deleted by creator

He’s trying to become POTUS and it is unlikely the DNC will select someone looking to make things better

My defense for them was that it seems investment banks, who are loathe to lose money, seemed to retain these policies which suggests they make them more money.

Polls are elections now?

Im not joking he is an expert in home goods. I suspect he identifies locations of photos based on them. Are you just generally unaware of what analysts do at the CIA because it really seems like it.

You didn’t explain anything you just bloviated. It’s probably worth noting I think your definition if fascism is wrong and frankly silly.

Im not sure what you think links to books for sale represent but I know Prashad IRL and I would never cede that clown any credibility.

deleted by creator

I know a guy who is in analysis. He’s an expert in kitchen appliances. What’s he doing to create or enforce your notion of fascism?

She is a fascist.

Stop using words when you clearly do not know what they mean.

Cool, buddy purity tests are absolutely the smartest way to confront actual fascists which doesn’t include her.

The only one playing word games is the person misusing the term fascist. She isn’ta fascist and Sanders lost fair and square both times. America is not a progressive nation

Im sorry for my error and my hypocrisy.

Right now anyone who is anti-fascist needs to be on the same team. Anyone saying we should reject anyone who is anti-fascist because they do not cling to a specific ideology are a larger part of any problem we are facing than she is.

I know who she is. I believe you are incorrect in your take on her and Im not sure you understand how our system works at all which is a frequent problem for leftists.

Do you consider yourself an informed person when it comes to how the system works?

You think kings are singular actors? Have you ever studied any real life monarchy closely? That’s an inaccurate claim.

Im not trying to whitewash her I am addressing the errors in your comment.

Stop trying to claim moral high ground we are not arguing here. You made an extremely ignorant comment that was completely incorrect and all I am doing is pointing that out. You shouldn’t be this proudly incorrect

Im not defending her Im correcting your error. A simple look at her background would make it clear your claim was wrong.

Ah , see, that take is rationalizing. She’s a former CIA torturer who worked under Bush.

First she was in the DA not DO at the CIA so she factually was not a torturer as analysts weren’t doing torture rather the spies were. Secondly every single person in the executive branch works for whomever is POTUS so it is not a surprising claim to say she worked under POTUS at the CIA.

Edit: The directorate of analysis is where she worked. If the CIA directly hired torturers that worked for the CIA they would be in the directorate of operations. That being said the CIA contracts out torture through foreign intelligence, criminal groups, military/paramilitaries, or police when they have been found to do so. This is not an endorsement of torture but rather an explanation of how the CIA is divided and which side hires torturers, assassins and criminals.

I think you need it to be able to identify oligarchy and why it is an issue.

You might be surprised how many people have little to no understanding of political philosophy.

“ She said Democrats should stop using the term ‘oligarchy,’ a phrase she said doesn’t resonate beyond coastal institutions, and just say that the party opposes ‘kings,'” wrote Wren, who reported that Slotkin was planning to deliver a series of speeches in the coming months about her plan.”

Did you miss this part?

First, if patriotic imagery works when it comes to campaigning why shouldn’t they do it? Why not adopt winning tactics?

Second “ She said Democrats should stop using the term ‘oligarchy,’ a phrase she said doesn’t resonate beyond coastal institutions, and just say that the party opposes ‘kings,'” wrote Wren, who reported that Slotkin was planning to deliver a series of speeches in the coming months about her plan.”

that sounds a lot more like suggesting we don’t talk over the heads of the voters than suggesting we shouldn’t confront the problem. Do you take issue with this?

There are a lot of people here who pat themselves on the back for their lack of education and understanding.