You're right. That NYT article sounds like it was plagiarized from the LP.
But did you see the comments to it? Wow. Progressives fought back, totally ignoring the data. Many saying that they'd rather not win elections if it meant "compromising" their ideals.
What "ideals?" Isn't the Democratic "ideal" the idea of protecting the vulnerable? And isn't winning key to that?
Not for Progressives. Their major turn-on is dumping on Trump and his supporters and feeling that inner glow of being morally superior.
We'll lose the next election too. Keep trying FP. We're behind you.
You are RIGHT! And we have been watching this for almost three years now, trying to warn people in every place we could. All we do (except here) is to get people to call us names and accuse us of bad motives......and we're, like you, wanting to HELP people!
As refreshing as it is to see the NYT embrace centrism (or at least pretend to), that piece misses a lot.
First when it comes to winning elections the issue is less about appealing to the base than it is about running a candidate that’s mostly in sync with the electorate. e.g. While Susan Collins is the perfect GOP candidate for a state wide election in Maine, she likely couldn’t get elected to anything in Alabama.
Second, the Democrats have a huge credibility gap to get over. They have been pretending to be moderates on the campaign trail then refusing to vote like moderates once in office. A classic example is the rep from MA who was pitch perfect about boys playing girls sports in a speech, who then turned around and voted against legislation to protect women’s sports.
Last, but certainly not least is an apparent lack of understanding that when both candidates play to the base they force centrists to make a lesser of two evils decision. This is almost always going to come down to the candidate/party on the right side of most 80/20 issues. Right now that’s the GOP
Ok so that wasn’t last. I’d also add that even grading on a curve and understanding that it’s the NYT: If you actually believe Harris is a “moderate” then you really have no clue how deep of a hole the Democrats are in.
It’s too bad the FT piece is behind a paywall. I was hoping it might provide a rationale for going with LNG, which is infinitely preferable to coal, over small scale nuclear, which strikes me as the best possible solution based on current technology.
You're right. That NYT article sounds like it was plagiarized from the LP.
But did you see the comments to it? Wow. Progressives fought back, totally ignoring the data. Many saying that they'd rather not win elections if it meant "compromising" their ideals.
What "ideals?" Isn't the Democratic "ideal" the idea of protecting the vulnerable? And isn't winning key to that?
Not for Progressives. Their major turn-on is dumping on Trump and his supporters and feeling that inner glow of being morally superior.
We'll lose the next election too. Keep trying FP. We're behind you.
The sad irony is the most of the left’s current policies are actually harming the very people they claim to want to protect.
You are RIGHT! And we have been watching this for almost three years now, trying to warn people in every place we could. All we do (except here) is to get people to call us names and accuse us of bad motives......and we're, like you, wanting to HELP people!
As refreshing as it is to see the NYT embrace centrism (or at least pretend to), that piece misses a lot.
First when it comes to winning elections the issue is less about appealing to the base than it is about running a candidate that’s mostly in sync with the electorate. e.g. While Susan Collins is the perfect GOP candidate for a state wide election in Maine, she likely couldn’t get elected to anything in Alabama.
Second, the Democrats have a huge credibility gap to get over. They have been pretending to be moderates on the campaign trail then refusing to vote like moderates once in office. A classic example is the rep from MA who was pitch perfect about boys playing girls sports in a speech, who then turned around and voted against legislation to protect women’s sports.
Last, but certainly not least is an apparent lack of understanding that when both candidates play to the base they force centrists to make a lesser of two evils decision. This is almost always going to come down to the candidate/party on the right side of most 80/20 issues. Right now that’s the GOP
Ok so that wasn’t last. I’d also add that even grading on a curve and understanding that it’s the NYT: If you actually believe Harris is a “moderate” then you really have no clue how deep of a hole the Democrats are in.
It’s too bad the FT piece is behind a paywall. I was hoping it might provide a rationale for going with LNG, which is infinitely preferable to coal, over small scale nuclear, which strikes me as the best possible solution based on current technology.