Supreme Leader is a choice between the likes of Trump or Biden ~ or anybody else currently on the scene, be they a so-called “independent” [independent of what?, one must ask of people like RFK, Jr] or from some 3rd, 4th, or 5th Party ~ this Experiment launched on July 4, 1776 is on the verge of coming to its ultimate conclusion as a collapsed, complete, and total failure.
Bill: What do You call an individual or a collection of individuals ~ as cultural, civil society, and economic groups, organizations, or institutions ~ individuals who do absolutely NOTHING THAT WORKS to first resist, then rebel against, and ultimately to replace that system of government and governance? [EMPHASIS added.]
"As we get older and stop making sense, stop making sense, making sense" David Byrne, Girlfriend Is Better, Talking Heads-- 2 absolutely "Brutal" choices right there.
Yeah, Bill, that one statement also stood out for me and no doubt lots of others. Some of us got a lot of humor (to offset the anger and dread) from Shrub (GW Bush). I even recall a humorous 1 page-per-day calendar full of Bush quotes. A 10 or 11-year-old neighbor of some Dublin, Ireland friends I was visiting at the time stopped me, in the middle of his attempt to teach me how to play soccer, to ask: "I just want to know one thing..... How could you (and i assumed he meant, Americans) vote for someone like George. W. BUSH?!!! ". I was nearly dumbstruck, but managed a weak, "Well I didn't.... but I can't speak for those who did!"
And yes, these are (if possible) even darker times, so keep the humor coming!
Probably not much, assuming only that binary choice. One of the worst things Shrub did was to ok the Iraq invasion. I suspect Gore would have as well, unless he had a completely different foreign policy team.
The First Worst thing he did was invade Afghanistan in revenge, retaliation, and retribution for 9/11. As if a Raghead living in a cave in that country could have pulled off 9/11 without a great deal of assistance from people living and working for the federal government of the United States.
The oligarchs have been fighting workers, unions, regulations, and anything else that might get in the way of endless profits, since the New Deal. They really do have just about full control over the government, universities (through endowments), regulatory agencies (through capture), the news (through outright ownership) and Hollywood (doing its part to float The Blob). I don't see any clear path to undoing the control they now have, and as long as they have that level of control, we will only get a choice between people like Biden and Trump in all elections (or a choice between cholera and gonorrhea, as Julian Assange so aptly put it). Personally, I may just write in diphtheria or diarrhea since I really don't like cholera or gonorrhea. I wish Dennis Kucinich would run for president. I heard an interview with him recently and he would be a great candidate.
I've known Dennis for years. He used to be my congressman, and I canvassed for him. Also supported his two Presidential candidacies ('04 and '08) and one gubernatorial run. The DNC squashed his candidacies ruthlessly. Rumor had it that the total lack of media coverage of his campaigns was the DNC's doing. The DNC definitely saw to it that he lost his Congressional seat, because he wouldn't kowtow to Big Corp.
Yes, he'd be an excellent choice, but it'll never happen.
This is why having oligarchs with more money than most countries have is going to ensure no decent candidate ever gets a chance at a fair election. My question for the last several years is how can the situation be turned around now? The oligarchs have full control over the media, for example, so most people never hear what is actually happening. I am not sure how such a situation can be remedied. People with more money than most countries have end up with nearly unlimited power to control our society, our elections and our lives, and unless they have all their money confiscated (which isn't going to happen) then I don't see any potential remedy. Anyone have any ideas how you fix this mess? If it doesn't get fixed, we will always be stuck with choices between the likes of Biden and Trump.
I agree entirely with your assessment of our current situation, John. Unfortunately, I have no practical, step-by-step suggestions for how to remedy it.
Good Kitty and Cindy '24!
No corruption, no ties to Big Corp. Will work for treats!
That's incredably sad. He's the only one I would vote for. On the other hand, what could he accomplish with Congress? They all need to go. It's all a very bad joke on us.
Actually, he did some good in his years in Congress. If nothing else, he pushed hard---and vocally---for progressive causes. He was the pre-Bernie.
