New York Times
The same newspaper that said Clinton had a 91% chance of winning in 2016.
Even if this guy individually changed his mind, it doesn’t change the fact NYT is a mouthpiece of the DNC and has every notoriously reported false information multiple times even up to this year over Gaza which they refused to pull from publication or change.
So, how do we get people who fear socialism to vote for a socialist that inspires blue voters to vote or steals enough working class votes to get elected enough rather than slowly spiral into fascism?
- Keep fascism in check for the next two years and hopefully win mid terms so we get the House and Senate again.
- Starting prepping a 50 year old straight white man for presidency.
- Somehow convince people that the firehouse of falsehoods isn’t worth their time.
- Keep it up another two years after to get the presidency back.
- Kill the filibuster.
- Stack the supreme Court after all the Republican extremist ones die.
- Fund public education in a way that isn’t based on local property values.
- Bring back the fairness doctrine.
- Stave off NatCs for another 20 years and hopefully profit?
You’re dead at first point itself. Rest is just hopium.
I fucking HATE these people. Can we throw this piece of shit into a volcano?
David Brooks (Now): Never Volcano not now not ever.
David Brooks (2028 probably): I get why you guys wanted to throw me into a volcano. My Bad.
i hope that one day people stop caring about what david brooks has to say
I never started. He’s on the official Council of Daves shit list.
If Sanders did win the nomination Brooks would go right back to fear mongering though. He’s using him as a cudgel because he has a beef with the Democratic party and Sanders is now too old to run again. He’s just a dumbass.
And he tells the stupidest lies. https://newrepublic.com/post/175705/david-brooks-78-airport-meal-fact-check
He is not a liberal, he’s the end of liberalism.
chad yes.png
Threatening with a good time.txt
Watching David Brooks, of all people, develop more introspection and self-awareness than the entire Democratic party leadership has been a real trip.
Don’t assume that he actually developed any self-awareness. I’m sure he takes no responsibility for the horrible columns he’s written over the past few decades. To him, the facts on the ground changed, and certainly he never got anything wrong.
Well, I doubt he blames himself for anything that’s occurred, and I certainly don’t think he’s going to become a socialist or anything like that. He does seem aware that 40 years of free market capitalism without any pushback from a real progressive party on behalf of the working class has created the conditions necessary for Trump, and that’s more self-awareness than I’ve seen from Nancy Pelosi. That being said, I’m sure this newfound progressive streak will boil down to, “let’s raise the federal minimum wage so we can get back to capitalism as usual.”
I know nothing of his work, but my immediate assumption is that he’s just a contrarian asshole that has no actual principles.
In media (as in politics), this kind of thing is almost always a product of cynical expediency rather than sincere introspection.
He’s an old-school Regan conservative who writes a column for the New York Times. He also does a weekly PBS news segment; it used to be with this even older liberal named
David Brooks(Mark Shields, what a dumb typo), but he retired, and now it’s with a young liberal who’s so moderate they barely even disagree.Funny enough, I actually don’t think he’s being contrarian. He was on PBS Newshour for their election night coverage, and he seemed shook. The next day, he commented on Twitter something to the effect of, “maybe the answer is that the Democrats need to pick someone that makes people like me unconformable.” I think he’s watched his economic outlook completely win American politics over the last 40 years, only to find the prize at the end was fascism.
I like how he completely misses the point even now. We don’t need to end liberalism but we absolutely do need to tax and regulate.
No. Miss me with this lib shit. Liberalism has GOT TO GO. Liberalism is just the lapdog of fascism and always has been.
We don’t need to end liberalism but we absolutely do need to tax and regulate.
Definitely need both. Neoliberalism is a center right to right wing ideology that inherently favors moneyed interests and the status quo over workers and progress.
Having it as the leftmost ideology of only two political parties with real influence is lunacy.
Taxes and regulations are bandaid solution to capitalism.
As we’ve all seen, those with wealth use it to hide it away from taxes and to bribe for relaxed regulations or regulations to stop competitors appearing.
Liberalism and any other capitalist model need to go.
Look, I’m not going to defend capitalism, but
As we’ve all seen, those with wealth use it to hide it away from taxes and to bribe for relaxed regulations or regulations to stop competitors appearing.
Is not a problem inherent to capitalism. All of that stems from human greed, which you’re going to have no matter what economic system you try to implement. The solution is to have actual enforcement of your regulatory guardrails.
I don’t see capitalism ending in the US during our lifetimes so I’ll take any improvement I can get
DNC: bUt mUh sTaTus qUo
