What has happened to the left?

[ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989]

Does anyone who leans left of the political spectrum feel that something has gone terribly wrong with left wing politics?

I'm left leaning myself and I feel that many left wing parties have done a shift to the centre and right of the spectrum, after the Brexit referendum I have witnessed such anti working class bigotry from supposed "lefties" you know the very group that the left used to champion and wanted the working class become the ruling class, its staggering some of the things that are said.

London Lefties make me laugh as although they read the guardian and support refugees, they are anything but leftist, I went to a discussion meeting a few weeks back on how and why Brexit happened and why many people in the north voted leave, the vast majority of those in the discussion were under 30, middle class and hadn't been beyond the M25 and the language used to describe northern people was frankly beyond contempt.

It's worrying that there isn't a real left wing party or organisation anymore that truly champions the workers or those who live outside the M25 bubble, and why are modern "leftist" afraid to be proud of being English?

Whilst in the subject did anyone watch Trevor Phillips channel 4 documentary yesterday on Political Correctness? It was a good documentary and makes you realise who really is to blame for the rise of the far right? The stagnant political establishment and the Metropolitan urban liberals are to blame.

 

[Angela Channing]

Does anyone who leans left of the political spectrum feel that something has gone terribly wrong with left wing politics?

I'm left leaning myself and I feel that many left wing parties have done a shift to the centre and right of the spectrum, after the Brexit referendum I have witnessed such anti working class bigotry from supposed "lefties" you know the very group that the left used to champion and wanted the working class become the ruling class, its staggering some of the things that are said.

London Lefties make me laugh as although they read the guardian and support refugees, they are anything but leftist, I went to a discussion meeting a few weeks back on how and why Brexit happened and why many people in the north voted leave, the vast majority of those in the discussion were under 30, middle class and hadn't been beyond the M25 and the language used to describe northern people was frankly beyond contempt.

It's worrying that there isn't a real left wing party or organisation anymore that truly champions the workers or those who live outside the M25 bubble, and why are modern "leftist" afraid to be proud of being English?

Whilst in the subject did anyone watch Trevor Phillips channel 4 documentary yesterday on Political Correctness? It was a good documentary and makes you realise who really is to blame for the rise of the far right? The stagnant political establishment and the Metropolitan urban liberals are to blame.

I'm left leaning myself and I feel that many left wing parties have done a shift to the centre and right of the spectrum, after the Brexit referendum I have witnessed such anti working class bigotry from supposed "lefties" you know the very group that the left used to champion and wanted the working class become the ruling class, its staggering some of the things that are said.

London Lefties make me laugh as although they read the guardian and support refugees, they are anything but leftist, I went to a discussion meeting a few weeks back on how and why Brexit happened and why many people in the north voted leave, the vast majority of those in the discussion were under 30, middle class and hadn't been beyond the M25 and the language used to describe northern people was frankly beyond contempt.

It's worrying that there isn't a real left wing party or organisation anymore that truly champions the workers or those who live outside the M25 bubble, and why are modern "leftist" afraid to be proud of being English?

Whilst in the subject did anyone watch Trevor Phillips channel 4 documentary yesterday on Political Correctness? It was a good documentary and makes you realise who really is to blame for the rise of the far right? The stagnant political establishment and the Metropolitan urban liberals are to blame.[/QUOTE]

I would describe my politics as being socialist but I don't like being described as a "leftie" because I consider it to be a pejorative term invented by right wingers as an insult to people on the left, especially when proceeded by the word "loony".

I'm a London socialist and I don't fit in with the stereotype you describe. I'm from a working class background (my parents were factory workers) and I'm over 30. I went to university in the north of England and I've worked all over the United Kingdom so I believe I have some appreciation of life outside of London. My experience of left wing Londoners is that they are very diverse in terms of age, social background, race and religion and more diverse than people on the right, who are more likely to be older and whiter.

I honestly have never come across someone with socialist views that is anti-working class, on the contrary, those that I have met champion the plight of working class people. I find your comment that "there isn't a real left wing party or organisation anymore" to be incredible at a time when many commentators are saying the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn is too left wing. I suggest you look at the Labour Party website and you will see it is awash with left wing policies or maybe you can explain what left wing policies you think Jeremy Corbyn doesn't support that you think he should.

My view is that the blame for the rise in the far right is the result of austerity policies which have hurt working class people disproportionately and the fact that right wing governments, like the evil Tory one we currently have the in the UK under Teresa May, constantly use the poor and immigrants as scapegoats for their own failure. Blaming political correctness is just another scapegoat used by right wingers to distract from their failure.