From the little that I know of him he was the only one with a functioning brain in politics. Then he.was nullified. Says a lot about our democracy doesn't it?
Not only is he keenly intelligent and well informed, he's never had any corporate ties. Many years ago, a survey was released listing the values of some politicians' homes (it was so long ago, I can't find the source). Kucinich's was at the very bottom, by a lot. Ludicrously cheap, even by Cleveland standards.
THIS JUST IN: Kucinich has announced he's running for Congress again! Not in my district, unfortunately, but he's trying to unseat a Rethug. Bravo! He's running as an Independent, however, so maybe even the deep regard that northeast Ohioans have for him won't put him over the top.
Keenly intelligent, well informed and no Corp ties are automatic disqualifications for any political position.
Turd1 or Turd2?
won't vote of either and the duopoly will contine to win so things will stay the same. For don't rock the boaters this works out just fine. But for me and other FED UP WITH THE SYSTEM folks: it sucks.
We desperately need 3rd party choices
"...DNC, whose main job it is to ensure no progressive Democrat ever wins the nomination."
Truer words were never spoken, Bill.
Even if some "progressive Democrat" ~ whatever that is ~ wins the nomination and somehow gets elected, what is she or he going to accomplish without a Congress committed to the same set of values and priorities? Anything? At all?
Progressive Democrat: think of George McGovern, Jeff. Or Dennis Kucinich. They were/are the real deal. Of course, McGovern was trounced and Kucinich was bounced. Here's hoping DK bounces back.
Again, Bill: Even if DK [or any other "Progressive Democrat"] bounces back all the way into the Oval Office , how is he going to accomplish Anything without a Congress committed to the same values and priorities that put him in the Oval Office in the first place? See Denise's comment on this below.
Asked and answered. You seem to be arguing in circles.
How am i "arguing in circles"?
We've had this discussion before. It's a given that without a significant percentage of progressives in Congress, a progressive would never be nominated for President in the first place. Unless the DNC changed enough to support large numbers of progressives as legislators, then it follows the committee would never back a progressive for the Oval Office.
See my comment to Bill above, Denise. The Real Question, tho, is this:
Even if the DNC was to somehow, suddenly, magically change, and threw All of its financial and propaganda support capability and capacity behind a full slate of "Progressive Democrats" as candidates, starting with the White House:
How would such a slate of candidates with their Progressive Democratic values, priorities, promises, and platforms do in the ballot box against Trump and his Band of Trumpatistas running for the same offices?
That outcome would depend entirely on competing messaging. On his program, for instance, Jimmy Dore has cited a statistic that 70% of the U.S. population backs a public healthcare option (I quote Dore because he's reliably left-wing). Dore has talked about other, similar statistics related to issues that progressives espouse. If the figures he brings out are even close, it's safe to assume that progressive values are generally popular.
All that being said, progressives aren't monolithic, as the MAGAs are. They don't move in lockstep. Therefore, their messaging would have to be very carefully framed and crafted, with advance buy-in from all candidates. It would have to be aggressive, straightforward, and pervasive. In short, progressives would have to be proactive and play hardball, versus sitting back and letting the MAGAs frame all the arguments. Only if they would take the lead in effective messaging could the progressives come out ahead. They'd have to drown out all the extremist, hard-right, dysfunctional noise coming from the MAGAs. All this while continually pounding on the fact that the MAGAs may be loud, but they're definitely in the minority.
Given the fact that very few self-proclaimed/media identified "progressives" have ever been successful at packaging and selling their values, priorities, promises, and platforms in the entire 21st and last quarter of the 20th centuries, what basis is there for assuming that that could, would, can, and will happen now?
And on what basis do You declare that "MAGAs are definitely in the minority"? Have You taken a look at any Trump v Biden poll results lately?
When you consider all the eligible voters, Jeff, the MAGA crowd is a minority.
Recall that roughly 40% of eligible voters typically don't vote in presidential elections. This time around, if NOTC was on the ballot, it would probably win in November if everyone voted.
