Well. Yah. That’s kind of a universal principal.
People aren’t even obliged if they do have something meaningful or interesting to say.
It’s their right to keep it to themselves, if they wish.

I’m working on it.
The drastic systemic change part.

I absolutely agree with your assessment of the problem. I’ve often thought of dividing The Executive Branch into at least two leadership roles. One of foreign responsibility, one of domestic. Though it may make sense to keep the roll as a single office, where teams of self determined size can divide responsibilities however they choose. Then it starts looks something like a parliamentary system. But I imagine the membership would be fixed somehow. I don’t know. Still working on it.

I wasn’t commenting on your assessment of what I was doing, just your assessment for the reason I was doing it.

You mean all those points I’m losing with every comment?

I’m not exactly a fan of Harris. But her inability to keep staffers, means she had no problem just accepting Biden’s entire campaign team. And I actually do hope the same for most of his agency appointments. Lina Khan most especially.

Is he really saying it’d be better if they got more money?
I read the article. I still don’t get the argument.
He’s sounds disappointed they got paid so little.

All of that is entirely true.
And ultimately entirely undemocratic.
And that’s the biggest problem I have with the party at the moment.

The Republicans, who are sooo shitty in most every other respect, held an actual primary process. While they’re exactly the same kind private company the Democrats are, and could’ve simply gone with Trump.

As I recall yes. When the tech was new several years ago, just wearing flip-flops or jandels or whatever-you-call-them was enough to completely throw it off.

Who dismissed Harris?

Is Fascism the one where leaders are chosen by an elite few, without the input of the public?

Edit: Thank you. I do try to be a honest as I can. Even when I know my ideas are very… Uncommon I guess.

No idea.
The party never presented any real chance to compare options. That’s the problem. We could’ve had a dozen debates with anyone polling over 0.1%. Like the Republicans. But that never happened.

If we had, maybe it’d be clear she’s the best choice.

That’s a good point. And a better plan.

His domestic work was acceptable. My only gripe there is not pushing harder on the minimum wage. He could’ve replace the parliamentarian.

That’s a plan, I can get behind.
But I would go to 5 years ago.

No they wouldn’t. The party leaders were all in on Biden until 3 weeks ago. The last thing they want is for the public to choose “their” candate.

Yah. That’s fair.

I’m not sure I’ve even been truly happy since I was a child who didn’t know anything.

Oh I voted in every election since I could. Just never for someone I believed in. It was only ever hope.

Would there have been a debate if I had?

I’d be thrilled for someone who isn’t an obvious self centered opertunist. Someone with principals that aren’t power for its own sake. I thought that was Obama. Honestly I still believe he has that in him. I know it’s Bernie, and Yang. I’m sure there are more out there. But our system itself keeps them from getting to the top.

I never had a chance to vote for her. I was never offered any other options. That’s what my first comment was all about.

Project 2025 exists because electing Biden didnt stop anything. P25 is simply the latest label for the same agenda that’s been going on since forever. That’s what never ends.

The conservative religious right has waxed and waned for millennia. But it never stops.

You’re missing the forest to the trees.