Ralph welcomes political consultant and pollster, Celinda Lake, to outline a ten-point Progressive Contract for America that she and Ralph believe – if adopted by Democratic candidates— will ensure they landslide the Republicans in the midterms.
Thank you! I love and support this ‘Contract for America’ :
• Raising the federal minimum wage
• Raising Social Security benefits
• Restoring taxes on the super-rich
• Establishing a children’s tax credit
• Instituting Medicare for All (-/- the super-super-rich)
• Cracking down on corporate crooks
• Adopting social safety nets
• Passing labor law reforms
• Investing in crumbling public services and infrastructure
• Ending corporate welfare
• Exporting this ‘Contract for America’ to all other countries in the world that need the same, because of the same corporate-crooks, Me Myself and I super-rich and other predators.
I sent a note to Ralph's team too, because I want to share his great podcast, but CONTRACT is misspelled as COMPACT in so many places. It reminds me of a comic I saw once that said "I do my best proofreading after I press SEND" hahaha
Thank you for this! Every time "compact" has come up I'm like, "what the f...."
I've got this handy tool, an online dictionary. It would be wise for others to use it too. And there is nothing in the dictionary's definition of "compact" that justifies how people are using that word nowadays. You'd think that in an English-only country such as ours, people would have a better grasp of that one language... I guess we can thank our grrrrreat education system for that!! hahaha
Thanks Ralph and team for the discussion with Celinda Lake and the campaign tool of a ‘Progressive Contract for America’.
I always point back to my vetted source when sharing across social media but I would first ask that your essay and graphic has multiple typo’s where the word CONTRACT is misspelled as COMPACT…can you correct this asap please? Even the header line and graphic image are misspelled.
Steve, thanks for your note, but everyone will see it as a typo for contract. When Celina Lake says to make each of the ten bullet points a one sentence concise statement, how messed up would that be to constantly explain why Democrats would choose COMPACT to mean CONTRACT? Voters complained in 2024 about verbiage used and they said many times the Republicans spoke in terms that is not just for the elites.
Hi Steve, I’m not trying to be disrespectful or stubborn, but as someone who really hopes we can get as many voters to the polls. I put the question to Google Gemini AI, and I’ll paste here:
‘The choice between "contract" and "compact" matters significantly because they carry different psychological meanings, legal weights, and levels of familiarity for voters.
While they are synonyms in a broad sense, they are not interchangeable in political communication. Here is a breakdown of how these words affect voter perception.
Word Familiarity and Accessibility
* Contract is a universally understood word. Every voter knows what a contract is because they sign them for cell phones, employment, and housing.
* Compact is much less common in everyday speech. Many voters may only associate it with makeup, cars, or historical documents like the Mayflower Compact.
* The Verdict: "Contract" is far more accessible to the average voter's vocabulary.
Psychological and Political Impact
* "Contract" implies accountability. It suggests a binding, two-way agreement. Voters feel that if the politician breaks the "contract," there will be consequences. This format was famously used in the 1994 "Contract with America," which resonated because it felt legally enforceable.
* "Compact" implies a loose alliance. It sounds more like an agreement between governments or factions rather than a promise to the citizens. It can feel high-minded, bureaucratic, or distant.
* The Verdict: "Contract" builds more immediate trust and a sense of mutual obligation.’
Steve - you don’t seem to care about how these words affect voter perception. I’m signing out of this discussion. You would rather win a disagreement than get the GOP out of office.
An addendum to the new contract with USA outlined above. Antitrust and anti monopoly laws have been an abject failure since 1980 and Reaganism/SCOTUS corruption/GOP complicity. I propose that a single new law/constitutional amendment replace the current mismash of laws and regulations. Enact a law that says ALL corporations can only have 5% or less national and international market share for any product or service they sell to the consumer public. There would be mandated quarterly or annual mandatory audits by a reinvigorated and funded IRS. Then the top 20 corporations will have to compete against each other on price, quality and customer service. Market share law would also have these provisions: 1) any market share above 5% must be divested/sold off. 2) all employees must have 67% of all voting stockholder shares, with the 33% left going to outside investors. 3) Citizen United corporate personhood SCOTUS decision is forever repealed. 4) Natural monopolies that cannot be divested would then be forced to become chartered federal NONprofit corporations like AMTRAK and the USPS. All of the internet and social media companies and the entire military industrial complex are obvious candidates for that change.