There isn' t a basis for assuming that progressives could, would, can be successful at messaging. I didn't say they ever would. I said that, for them to get candidates elected, successful messaging would be a minimum requirement. I didn't speak to the probability of that outcome.
As for MAGAs in the minority, there are more registered Ds than Rs, and the MAGAs don't hold 100% of the Rs. Hence, MAGAs are in the minority.
https://ballotpedia.org/Partisan_affiliations_of_registered_voters
An old Mexican joke ... What do you call a person that speaks two languages? Bi-lingual. What do you call a person that speaks three languages? Tri-lingual. What do you call a person that speaks one language? Gringo.
How about this as a Real Alternative to the 77-year old Trump and the 81-year old Biden?
The 90-year old Ralph Nader.
Wouldn't You just love to see a globally-televised Presidential Campaign Debate involving all three?
To see what kind of cognitive, intelligence, and intellectual shape Nader is in [compared to Biden and Trump], go to his website and read his 5 March "Stop the Worsening UNDERCOUNT of Palestinian Casualties in Gaza," that begins:
"Since the Hamas raid penetrated the multi-tiered Israeli border security on October 7, 2023 (an unexplained collapse of Israel’s defensive capabilities), 2.3 million utterly defenseless Palestinians in the tiny crowded Gaza enclave have been on the receiving end of over 65,000 bombs/missiles plus non-stop tank shelling and snipers.
"The extreme right-wing Netanyahu regime has enforced its declared siege of, in its genocidal words, 'no food, no water, no electricity, no fuel, no medicine.'
"The relentless bombing has destroyed apartment buildings, marketplaces, refugee camps, hospitals, clinics, ambulances, bakeries, schools, mosques, churches, roads, electricity networks, critical water mains – just about everything.
"The U.S.-equipped Israeli war machine has even uprooted agricultural fields, including thousands of olive trees on one farm, bulldozed many cemeteries and bombed civilians fleeing on Israeli orders, while obstructing the few trucks carrying humanitarian aid from Egypt.
"WITH VIRTUALLY NO HEALTHCARE LEFT, NO MEDICATIONS, AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES SPREADING ESPECIALLY AMONG INFANTS, CHILDREN, THE INFIRM AND THE ELDERLY, CAN ANYBODY BELIEVE THAT THE FATALITIES HAVE JUST GONE OVER 30,000? WITH FIVE THOUSAND BABIES BORN EVERY MONTH INTO THE RUBBLE, THEIR MOTHERS WOUNDED AND WITHOUT FOOD, HEALTHCARE, MEDICINE AND CLEAN WATER FOR ANY OF THEIR CHILDREN, SEVERE SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE HAMAS HEALTH MINISTRY’S OFFICIAL COUNT IS WARRANTED.
"Netanyahu and Hamas, which he helped over the years, have a common interest in lowballing the death/injury toll. But for different reasons. Hamas keeps the figures low to reduce being accused by its own people of not protecting them, and not building shelters. Hamas grossly underestimated the savage war crimes by the vengeful, occupying Israeli military superpower fully and unconditionally backed by the U.S. military superpower."
Continued at https://nader.org/2024/03/05/stop-the-worsening-undercount-of-palestinian-casualties-in-gaza/ ; EMPHASIS added.
And finally… :
MAINSTREAM MEDIA WARN IF TRUMP IS ELECTED HE MIGHT INDICT HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES, IMPRISON DETRACTORS, AND RIG ELECTIONS IN HIS FAVOR 030424
LOS ANGELES, CA — Mainstream media outlets warned this week that if former President Trump is re-elected, he might indict his political enemies, imprison opposing journalists, and change the voting rules of future elections to favor his party.
"If none of the Democrats' 73 indictments against Trump work, Trump might gain the power to have political opponents indicted," warned MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow. "It's terrifying to think what could happen if a President were to wield the power to bankrupt opponents with bogus charges or intimidate journalists with legal threats. We are talking a danger the likes of which we have never, ever seen."