Tories blame the increase in hospital waiting lists on immigrants using the health service when it's really down to their own cuts. They blame to lack of social housing on immigrants having to be housed instead of blaming their own policies of selling off council houses and cutting programmes to build more. They say Tory cuts are necessary because the benefits bill is too high rather than blaming the tax cuts they are giving to the richest people in Britain, many of whom fund the Tory party.

When fed this constant diet of hate towards immigrants and the poor, people are attracted to the simple solutions put forward by right wing extremists e.g. Brexit, throwing out immigrants, cutting support for the poor and vulnerable, etc. If you want to know who to blame for the rise of right wing extremism, look toward the right wing governments and wicked politicians on the right like Teresa May and David Cameron.

 

[Frank Underwood]

Does anyone who leans left of the political spectrum feel that something has gone terribly wrong with left wing politics?

I'm left leaning myself and I feel that many left wing parties have done a shift to the centre and right of the spectrum, after the Brexit referendum I have witnessed such anti working class bigotry from supposed "lefties" you know the very group that the left used to champion and wanted the working class become the ruling class, its staggering some of the things that are said.

London Lefties make me laugh as although they read the guardian and support refugees, they are anything but leftist, I went to a discussion meeting a few weeks back on how and why Brexit happened and why many people in the north voted leave, the vast majority of those in the discussion were under 30, middle class and hadn't been beyond the M25 and the language used to describe northern people was frankly beyond contempt.

It's worrying that there isn't a real left wing party or organisation anymore that truly champions the workers or those who live outside the M25 bubble, and why are modern "leftist" afraid to be proud of being English?

Whilst in the subject did anyone watch Trevor Phillips channel 4 documentary yesterday on Political Correctness? It was a good documentary and makes you realise who really is to blame for the rise of the far right? The stagnant political establishment and the Metropolitan urban liberals are to blame.

The same thing has happened to the left in America as well. The Democratic Party has been taken over by corporatist war mongers. Many in the party also support trade deals that screw over workers, and some have even supported socially conservative polices such as anti-gay legislation. The side effect of the Democratic Party moving towards the right is that it has forced the Republican Party to do the same. So what we ended up with is this two headed monster that does the bidding of Wall Street, corporations, and the military, while screwing over the rest of us. Trump and Cheney put an ugly face on ugly policies, but all of the wars and NSA spying under Obama was just as ugly. And let's not forget that DOMA, NAFTA, mass incarcerations, and the gutting of welfare took place during the Clinton Administration.

Neoliberal sell outs like Nancy Pelosi have the audacity to say that Democrats don't want a change, but groups like Justice Democrats show otherwise. So while the spineless DNC Chair Tom Perez retracts his statement that the process was rigged against Bernie (which it was), progressives are working to vet their own for office. It's time the left got back to standing up for civil rights, as well as for the poor and working classes.

 

[Angela Channing]

The same thing has happened to the left in America as well. The Democratic Party has been taken over by corporatist war mongers. Many in the party also support trade deals that screw over workers, and some have even supported socially conservative polices such as anti-gay legislation. The side effect of the Democratic Party moving towards the right is that it has forced the Republican Party to do the same. So what we ended up with is this two headed monster that does the bidding of Wall Street, corporations, and the military, while screwing over the rest of us. Trump and Cheney put an ugly face on ugly policies, but all of the wars and NSA spying under Obama was just as ugly. And let's not forget that DOMA, NAFTA, mass incarcerations, and the gutting of welfare took place during the Clinton Administration.

Neoliberal sell outs like Nancy Pelosi have the audacity to say that Democrats don't want a change, but groups like Justice Democrats show otherwise. So while the spineless DNC Chair Tom Perez retracts his statement that the process was rigged against Bernie (which it was), progressives are working to vet their own for office. It's time the left got back to standing up for civil rights, as well as for the poor and working classes.

But that's not what has happened in the UK. The Labour Party, the main opposition party, elected it's most left wing leader in almost 40 years, Jeremy Corbyn. The party has long moved away from Tony Blair's Conservative-light approach and is now advocating a more socialist response to deal with the problems of our country.

 

[Frank Underwood]

But that's not what has happened in the UK. The Labour Party, the main opposition party, elected it's most left wing leader in almost 40 years, Jeremy Corbyn. The party has long moved away from Tony Blair's Conservative-light approach and is now advocating a more socialist response to deal with the problems of our country.

