I have tried to explain this to folks for years. Some seem to think that the rich can just hire some poor people to kill other poor people, so surely it will be fine.
I do think that studying the history of revolutionary movements changes a worldview. People can be pretty nasty.
This, this is just an old bit of Ronald Reagan sophistry. It’s colossally missing the point of why there are deductions. It’s an argument from the ignorance of the arguer.
To be fair, there’s no point in investing if people don’t have money to buy the goods or services your investment will produce.
Which gets us back to the maldistribution of wealth as the underlying problem.
Don’t worry, he’ll come up with some trivial reason why he can’t quite support it.
Excepting wars of independence like the American “Revolution”, have their ever been Revolutions in countries where most people are subsisting quite well? I think more Americans today are concerned about the price of iPhones than about the price of bread.
Yes. It’s hard to imagine anything but a very gradual revolt against our kleptocrat overlords. There was a time of “Solidarity Forever.” But now Millenials ask their parents “What does ‘Labor Union’ mean, Daddy? What was a ‘general strike’?” — Just looking at the meager number of views on those YouTube songs is depressing. When’s the last time you heard “We shall overcome”? (That 11-year old YouTube has only 143,000 views. Pete Seeger sings it with only 23,000 views.)
Affluent California consumers boycotted non-union grapes for five long years in the 1960’s and finally got better working conditions for mostly “brown” farm workers. Can anyone imagine that happening today? With Trump, Lindsay Graham, and all the hateful sycophants practicing Divide and Conquer and trying their darndest to make whites hate browns, browns hate blacks, straights hate gays, and everybody hate the Jews?
His version of L’Internationale has 170k views, if that helps. It certainly helps me. 
In solidarity,
andros
Thanks. I’d heard Pete Seeger sing English, Spanish, Hebrew, Yiddish but this French is a first for me.
I guess L’Internationale is a song which is … well, international. Here’s that song in Spanish from a famous movie.
BTW, andros, I hope you’re not too bitter about the often-forgotten .sig. Sigs can be made the default only with the SultanBugs option, and that would be a punishment too far!
The sentiments carry in every language. One of my favorite recent versions is Billy Bragg’s in English, but I’m a sucker for that commie bastid.
(And while I love seeing my name as much as the next narcissist, seriously don’t sweat it.)
My favorite is “Old time rock and roll”. It’s the song of my generation.
… you, sir, are going to hell.
she apologized to the Cherokee tribe over the DNA test
I think the humor part would be important to beat Trump.
In a situation where you can’t outright punch a bully in the face , making people laugh at him is basically just as effective.
As much as this sounds like playground tactics. Keep in mind a lot of the voting public is very very superficial.
That would also be an effective way to counterpunch his personal attacks. Try to sling insults back and you’ll lose on his turf. Mock him, laugh at him, get the audience laughing along with you, and you have a great shot at reducing him to sputtering, (even more) incoherent rage. He craves respect and adulation and that is the weakness to go for sans mercy.
My wife and I came to the same conclusion (independently) about Warren. I’m curious if anybody else feels this way.
I think “authenticity” is overrated, but both of us are struck by the difference in Warren in interviews and speeches before she announced she would be running (“formed her exploratory committee”) and her appearances since then. Hard to put a finger on exactly, but she strikes each of us as playing a part–as though someone has told her “Go out there and be energetic! Try to pretend you’re pushing 50 or even 40 instead of about to be 70!” Though the senator’s very…bouncy… in the clips we’ve seen, it seems unconvincing, like she’s putting on an act and trying hard to remember her lines.
I’m in wait-and-see mode regarding (just about) all the candidates to determine who I’ll support, but it’s fair to say Warren is not tops on my list for various reasons (including her handling of the DNA incident, which I thought showed very poor judgment). On the other hand, my wife likes her quite a bit. and is somewhat disappointed in how warren is coming across (to her at least). Neither of us is going to make any kind of decision based on some perception of “genuineness”–but I’m curious if anyone else has picked up on this, or if it’s specific to the Unwashed household. (“Elizabeth Warren: Appealing to the Washed Among Us Since 2010!”)
I’m pretty much with Arthur Chu on this one - “authenticity” is bullshit.
https://twitter.com/arthur_affect/status/1088354051324928000?s=19
Oh, I wouldn’t disagree (though I probably wouldn’t go that far). But I think it does matter for many voters. I certainly heard and saw a whole bunch of people talking enthusiastically about “authenticity” as a reason to vote for either Trump or Sanders in 2016, for instance. Whether that’s a real reason or something cooked up to justify other positive feelings I couldn’t say.
But in Warren’s case, even if it’s not going to affect my vote directly, I’ll admit I find it irritating! 
I guess because I’m not big on watching speeches and stuff, none of that registers with me. To me she’s ‘authentic’ because she’s been essentially the same person politically for the dozen or so years she’s been publicly active, and I know what her values are and what’s important to her. I know where she stands on the issues, and I trust her to be the same person going forward.
Setting aside issues of age and electability, I think that Warren is probably my favorite. Of course, in the real world, you can’t set aside either of those, so I’m still watching other candidates.
This is no election for old men, and it remains to be seen if the same can be said of women. If Warren were twenty years younger, I think she’d be polling a lot better than she is.
Choosing the candidate who will most remind voters of Hilary through her demographics, education, career track and appearance would show the Democratic party hasn’t really learned from 2016. So it’s very much possible.