Other outlets were reportedly quick to also sound the alarm, with CNN running a four-hour segment on how the DOJ must jail Republicans in order to keep Republicans from gaining the power to jail political opponents. CBS News, having recently seized confidential records from a journalist, called for the imprisonment of any journalist who does not write what the government tells them to write. "It's the only way to stop Trump from threatening journalists," explained CBS News President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews. "We have to bend or break every moral and ethical rule in existence to keep Trump from breaking the rules."
As of publishing time, Trump had been indicted for mass murder after telling his supporters that he promised to drain the D.C. swamp and get rid of all the corruption in the federal government.
Source: https://babylonbee.com/news/mainstream-media-warn-if-trump-is-elected-he-might-indict-his-political-enemies-imprison-detractors-and-rig-elections-in-his-favor
Voting for Trump.
Will enjoy the 4 years of deep state revenge propaganda.
If Trump does not follow the instructions given to him by his owners, operators, commanders, controllers, handlers, and script writers of that Deep State, he will not survive for 4 years.
That's the only reason he survived his first term on the throne for 4 years from 2017 to 2021. And that is the only reason he is up for consideration for 4 more years in 2024.
In that regard, there is ZERO difference between Biden and Trump. Just as there was ZERO difference between Trump and Clinton in 2016. Or Obama and everybody who ran against him. And so forth back to Cheney/Bush the Lesser, Clinton, Bush I and Bozo, or The Peanut Farmer.
A vote for the Surprise Party is a vote for fun!
https://youtu.be/k6w8OaByPLg?feature=shared
And speaking of SCOTUS... :
IN MAJOR BLOW TO DEMOCRACY, SUPREME COURT RULES VOTERS CAN VOTE FOR FAVORITE CANDIDATE 030424
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a stunning unanimous decision that dealt a shocking blow to democracy, the United States Supreme Court affirmed that people can vote for the candidate they want.
The landmark ruling, issued just as the 2024 Presidential Election prepared to ramp up, presents a grave new threat to American freedom, as all nine justices declared that voters can, in defiance of what the ruling authorities may want, select their preferred candidate.
"We've never seen democracy in such danger," said black and gay White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who is black and gay. "Today's ruling from the Supreme Court now adds credence to the belief held by fringe extremists that they are allowed to select the candidate they want in an election. This is terrifying."
The state of Colorado had boldly and bravely attempted to preserve democracy by removing former President Donald Trump from the ballot, but the nation's highest court ended all hope that freedom and liberty would reign.
"We don't have a country anymore," said a despondent Rachel Maddow. "You mean to tell me that — in a DEMOCRACY — people can just go out and vote for whoever they want?! Why don't you just burn the Constitution already? No, seriously, can we burn it?"
At publishing time, Democrats at all levels of government across the country decried the ruling as the end of America as we know it, ushering in a new and dangerous era of people getting to vote for the candidate they want to be in charge.
Source: https://babylonbee.com/news/in-shocking-blow-to-democracy-supreme-court-affirms-voters-can-vote-for-candidate-they-want
DEMS QUIETLY ASK SCOTUS IF THEY CAN BAN BIDEN FROM BALLOT 030524
WASHINGTON, DC — According to unnamed sources, Democrats have discreetly petitioned the Supreme Court to keep current President and presumptive Democratic nominee Joeseph Biden from appearing on the ballot in any state.
"They were able to keep states from barring Trump from the ballot," Senator Chuck Schumer told reporters. "What we were wondering, I mean quietly of course, if it wouldn't be too much trouble that is, to, um, keep President Biden from being on the ballot in, say, all 50 states?"
Democrats explained they still very much support the President in his bid for reelection and think he's totally mentally fit to run, but that if some sort of legal maneuvering prevented him from running, as much as that would be a tragedy, they might be able to run a candidate who is a little more alive and slightly less dead.
"I love our President and wish he could run for 10 more terms," California Governor Gavin Newsom said. "But if the Supreme Court could find some sort of mechanism to keep him off the ballot nationwide I'd have no choice but to step in and run in his place. It would be a great sacrifice, but I'm literally sitting by my phone 24 hours a day in case SCOTUS does find a legitimate reason to keep him from running."