I don't follow politics outside of the United States. However, I was referencing the OP's point about the left moving towards the right, and what that looks like in American politics.

If you've got a party that's taken on a socialist agenda, all I can say is lucky you. Establishment Democrats in America would rather cut their own throats than to run actual progressives for office.

 

[Angela Channing]

I don't follow politics outside of the United States. However, I was referencing the OP's point about the left moving towards the right, and what that looks like in American politics.

If you've got a party that's taken on a socialist agenda, all I can say is lucky you. Establishment Democrats in America would rather cut their own throats than to run actual progressives for office.

I think it's wrong to suggest that the left is in retreat and that left wing parties are moving to the right. The UK Labour Party is not the only example of a radical left wing party that is growing significantly. The same is happening with Syriza in Greece (who are now in Government) and Podemos in Spain (the second largest party in the country), to name just more two countries whose left wing parties are adopting a more radical left wing agenda in response to failing right-wing policies of austerity and are growing as a result.

 

[Frank Underwood]

I think it's wrong to suggest that the left is in retreat and that left wing parties are moving to the right. The UK Labour Party is not the only example of a radical left wing party that is growing significantly. The same is happening with Syriza in Greece (who are now in Government) and Podemos in Spain (the second largest party in the country), to name just more two countries whose left wing parties are adopting a more radical left wing agenda in response to failing right-wing policies of austerity and are growing as a result.

That may be what's happening in other countries, but not in the US. The Democratic Party is currently the only viable "leftist" party in America, but they've moved way too far to the right. There are progressive alternatives such as the Green Party and the Democratic Socialist Party, but the deck is stacked against them. I was hoping that losing the White House, Congress, and governorships would cause the Democrats to reassess their position and return to the left, but they're still all about protecting the establishment. That just goes to show how compromised they've become. They think beating Trump will be even easier the second time around, so they're going to continue to rest on their laurels. Corey Booker and even Hillary Clinton are being talked about as possible nominees in 2020, proving they didn't learn a damn thing.

There's a newly formed group called Justice Democrats that is trying to reform the Democratic Party from within, but it will truly be an uphill battle.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

If you've got a party that's taken on a socialist agenda, all I can say is lucky you.

So 'progressive' is simply a more palatable term for 'socialist?'

Establishment Democrats in America would rather cut their own throats than to run actual progressives for office.

I'm not aware that socialists are being being elected in abundance in the U.S.

The Democratic Party is currently the only viable "leftist" party in America, but they've moved way too far to the right.

If you're a socialist, probably so. For those of us who are moderately liberal, less so. The moderates are obviously in the majority and, therefore, determine the party's agenda. That's how it works in a democracy...the majority rules. That's not to say that progressives shouldn't have a voice. However, it's not the only voice.

There are progressive alternatives such as the Green Party and the Democratic Socialist Party, but the deck is stacked against them.

Meaning, in a two-party system, voting for a third-party progressive alternative often results in a Bush or Trump presidency, which I would assume is a far less acceptable outcome than a Democratic presidency (unless you have a vendetta against a particular candidate that you would rather cut your own throat over rather than let it go).

I was hoping that losing the White House, Congress, and governorships would cause the Democrats to reassess their position and return to the left,

You mean before Bill Clinton? When we lost 3 consecutive presidential elections?

but they're still all about protecting the establishment.

The establishment that resulted in 2 highly successful presidential administrations?

That just goes to show how compromised they've become. They think beating Trump will be even easier the second time around, so they're going to continue to rest on their laurels.

If the Clinton and Obama administrations are examples of that compromise, count me among those resting on their laurels.

Corey Booker and even Hillary Clinton are being talked about as possible nominees in 2020, proving they didn't learn a damn thing.

Pray tell what's wrong with Corey Booker?

 

[Frank Underwood]

So 'progressive' is simply a more palatable term for 'socialist?'

I'm not aware that socialists are being being elected in abundance in the U.S.

If you're a socialist, probably so. For those of us who are moderately liberal, less so. The moderates are obviously in the majority and, therefore, determine the party's agenda. That's how it works in a democracy...the majority rules. That's not to say that progressives shouldn't have a voice. However, it's not the only voice.

Progressive policies generally have socialism in them. Like health care and college tuition that is funded by taxes. Both of which Hillary Clinton referred to as "pie in the sky" during the primaries. She even went as far as to say single payer health care "Will never, ever come to pass." Many people in this country believe education and health care shouldn't be luxuries afforded only to the rich.

