Tinidril

That's sure not what she's running on.

There is no candidate who can win this race that won't keep writing blank checks for Israel. If anything, Netanyahu wants Trump to win. He is enraged by even the minimal pushback he gets from the Biden administration.

I'm amazed that anyone is still buying the "moderate voters" bullshit. Just try to picture an actual human being who's politics have left them scratching their heads between Harris and Trump. "If only Harris would do a little more for corporations. Oh well, I guess I'll stick with the racist orange insurrectionist."

It's not about moderate voters. If anything it's about the median voter, but that's a very different animal. The median voter in this country is wacky as fuck with political opinions that are all over the place. The one thing they almost all have in common is that they hate establishment politicians from both parties. Harris is trying to get their votes by being even more establishment, and it's going to be a disaster.

The one hope we have is the end of RvW. If that's woken up enough women voters, then we still can win. Republicans may have screwed themselves so badly that even establishment Democrats can beat them. Let's hope.

Do you think Harris is running a flawless campaign?

If Kamala loses it will be her fault. The fact that we'll all suffer for it is beside the point. You might think it's irrelevant, but establishment Dems lose over and over again by ignoring what the left tells them, then they turn around and blame the left. Continuing to indulge their delusions just leads to more losses.

This really isn't about Trump anymore. The Republican party has been transformed, and every single Republican candidate for the foreseeable future is going to be just as much a threat to democracy as Trump, if not more so.

The Greens hurt Democrats far less than the libertarians hurt Republicans, and neither is going anywhere. Democrats need to focus on being better candidates, not finding someone else to blame.

It's wealthy suburban NIMBY Dems, not "white".

But there is such a thing as a non-corporate Democrat. Unfortunately, they are few and far between. There are also some wealthy Democratic donors that are less than 100% shitbags, resulting in some legitimate progressive policy.

I'm not being smart or funny, but apparently I'm getting under your skin.

Say what you will about socialist beliefs, they are absolutely more nuanced, historically rooted, and varied than what you call libertarian. You also don't see super wealthy corporate oligarchs as thought leaders on the left. Your Ayn Rand inspired cult was entirely assembled by oligarch sponsored anarcho-capitalist think tanks.

I haven't argued for socialism of any kind here, and I won't. You have probably heard most of the reasons why your opinions on socialism are nonsense, and you have probably not really heard any of them. I'm not wasting my time on that.

You guys all spout the same platitudes constantly and ignore every reality based argument. It's not exactly opaque (or interesting).

Arrogance is the only language that ever penetrates with people who think in platitudes. It's not my general attitude, it's a tool that sometimes wakes up zombies. American libertarians are always surprised to find someone more arrogant then themselves.

What you believe to be a political philosophy is nothing but empty rhetoric assembled by powerful elitists for the express purpose of consolidating and extending their power. It's intended from the outset to neuter actual libertarian movements. Wake the fuck up zombie.

Excerpts from the Wikipedia entry on libertarianism:

In the mid-19th century,[10] libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists.

And

In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.

Don't feel too bad. Having no fucking idea what you are talking about just makes you a typical American style libertarian.

As for centralizing power, corporate personhood and broad deregulation are about the most radical systems for centralizing power that have ever existed. You are still ignoring the entire history of conflict between unions and corporations. Unions had their day using the "libertarian" model and all that came from it was disaster. It wasn't until the labor movement gained political power and had pro-union regulations put in place that unions had any real ability to negotiate with corporate power. But that's all reality so it's irrelevant I guess.

Libertarianism is properly a socialist philosophy, but it's been coopted by the far right in America who then started exporting their bullshit to the rest of the world. It's entirely possible for two people to call themselves "libertarian" and have next to nothing in common in their understanding of what that means.

Most libertarian support of unions in America is a bad joke. It's meaningless feel-good rhetoric that completely ignores the entire history of unions in America. Corporations have a million ways to crush unions and union organizers. Without government regulations requiring corporations to engage with unions, unions are next to impossible in reality. But that's just fine with the kind of people attracted to the Libertarian party, because they don't live in reality.