As of publishing time, Kamala Harris was seen quietly slipping a crisp $20 bill under Chief Justice Roberts's office door.
Source: https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-quietly-ask-scotus-if-they-can-ban-biden-from-ballot
THE POWER BEHIND THE THRONE AND THE BANKERS’ FOREVER WARS by Alex Krainer / Global Research 030424
Last week, former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss gave us a stonker of a revelation which, I believe deserves to be set to the record. Truss appeared in Steve Bannon‘s War Room and said this:
“WHAT I FOUND OUT WHEN I GOT INTO NO. 10 IS, I THOUGHT THAT IF I GOT TO THE TOP OF THE TREE, I WOULD BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THOSE CONSERVATIVE POLICIES… AND WHAT I DISCOVERED WAS THAT I WAS NOT HOLDING THE LEVERS. THE LEVERS WERE HELD BY THE BANK OF ENGLAND, BY THE OFFICE OF BUDGET RESPONSIBILITY, THEY WEREN’T HELD BY THE PRIME MINISTER OR THE CHANCELLOR…”
Truss goes on to point out the obvious problem with this: you can sack the Prime Minister, but you can’t sack the BOE officials who hold the levers of power. Around the same time of this revelation, GLENN BECK DROPPED A SIMILAR CLUE. IN HIS INTERVIEW WITH TUCKER CARLSON PUBLISHED ON 21 FEBRUARY 2024 HE SHARED A STORY OF HIS ENCOUNTER WITH GEORGE W. BUSH:
“I THOUGHT OF SOMETHING GEORGE BUSH TOLD ME IN THE OVAL OFFICE. I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE POLICIES AND HOW THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE, AND HE SAID, ‘GLENN, DON’T WORRY, WHOEVER SITS BEHIND THIS DESK, IN THAT CHAIR, IS GOING TO HAVE THE SAME ADVICE GIVEN BY THE SAME ADVISORS AND THEY’LL REALIZE, THE PRESIDENT’S HANDS ARE TIED.’ I WALKED OUT OF THAT ROOM HORRIFIED… WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE ELECTIONS?”
What G. W. Bush had revealed to Beck and what Liz Truss discovered when she got to the top of the tree, has been the defining feature behind our “democracies” for a very long time. Former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli said in 1844 that, “The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.” Sir William Pitt, Prime Minister in 1770 said that, “There is something behind the throne greater than the King himself.”
The Power ‘Behind the Throne’ Are the Bankers
In untangling the causal factors behind the many crises we face today, the trail of breadcrumbs always leads to the international banking cartel which appears to have the determining influence shaping the system of governance under which our societies operate. This network likely constitutes the very “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” that President John F. Kennedy had warned us about.
As a famous member of that cartel proclaimed, “Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!” At the money power’s receiving end, Napoleon Bonaparte understood that relationship all too well: “When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation.” This, it would seem, is how it is today.
In his 1965 book “Tragedy and Hope,” Carroll Quigley warned us that, “The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. … The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and direct injury of all other economic groups.” That world system of financial control is what’s today being promoted as the “rules based global order.”
Bankers and Forever Wars
In particular, the banking interests appear to be the key movers behind the perpetual warfare we are witnessing today. The better we understand the way the systems work, the more the saying, “all wars are bankers’ wars” rings true. US Congressman Ron Paul said that IT WAS NO COINCIDENCE THAT THE CENTURY OF CENTRAL BANKING COINCIDED WITH A CENTURY OF TOTAL WAR.
Today we know, for example, that Adolf Hitler and his National Socialists were cultivated and lavishly funded by prominent Wall Street bankers (including George W. Bush’s grampa Prescott Bush) and that the multinational corporations they controlled provided the technology and assistance for Germany’s rearmament… .
Continued at https://www.globalresearch.ca/power-behind-throne-forever-wars/5851240 ; EMPHASES added.