Of course, she ended up supporting free public college and the public option once she realized she needed the progressive vote.

What has the moderate wing brought us, other than war, Wall Street, and even the support of some backwards social conservative policies?

Meaning, in a two-party system, voting for a third-party progressive alternative often results in a Bush or Trump presidency, which I would assume is a far less acceptable outcome than a Democratic presidency (unless you have a vendetta against a particular candidate that you would rather cut your own throat over rather than let it go).

Trump's presidency is horrific, no doubt about it. But I voted for Obama twice, and got burned. Obamacare, which had previously been the Republican healthcare plan, was passed while Democrats were in the majority. And while it was a band aid for many people without health insurance, it still seems strange that they didn't seize the opportunity to implement universal health care.

But that's the least of my issues with Obama. He said he would end Bush's wars, close Gitmo, and end the NSA's surveillance program. What he actually did was keep all of that going, along with starting wars of his own.

Like Obama, Hillary only offered more neoliberalism. Both supported TPP, which is an American jobs killer. Both supported the Wall Street bailouts, which was a tax burden on the middle class. Both support an interventionist foreign policy. Between her time as first lady, a senator, and secretary of state, Hillary has been on the side of polices such as DOMA, the Patriot Act, Iraq, interventions is Syria and Libya, mass incarcerations, and welfare reform that hurt poor people. We couldn't even get a $15 an hour minimum wage or a stop to fracking in her platform. All she had to offer was the status quo, if not slightly worse.

On top of that, she clearly has judgement issues when it comes to the use of her private emails and the pay to play scandals of the Clinton Foundation.

Is any of that more acceptable than what Trump's doing? You'll have to decide that for yourself. Innocent people died in Trump's Yemen raid, just like innocent people died in wars supported by Obama and Clinton. Trump's banning refugees, but Hillary's on record saying that refugee children would potentially be sent back. Russia hacked the DNC, only to expose that the DNC was up to no good anyway.

My vendetta is against neoliberalsim, regardless who embodies it.

You mean before Bill Clinton? When we lost 3 consecutive presidential elections?

So if you can't beat them, join them? Democrats have been moving towards the right since Bill Clinton, which has forced Republicans to do the same. So now our choices are Republican and Republican-lite.

Could the tide possibly be changing? Unlike Hillary, Bernie Sanders had a double digit lead over Trump during the primaries. Millennials are our future, and they overwhelmingly support progressive policies.

The establishment that resulted in 2 highly successful presidential administrations?

If the Clinton and Obama administrations are examples of that compromise, count me among those resting on their laurels.

Depends on your definition of success. George W. Bush got everything he wanted, so some would call that a success.

Clinton left a budge surplus, while Obama cut the deficit. But I'd argue that Clinton was bad on welfare, criminal justice, and gay rights, while Obama was bad on war, NSA surveillance, and gave up universal health care. Both are bad on trade, with Clinton supporting NAFTA and Obama supporting TPP. Trump actually put a stop to TPP, which is the only good thing he's done so far.

If you think it's fine that Democrats rest on their laurels, so be it. But there are many Democrats out there who do reject neoliberalism, and are working to reform the party's core values.

Pray tell what's wrong with Corey Booker?

The guy who voted against purchasing cheaper prescription drugs from Canada because he's in the pocket of big pharma? I'm sure he's swell.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Progressive policies generally have socialism in them. Like health care and college tuition that is funded by taxes. Both of which Hillary Clinton referred to as "pie in the sky" during the primaries.

And she was wrong? I can't think of 2 entitlement programs I'm less likely to see in my lifetime.

She even went as far as to say single payer health care "Will never, ever come to pass."

I hate to say it, but she may very well be right. Unless a meteor hits the earth and somehow manages to wipe out the GOP.

Many people in this country believe education and health care shouldn't be luxuries afforded only to the rich.

And I agree. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Republicans don't give a sh!t if anyone other than the rich can afford health care or a college education and they're determined to keep it that way.

Of course, she ended up supporting free public college and the public option once she realized she needed the progressive vote.

You mean millennials. Not that it did her any good since they failed to support her in the same numbers they did Obama. And they got the Trump presidency they apparently preferred instead.

What has the moderate wing brought us, other than war, Wall Street, and even the support of some backwards social conservative policies?

Well, let's see...for starters, how about the booming economy of the 90s? Or the budget surplus that Bush ultimately squandered? Or low unemployment? Or taking out Osama Bin Laden? Or a Supreme Court that has a liberal wing?

