I have no doubt Bernie and Warren do want it. So lets nip it in the bud.

>Blame Iran for everything ever.
>"What's a South Korea?"
>unconditional aid to Israel.
>unconditional sanctions on venezuela.
>continue paternalism of Africa.

According to Council on Foreign Relations.

Trump 2020

I really love watching the CFR. Like if you wanted to see every clueless college kid grown up holding a convention about their dorm-room jam sessions it would be them.

maybe so, but this is more about Warren.

Warren is a faux progressive

^

As for Warren's strategy, I admit that they're not all deus ex machina-style solutions to the world's problems - she's only human - but they're damn good, for the most part. Furthermore, her transparency about her plans for everything alone is a pretty good sign, if you ask me. Many candidates in both parties don't have anything anywhere near as specific on their platform; their plans are much more reminiscent of vague promises by comparison.

Warren may be a little overly optimistic here and there, but she is always willing and prepared to explain exactly how she intends to accomplish everything on her agenda.

That earns my respect, at the very least.

So just ignoring the fact she intends to continue almost everything wrong with current US foreign policy.

Only Trump keeps his promises. I expect Warren to go hard corporatist if she wins.

I don't think so. I take the opposite tack. Waren is what she appears to be an upper-class WASP so removed from economics and life that she believes the theory crafting that occurs at Harvard. Which is to say she is a commie and has tried to 'make the message palatable' but now the gloves are off.

I mean the impeachment, the debates, basically I think the DNC knows they are losing. So they figure it's a 1-100 chance to win. Might as well shoot for everything you really want and ignore making yourself seem reasonable. At worst you lose which is the likely outcome anyway. If you win you can claim a mandate for your madness.

*Sigh* I'm a little too tired to respond to the claim made by Wizard, nor the base claim that Warren is a "commie." It feels a little pointless, and I've had a long day.

Nor will I engage the persistent and pathological obsession with viewing everyone with a (D) next to their name as Joseph Stalin's disciple.

except what the DNC really wants isn't that dissimilar from what the RNC wants, just for a different team

Eh, I could believe that last one.

There is corruption in both parties, without a doubt. But the extremes to which people take that... I just can't, y'know?

yeah good luck finding more than a handful of people on this server that don't see "muh left" as the root of all evil and also stubbed toes.

I know, right? Everyone seems to think that the mindset of the average twitter troll or petulant child who is too young to vote anyway is the mindset of everyone on the left, and that is simply untrue.

It is entirely reasonable. 20% of professors in Social Science are Marxists. In Harvard it is likely higher.

whether they genuinely believe that is neither here nor there, its just that they generalise most of the time.

We already know that Warren will lie, to the point of calling her own family racist, when she finds it expedient.

*Sigh* I don't really care what 20% of professors in a certain specific field think; they don't speak for me.

And I don't care to dignify that statement about Warren with a response.

I'm not speaking for you either. You made some aspersion on my estimation of Warren. I'm merely explaining why it is an entirely reasonable assumption on my part.

*sigh*

I don't think it is. You are making very grave assumptions about an entire political party, and to avoid vain arguments about the people's alignment let's assume roughly half of the United States

Or one third, accounting for independents.

Based on 20% of professors in one particular field. The evidence for which, I might add, I have yet to see and cannot evaluate.

this sounds like comminucation error. you both should clarify if you're talking about voter base or politicians and their platforms

I'm talking about both.

Hardly 1/3rd even. About 1/2 of Americans even vote. Much less participate in primary politics.

^

So in a leftist district any sort of extremist socialist can attain office and gain ground in party politics.

If I were to run for office tomorrow, I would still be - good point about the amount of individuals engaged in politics - the same person I am now.

The same is true of Republicans, you know.

And again I can go back to my original point. If 'Democratic Socialists' merely want police, firemen, and roads *we have that already* so clearly their real aim is to increase socialism *beyond this*.

Yes, of course it is. But more socialism than we have now =/= COMMUNIST RUSSIA, COMRADEZ