From the "Off Topic, but Not Really" Department:
The ten States with the highest Credit Card Payment Delinquency Rates in the US are as follows:
Texas 24.7%
West Virginia 25.2%
Tennessee 26.2%
South Carolina 26.9%
Kentucky 27.6%
Oklahoma 28.2%
Arkansas 30.1%
Alabama 30.5%
Louisiana 31.7%
Mississippi 39.1%
Isn’t it interesting that every one of those States was Trump Land in Election2016 and Election2020? Think there's any correlation?
Source: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/credit-card-delinquency-rates-us-by-state/
Does anybody here at Bracing Views ~ or any place else, on the internet, social media, or in the real world down on “Main Street,” etc ~ actually, really, honestly, and sincerely feel, believe, and/or think that it will make ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER to and for the future of this Nation ~ or of this Planet ~ WHO the next President is? Or who controls the United States Senate and House of Representatives?
What changed when Biden took over from Trump, except for things to get worse by any and every possible measurement or criteria regarding Anything: the Economy, the National Debt, Foreign Affairs, the health, welfare, and well-being of the MICC and the Imperialist Warfare State, private, corporatist, or governmental Crime, or anything else? What changed for the better, as opposed to what changed except to get worse? Can anybody name even one thing?
And what changed after Trump took over from Obama, except for things to continue to get worse? Or after Obama took over from Cheney/Bush the Lesser? Or after those War Criminals took over from that other War Criminal Clinton? And after Clinton took over from those other War Criminals, Bush the Elder and Bozo? Except to get worse?
America is on a Collision Course With Reality, and when that Collision happens, it is going to be not merely Ugly, but Dangerous and Deadly to a significant number of Americans, if not a majority.
But America’s Ruling Political Class will continue to Roll and Rule On. And the American Peoples ~ or what’s left of them ~ will go right along for the ride, just as they have since America’s defeat in Vietnam under Nixon and Johnson, if not the end of World War II.
A Nation and a People get the system of government and governance that they deserve; and that is exactly what is happening in and to the United States today. And has been for a long, long time.
If the best America can come up with to be its next Supreme Leader is a choice between the likes of Trump or Biden ~ or anybody else currently on the scene, be they a so-called “independent” [independent of what?, one must ask of people like RFK, Jr] or from some 3rd, 4th, or 5th Party ~ this Experiment launched on July 4, 1776 is on the verge of coming to its ultimate conclusion as a collapsed, complete, and total failure.
You deserve better, Jeff. You're not just "people."
Bill: What do You call an individual or a collection of individuals ~ as cultural, civil society, and economic groups, organizations, or institutions ~ individuals who do absolutely NOTHING THAT WORKS to first resist, then rebel against, and ultimately to replace that system of government and governance? [EMPHASIS added.]
If that’s not a “people,” then what is?
"As we get older and stop making sense, stop making sense, making sense" David Byrne, Girlfriend Is Better, Talking Heads-- 2 absolutely "Brutal" choices right there.
Yeah, Bill, that one statement also stood out for me and no doubt lots of others. Some of us got a lot of humor (to offset the anger and dread) from Shrub (GW Bush). I even recall a humorous 1 page-per-day calendar full of Bush quotes. A 10 or 11-year-old neighbor of some Dublin, Ireland friends I was visiting at the time stopped me, in the middle of his attempt to teach me how to play soccer, to ask: "I just want to know one thing..... How could you (and i assumed he meant, Americans) vote for someone like George. W. BUSH?!!! ". I was nearly dumbstruck, but managed a weak, "Well I didn't.... but I can't speak for those who did!"
And yes, these are (if possible) even darker times, so keep the humor coming!
Given that the choice was Bush II or Gore, what difference would it have made WHO was elected in 2000?
Probably not much, assuming only that binary choice. One of the worst things Shrub did was to ok the Iraq invasion. I suspect Gore would have as well, unless he had a completely different foreign policy team.
The First Worst thing he did was invade Afghanistan in revenge, retaliation, and retribution for 9/11. As if a Raghead living in a cave in that country could have pulled off 9/11 without a great deal of assistance from people living and working for the federal government of the United States.
a great year ahead for the third party voter!
Or 4th, 5th, and 6th Party, as well.