This piece explores how Kamala Harris’ Opportunity Economy counters neoliberal criticism and reveals its potential to reshape economic paradigms, offering a fresh, equitable vision for America.
The choice between two genocidal candidates is no choice at all. If you don't live in a swing state, the real choice is Jill Stein. Here in Texas, a non-swing-state, you can vote for Stein without advantaging Trump. Stein would cut funds for Israel and, by the way, push for universal healthcare (which Israel has, btw).
Harris proposes direct major aid for home buyers but not for renters, who disproportionately occupy the lower economic strata. Stein proposes limiting how much landlords can jack up rents. For starters.
If you vote for Stein, you can still vote Dem all the way down the rest of the ballot, to slam the door shut on the GOP grabbing state and local offices. (Important!)
We need a revamp of the economic system. Capitalism as defined and practiced does not support anything humane. But too often IMHO we allow the savvy and capital of the Oligarchs to win the race as immoral as they are. Why? They will lie without remorse unabashedly. We, Progressives, on the other hand, too often do not do the work to reach the ill-informed where they are. To be clear, the oligarchs get to the ill-informed and nurtures them.
Now, the reason I disagree with the support for third parties in the states that do not matter, is that we can only SUCCESSFULLY demand change with agency. In other words, we give a massive win to the compromised candidate. In the political sphere that candidate immediately has a mandate. And that is when the election really begins. We must be out there then defining the mandate.
Many do not have the privilege of waiting for the perfect that never comes. But all of us can work to unify and force change.
Revamp, yes. Immoral, yes. Reach ill-informed people "where they are." Yes.
That said, I must respectfully disagree about genocide enablers. How would you feel if your daughter were blasted to bits tonight by genocidal maniacs with support from your tax dollars etc.? A mandate for more genocide? Not on my watch.
This cruel calculus changes in swing states, but I already said that. I would like to see not-Trump win the election -- while every vote not needed for that explicit purpose sends a message about the winning candidate's mass murder of Palestinian women and children, collusion in genocide, wholesale theft of their land, etc.
"Waiting for for the perfect"? I never said that, and it is not a position I support. I invite you to unify on a powerful anti-zionist, anti-genocide message while still keeping the other genocidal candidate out of the White House.
To be clear, the surprisingly large "uncommitted" primary vote in Michigan and elsewhere sent a strong message. Pro-Stein votes in November -- ONLY in non-swing-states and only in this election cycle -- likewise will send a message.
The choice between two genocidal candidates is no choice at all. If you don't live in a swing state, the real choice is Jill Stein. Here in Texas, a non-swing-state, you can vote for Stein without advantaging Trump. Stein would cut funds for Israel and, by the way, push for universal healthcare (which Israel has, btw).
Harris proposes direct major aid for home buyers but not for renters, who disproportionately occupy the lower economic strata. Stein proposes limiting how much landlords can jack up rents. For starters.
If you vote for Stein, you can still vote Dem all the way down the rest of the ballot, to slam the door shut on the GOP grabbing state and local offices. (Important!)
We need a revamp of the economic system. Capitalism as defined and practiced does not support anything humane. But too often IMHO we allow the savvy and capital of the Oligarchs to win the race as immoral as they are. Why? They will lie without remorse unabashedly. We, Progressives, on the other hand, too often do not do the work to reach the ill-informed where they are. To be clear, the oligarchs get to the ill-informed and nurtures them.
Now, the reason I disagree with the support for third parties in the states that do not matter, is that we can only SUCCESSFULLY demand change with agency. In other words, we give a massive win to the compromised candidate. In the political sphere that candidate immediately has a mandate. And that is when the election really begins. We must be out there then defining the mandate.
Many do not have the privilege of waiting for the perfect that never comes. But all of us can work to unify and force change.
Thanks for reading, my brother.
Revamp, yes. Immoral, yes. Reach ill-informed people "where they are." Yes.
That said, I must respectfully disagree about genocide enablers. How would you feel if your daughter were blasted to bits tonight by genocidal maniacs with support from your tax dollars etc.? A mandate for more genocide? Not on my watch.
This cruel calculus changes in swing states, but I already said that. I would like to see not-Trump win the election -- while every vote not needed for that explicit purpose sends a message about the winning candidate's mass murder of Palestinian women and children, collusion in genocide, wholesale theft of their land, etc.
"Waiting for for the perfect"? I never said that, and it is not a position I support. I invite you to unify on a powerful anti-zionist, anti-genocide message while still keeping the other genocidal candidate out of the White House.
To be clear, the surprisingly large "uncommitted" primary vote in Michigan and elsewhere sent a strong message. Pro-Stein votes in November -- ONLY in non-swing-states and only in this election cycle -- likewise will send a message.