a reply to: omniEther
On the topic of Democrat leaders being on a different page than the electorate, it depends which leaders you are talking about. Nothing is black and
white here. Some people appear to have the right idea, but the Party at large hate them, because they make it hard to do dodgy deals out the back, to
trade people down the river without being chastised for it. For example, although Mr Bernie Sanders may be better described as a socialist rather than
as a Democrat (in fact there is no doubt) he is actually a better representative on policy, than Hillary, of what the Democrats in the street want. No
matter whether he is an independent normally speaking and ran on a Democrat ticket, the point is that he had his finger on the pulse, she did not.
Because he wanted to actually do the deed, and fix things that were broken, he got boned by the party political, against the wishes of a very
motivated Democrat voter base.
On the subject of the far left...
That simply is not the case. The problem with the Democrat Party, is that they are not as determined to left shift as the majority of their
constituents, and in fact, are less sure of what the left is supposed to represent. For example, Hillary was a bloodthirsty cow when it comes to
matters of war. No lefty would support that worth a god damn. War is not something to enjoy, it is something to tolerate the necessity of, only in
EXTREME and immediately dangerous circumstances for the territory one is in charge of.
Furthermore, with regard to narcissistic authoritarians, no one who voted Trump can use such a phrase without being aware that they have voted in the
MOST narcissistic authoritarian that has sat in the White House for some time. Pot, meet kettle, you guys appear to have something in common.
Realistically speaking, if Democrats (the people, rather than the party) were given the opportunity, all matters would be put to the people to
decide, because real Democrat thinking holds that the more people get to express their opinion and influence the outcome of a vote, the better
represented the people will be, and that is absolutely true. Having professional politicians being the only people allowed to make choices on behalf
of whole nations, has always been a bloody stupid idea, but for a great many years, its been the only option. This however, is an age of
communication, an age in which a persons will can be known thousands of miles away from where they are, in a matter of seconds. There is no longer a
need to have representatives in government, because the technology exists to make the will of the people known in all things, at all times, without
buffer, filter or the ability of financial interests to poison the pot.
Its something to think about for the future I believe. The time is coming when politicians will be largely ceremonial, have no power but to enact the
will of the people in given matters, that will being made known by way of constant voting, either nightly or weekly perhaps, by ALL the people. That
would be a great thing to see.