Trump's presidency is horrific, no doubt about it. But I voted for Obama twice, and got burned. Obamacare, which had previously been the Republican healthcare plan, was passed while Democrats were in the majority. And while it was a band aid for many people without health insurance, it still seems strange that they didn't seize the opportunity to implement universal health care.

Perhaps because they barely managed to pass the bill as it was? And without a single Republican vote in the House or Senate.

But that's the least of my issues with Obama. He said he would end Bush's wars, close Gitmo, and end the NSA's surveillance program. What he actually did was keep all of that going, along with starting wars of his own.

How lucky for the Democrats that you're so easy to please. You only ask that everything be exactly the way you think it ought to be. Or else.

Like Obama, Hillary only offered more neoliberalism. Both supported TPP, which is an American jobs killer. Both supported the Wall Street bailouts, which was a tax burden on the middle class. Both support an interventionist foreign policy. Between her time as first lady, a senator, and secretary of state, Hillary has been on the side of polices such as DOMA, the Patriot Act, Iraq, interventions is Syria and Libya, mass incarcerations, and welfare reform that hurt poor people. We couldn't even get a $15 an hour minimum wage or a stop to fracking in her platform. All she had to offer was the status quo, if not slightly worse.

On top of that, she clearly has judgement issues when it comes to the use of her private emails and the pay to play scandals of the Clinton Foundation.

I was wondering when the tirade against Hillary Clinton would begin. Again.

Is any of that more acceptable than what Trump's doing? You'll have to decide that for yourself. Innocent people died in Trump's Yemen raid, just like innocent people died in wars supported by Obama and Clinton. Trump's banning refugees, but Hillary's on record saying that refugee children would potentially be sent back. Russia hacked the DNC, only to expose that the DNC was up to no good anyway.

Is a Trump presidency acceptable under any circumstance whatsoever? Hell no.

My vendetta is against neoliberalsim, regardless who embodies it.

I'm afraid you've got a long row to hoe.

So if you can't beat them, join them? Democrats have been moving towards the right since Bill Clinton, which has forced Republicans to do the same. So now our choices are Republican and Republican-lite.

The Democrats forced Republicans farther right? If you say so. Although, I'd characterize our choices as Hardcore Fascism or Moderate Democrat.

Could the tide possibly be changing? Unlike Hillary, Bernie Sanders had a double digit lead over Trump during the primaries.

And Hillary supposedly had a double digit lead over Trump for several weeks during the general election. But whatever.

Millennials are our future, and they overwhelmingly support progressive policies.

And yet, 35-40% of that demographic voted for Trump, with another 8-9% squandering their vote on third-party candidates, which did nothing but help elect a candidate whose policies couldn't be more different from their own.

Depends on your definition of success. George W. Bush got everything he wanted, so some would call that a success.

Let's leave the insane out of this.

Clinton left a budge surplus, while Obama cut the deficit. But I'd argue that Clinton was bad on welfare, criminal justice, and gay rights, while Obama was bad on war, NSA surveillance, and gave up universal health care. Both are bad on trade, with Clinton supporting NAFTA and Obama supporting TPP. Trump actually put a stop to TPP, which is the only good thing he's done so far.

If Clinton or Obama walked on water, something tells me you'd criticize them for not being able to swim.

If you think it's fine that Democrats rest on their laurels, so be it. But there are many Democrats out there who do reject neoliberalism, and are working to reform the party's core values.

I just hope that winning elections is somewhere on the list of priorities. Lofty values don't butter any biscuits.

The guy who voted against purchasing cheaper prescription drugs from Canada because he's in the pocket of big pharma? I'm sure he's swell.

And worse yet, he's not a socialist.

 

[Frank Underwood]

And she was wrong? I can't think of 2 entitlement programs I'm less likely to see in my lifetime.

I hate to say it, but she may very well be right. Unless a meteor hits the earth and somehow manages to wipe out the GOP.

And I agree. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Republicans don't give a sh!t if anyone other than the rich can afford health care or a college education and they're determined to keep it that way.

You're right about the GOP, but that's all the more reason why we need a party to counter their positions. I believe that voters want a president who will at least fight for the things they believe in. If you aim high like Bernie did, it at least opens the door for negotiation. Offer little to no change, and you'll get exactly that. Unfortunately, Republicans are much better at pushing through their agenda when they're in control.

