The problem I see it again promotes this equitable argument that Trumps meritocracy. Your promotion of Nijmeh doesn’t pass the smell test but your focus on the age elements make the case on why there needs to be term limits for Congress.
I would say that is true about establishment Democrats 100%. There is hope with some principled progressives to form a new "Liberal Wing" of the Democrat Party. I use the term Liberal in the classical, "Bill Maher" sense. I don't agree with a majority of what Bill Maher says, but his commitment to free speech and open dialogue is the medicine for our current systemic political ailment. I love his show for that reason. He is intelligent, interesting, and entertaining. And that is what we should expect from politics.
The Democrat Party had that when the Tip O'Neills, Ted Kennedys, and Daniel Patrick Moynihans were part of the leadership. They had their opinions and beliefs, but service to the best interests of America came first.
Now we have a Democratic Party Establishment and we don't know who owns them. But it's certainly not their rank and file constituents. Zoe Lofgren is a prime example. Someone said politics should be like Nascar and they politicians should have to wear who they get money from on their backs. Lofgren would be covered head to toe with Big Tech logos - and not all of those interests align with American interests or those of her constituency.
Say what you will about Charlene Concepción Nijmeh, but her pledge not to take Dark Money is a breath of fresh air and a step in the right direction.
And sad to say, a vote for the Republican, as qualified as he is, is a wasted vote in this District.
The problem I see it again promotes this equitable argument that Trumps meritocracy. Your promotion of Nijmeh doesn’t pass the smell test but your focus on the age elements make the case on why there needs to be term limits for Congress.
At this point, I think CA-18 deserves anyone other than Nancy Pelosi's long-time drinking buddy in the deep pockets of Big Tech.
If CA keeps voting for democrats there won’t be CA left to worry about:
I would say that is true about establishment Democrats 100%. There is hope with some principled progressives to form a new "Liberal Wing" of the Democrat Party. I use the term Liberal in the classical, "Bill Maher" sense. I don't agree with a majority of what Bill Maher says, but his commitment to free speech and open dialogue is the medicine for our current systemic political ailment. I love his show for that reason. He is intelligent, interesting, and entertaining. And that is what we should expect from politics.
The Democrat Party had that when the Tip O'Neills, Ted Kennedys, and Daniel Patrick Moynihans were part of the leadership. They had their opinions and beliefs, but service to the best interests of America came first.
Now we have a Democratic Party Establishment and we don't know who owns them. But it's certainly not their rank and file constituents. Zoe Lofgren is a prime example. Someone said politics should be like Nascar and they politicians should have to wear who they get money from on their backs. Lofgren would be covered head to toe with Big Tech logos - and not all of those interests align with American interests or those of her constituency.
Say what you will about Charlene Concepción Nijmeh, but her pledge not to take Dark Money is a breath of fresh air and a step in the right direction.
And sad to say, a vote for the Republican, as qualified as he is, is a wasted vote in this District.
Richard have you read Kunstler articles he been right over the target area. https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/brace-for-impact-2/