from my perspective, it is the same strategy that created a political climate in which trump could be effective, and has failed twice now to stop him from seizing the presidency.
Never said it wasn’t flawed, but even with the flaws it’s still the most effective strategy so far. When you have a more effective strategy, your criticisms will be worth considering. But since you didn’t, they aren’t.
other societies have prevented trump-like figures from seizing power. we could look to them for the kinds of things we could try. or you could keep feeding the same machine that made trump in the first place.
tehy also weren’t stuck with trump-vs-trumplight for 60+ years as their only options. voting for trumplight and getting trump seems like it should be a probable outcome, and having better options to begin with seems like a better strategy than hoping full-fat trump isn’t selected. of course there’s also the problem that the democrats have been complicit in concentrating power in the executive for that entire time, so when someone gets in and uses the power in a way they don’t like (or pretend not to like), tehy really only have themselves to blame.
voting for trumplight and getting trump seems like it should be a probable outcome, and having better options to begin with seems like a better strategy than hoping full-fat trump isn’t selected.
I couldn’t agree more, and when we have a better option with the popularity to win, I will be more than happy to vote for them. We don’t have that though, so it isn’t an applicable strategy.
of course there’s also the problem that the democrats have been complicit in concentrating power in the executive for that entire time, so when someone gets in and uses the power in a way they don’t like (or pretend not to like), tehy really only have themselves to blame.
Not really, that has been overwhelmingly a Republican effort.
I haven’t endorsed any strategy, have I? I’m saying yours is ineffective
It’s presently the most effective. It being imperfect doesn’t mean it isn’t better than every suggested alternative.
from my perspective, it is the same strategy that created a political climate in which trump could be effective, and has failed twice now to stop him from seizing the presidency.
Never said it wasn’t flawed, but even with the flaws it’s still the most effective strategy so far. When you have a more effective strategy, your criticisms will be worth considering. But since you didn’t, they aren’t.
other societies have prevented trump-like figures from seizing power. we could look to them for the kinds of things we could try. or you could keep feeding the same machine that made trump in the first place.
Correct: they voted for the major party not dominated by a Trump-like figure. That strategy works. Why would you think this point helps your case?
tehy also weren’t stuck with trump-vs-trumplight for 60+ years as their only options. voting for trumplight and getting trump seems like it should be a probable outcome, and having better options to begin with seems like a better strategy than hoping full-fat trump isn’t selected. of course there’s also the problem that the democrats have been complicit in concentrating power in the executive for that entire time, so when someone gets in and uses the power in a way they don’t like (or pretend not to like), tehy really only have themselves to blame.
I couldn’t agree more, and when we have a better option with the popularity to win, I will be more than happy to vote for them. We don’t have that though, so it isn’t an applicable strategy.
Not really, that has been overwhelmingly a Republican effort.