There are various strategies you could use for any of the three, with various levels of timeframe involved and chance of success and all, but “let Trump come to power” is not a real good solution to any of them, to me.

Probably not. I don’t know what the right strategies are, assuming they exist at all, but, yeah, that’s probably not it.

And, also, are totally uninterested in any leftist causes more strategic or logical than this weird and counterproductive single quixotic stand in this general election

Can you give me an example of a strategic or logical leftist cause?

Trump does still lead in our national average — however narrowly. But the bigger problem for Biden though is that elections in the United States aren’t determined by the popular vote.

That’s a problem for all of us. If the president were elected by popular vote, Trump would never have been president.

I don’t think it’s as much ignorance as it is tribalism. Humans are highly tribal, by our nature. People believe what they are told by trusted authorities, by the trusted leaders of their “tribe.” People will be skeptical of anything that doesn’t come from a member of their own tribe, even if what they’re being told is based in facts and evidence. Politicians have known this for a very long time, and they use it to their advantage. They just have to convince a group of people (usually one that feels alienated or disenfranchised) that they are “one of them,” and then you can steer them in the direction you want them to go, usually by pinning them against some other, opposing tribe.

Conservatives and liberals are opposing tribes. They don’t like each other and they don’t trust each other. All Donald Trump and other conservative politicians have to do is present positions that are in opposition to liberalism, the ideology of their hated enemy tribe, and members of the conservative tribe will quickly adopt them, not out of ignorance but out of tribalism.

“It is imperative that the Senate, in a bipartisan way, comes up with crippling sanctions against the ICC — not only to support Israel but to deter any future action against American personnel,” Graham said.

In this time of political division, it’s good to see there is still at least one thing liberals and conservatives agree on, and that is that the US and Israel must be allowed to commit war crimes without consequences.

Now everybody go fucking vote.

Vote for whom? You clearly don’t want me to vote for just anyone, so say the name. Stop being a pussy and say who it is you want me to vote for.

I give the Democrats a really hard time (mainly because I have much higher expectations for them, and so I hold them to a much higher standard than the Republicans), but I can’t deny that Democrats, generally, listen to experts and follow their guidance much more than Republicans. I would even say the Democratic party is somewhat of a technocratic party, for better or worse. It is in this light that the apparent “flip flop” regarding unions should be seen. Both parties became anti-union during the neoliberal era because economists were largely anti-union. Their models or formulas were telling them that unions were bad, so that became the orthodox position of mainstream economics, and Democrats trusted in their expertise. Now, many mainstream economists have decided that unions are good, actually, and so Democrats have once again followed the experts. I’m not sure what changed in the economists’ models or formulas that made them rethink their position on unions, but then economics has always been a bit of a mess.

There are countries, like Japan, that are happy we do that

I don’t care. I do not support my country unilaterally using military force to protect the interests of some countries, against others. We should not be the world’s police. No country should be in such a position of total power.

The US overthrew the democratically elected president of Iran and installed the authoritarian Shah in his place, setting the stage for the Islamic revolution that took place in the 70s.

Not that we didn’t try to instill democracy, but we failed.

Exactly. We tried to install a democracy in another country, through military force, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in the process. We shouldn’t meddle in the affairs of other countries, even, and especially, if we think we are doing it for noble reasons.

Experience has shown that isolationism delivers very negative consequences

There is a lot of ground between being an isolationist hermit like North Korea and getting involved in conflicts that we need not be involved in. I would say our involvement in the Middle East has done more harm than good. We are the reason Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan are in the conditions they are in, for instance.

Why are we involved? It’s not our territory, it’s not our business, it’s not our problem.

I’m not young, but I’m also not committed to a political party. I consider myself politically and ideologically agnostic. I’m not going to limit myself to only one ideology or orthodoxy. I prefer pragmatism to rigid orthodoxy.

I didn’t say that. I didn’t say they’re the same, I don’t think they’re the same. Go put words in someone else’s mouth.

Averages are kind of meaningless. The article does mention that median net worth also rose for people under 35, but it doesn’t give the numbers. Probably because the median numbers are considerably lower than the average. But even the median numbers wouldn’t’ tell the whole story. Net worth has gone up for people who own certain assets that have appreciated in value over recent years, like houses and stocks. Means nothing to those who don’t own any of those assets, and the more the value of assets goes up, the higher the barrier of entry will get for anyone looking to acquire such assets in an effort to improve their own wealth. It’s also worth mentioning that some people think we are in an asset bubble, and if that bubble were to pop, especially housing, people’s net worth would decline, maybe even significantly.

Frankly, I think we need to stop worrying about wealth and start carrying about well being.

The problems and divisions that those two men represent aren’t going to go away when they do.

If we can just get through this election then we can start worrying about the next election.

Too far? Not far enough. Biden is not only the greatest American president, he’s the greatest ruler/leader to ever live. The future is only possible because of him and his wisdom and virtue. By singlehandedly solving the climate crisis, he has saved us and countless future generations. He’s basically a god.

Joe Biden is going to singlehandedly save billions of lives. Trillions, even. He is literally a savior, a messiah.

As the dominant culture, it is not our place to decide to exclude groups of people based on a preconception.

I’m not sure progressives are the dominant culture in America, but regardless exclusion based on preconception is not the only kind of exclusion. You can exclude cultures based on behaviors that have demonstrated to lead to unacceptable consequences, and that does include white conservatives. It’s clear that liberals believe white, Christian conservative culture is at least partly unacceptable, even dangerous, and yet you insist it be tolerated. This seems, foolish. Especially since those conservatives seem hell bent on destroying your culture. It’s like refusing to remove a murderer from your home because that would go against the spirit of inclusion.

Every culture has blindspots. But none of them are absolutes. You tolerate the culture, and try to discourage behavior that is detrimental to the whole. Otherwise we’d ban most religions. Even western ones.

But what you’re describing isn’t inclusion, it’s passive assimilation. Discouraging behaviors you consider detrimental isn’t inclusion, it’s the opposite. Even if you are not excluding the whole culture, you are excluding part of it. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, but it’s not inclusivity and diversity, it’s promoting cultural homogeny, at least homogeny of some core principles. So, even if you don’t want to outright ban most religions, even western ones, because that would go against your core principles, you do want to “ban” (albeit not overtly) some aspects of those cultures.