Of course, more progressives in Congress would make the job of a progressive President that much easier. Sanders proved there is enthusiasm for progressives among young voters, so that gives me hope.

You mean millennials. Not that it did her any good since they failed to support her in the same numbers they did Obama. And they got the Trump presidency they apparently preferred instead.

Despite governing as a moderate, Obama campaigned as a progressive. Hillary, on the other hand, campaigned as a status quo moderate. Who do you think they're going to turn out for?

Were they supposed to believe that someone who previously ridiculed Bernie over free tuition and health care was now going to support those policies? Rejecting neoliberalism does not equate to preferring Trump.

Well, let's see...for starters, how about the booming economy of the 90s? Or the budget surplus that Bush ultimately squandered? Or low unemployment? Or taking out Osama Bin Laden? Or a Supreme Court that has a liberal wing?

I've touted those successes in other threads, but they're all things that progressives would have pushed for as well.

Progressives support the good positions of the moderates, without the baggage of war, job killing trade deals, Wall Street backers, donors like big pharma calling the shots, etc.

Perhaps because they barely managed to pass the bill as it was? And without a single Republican vote in the House or Senate.

Democrats seem more interested in trying to curry favor with Republicans than Republicans are with them. Of course, even though the ACA had previously been supported by Republicans, they hated it once the Democrats passed it. That's why it does the Democrats no favors to seek bipartisanship. Democrats could have banned gay marriage, and Republicans would have been against it.

How lucky for the Democrats that you're so easy to please. You only ask that everything be exactly the way you think it ought to be. Or else.

This is typical of moderate Democrats. Obama promises the public option, says he will end the wars, and condemns the NSA illegally spying on Americans. Once in office, he drops the public option, doesn't end Bush's wars, starts wars of his own, and expands the NSA's surveillance overreach. Instead of being mad at the guy who did the opposite of what he promised, they direct their anger at the voters who are upset at being conned.

I was wondering when the tirade against Hillary Clinton would begin. Again.

A tirade based on facts and not conjecture, but who cares about that. You accused me of cutting my own throat, so I explained why I don't believe a Clinton Presidency would have been great either.

Is a Trump presidency acceptable under any circumstance whatsoever? Hell no.

That's why you campaign by giving the voters something to vote for, not against.

I'm afraid you've got a long row to hoe.

Yes, although I'm hoping groups like Justice Democrats can gain enough momentum to change that.

The Democrats forced Republicans farther right? If you say so. Although, I'd characterize our choices as Hardcore Fascism or Moderate Democrat.

If you say so.

And Hillary supposedly had a double digit lead over Trump for several weeks during the general election. But whatever.

Her loss was due to the electoral college, not the popular vote. Supporting TPP and not campaigning in the rust belt hurt her,

And yet, 35-40% of that demographic voted for Trump, with another 8-9% squandering their vote on third-party candidates, which did nothing but help elect a candidate whose policies couldn't be more different from their own.

Many of them wanted to throw a brick through the window of the establishment. I could never bring myself to vote for Trump because I always saw him as a con man of the highest order. However, putting his vile rhetoric aside, there were times when he promised things that appeal to millennials. Protecting jobs, protecting Social Security and Medicare, and ending TPP (which he did) are popular with millennials.

Hillary may have swung more millennials to her side had she enthusiastically campaigned on these issues, and pointed out the likelihood that Trump wouldn't follow through. Instead, videos were leaked showing her condescension towards young voters. She was out-campaigned on several key leftist issues, which is rather embarrassing. Like I keep saying, you've got to give the voters something to vote for rather than against.

The reason millennials and people like myself voted third party is because we supported their platform. If I'm going to be screwed over anyway by one of the two mainstream parties, I might as well vote my conscience.

Let's leave the insane out of this.

I'm just pointing out what some people consider to be successful.

If Clinton or Obama walked on water, something tells me you'd criticize them for not being able to swim.

I don't think my criticisms of them are that unreasonable. Unless, of course, you believe interventionism, trade deals, the surveillance state, welfare gutting, and an increased prison population are things to cheer about.

On top of that, I gave Bill Clinton credit for the budget surplus. I've also given Obama credit for cutting the deficit, reducing unemployment, and taking out Bin Laden.

I just hope that winning elections is somewhere on the list of priorities. Lofty values don't butter any biscuits.

Of course winning is on the list of priorities. But considering Democrats were wiped out of the White House, Congress, and governorships, perhaps neoliberalism is no longer working.

And worse yet, he's not a socialist.

Just a corporate tool screwing over poor people.