I read the initial list. For me the main thing missing from the list is getting money out of politics, so thank you for including the repeal of the Citizen's United decision in your list.
This ten‑point Progressive Compact for America needs substantial revision. Several proposals conflict with fiscal reality or with the political environment we're actually operating in.
To start, it’s unclear how anyone proposes to increase Social Security benefits when the program already struggles to fund existing obligations.
A federal minimum wage is also a questionable federal priority. Most blue and purple states have minimum wages that significantly exceed the federal minimum. See the DOL's Consolidated Minimum Wage Table at
The proposal to "tax the super‑rich" also ignores the current political landscape. With Donald Trump as president, there is no viable path to raising income taxes on high earners. The real key to taxing the wealthy is taxing capital, not labor. Historically, the Founders supported taxing property to fund national defense. Today, roughly 80% of defense spending is financed by taxes on earned income rather than wealth or capital gains -- an imbalance that deserves attention.
Social Security's architects themselves anticipated that general revenues would eventually be needed to sustain benefits. After the 1939 amendments, even the Secretary of the Treasury supported the idea that general funds would ultimately supplement payroll taxes.
Instead of advancing proposals that are fiscally or politically unrealistic, Democrats should focus on protecting the American people from corruption -- whether it comes from Trump, the GOP, or from within their own ranks. Any Democrat engaged in corruption should be removed immediately.
Here in Maryland’s Congressional District 3 , now represented by first‑term House member Sarah Elfreth who got $4.2 million from AIPAC affiliates during her first 18 months in office. We are working to replace her with Austin Dyches, a social democrat and a veteran. Look him up and support him.
Some good political recommendations on the first part of the program but compromises will be necessary, $25 an hour as a national wage is completely unrealistic in our rough economy and under the current dictatorial leadership. We should be learning the lessons that Hungary did with their defeat of Victor Orban. They focused on the corruption, and had a positive and realistic message. Policies should have broad appeal for politicians to be viable, not be linked up with controversial things that cause significant segments to block out potential political reform and recovery of democratic ideals.
As far as "Ben and Jerry's" goes, this was never a righteous company as the product is unhealthy and they fought environmental recommendations all along such as not buying milk from dairy farms that use atrazine on their fields and other highly toxic practices. If you want to have dental problems, eat plenty of ice cream and soft drinks, they never fail. Yogurt by contrast can be consumed without sugar and other unhealthy or weird things added and it does have health benefits.
Good to have some of the former military or intelligence people on your program who are frequent guests on many Youtube interview programs week by week.
One idealogy is that Democrats are the party of the poor. Try simply identifying the politic of Democrats as the party of common sense and stop attacking the millionaire class and billionaire class. After all many with big money do identify with environmental, educational and technological paths that benefit everyone including the old and new money wealth in the USA.
Good glory carlspackler. Corporations and big money are the enemy of the middle and poor classes. Their exorbitant power destroys democracy. If you doubt that, a major research study was done by highly regarded academicians and professors Gilens & Page revealing oligarchic governance led to miniscule legislative benefits for the middle and poor socioeconomic classes. Please do yourself and us a favor and google Gilens & Page to judge for yourself. "Oligarchic systems often maintain a facade of democratic processes while the levers of power are manipulated behind the scenes. This can result in a gradual erosion of public trust in institutions, a skewing of the political landscape and the suppression of voices advocating for broader societal interests."(Democracy toolkit)"In an oligarchy, the interests of the middle and poor classes are rarely served. Because political and economic power is concentrated in the hands of a wealthy few, governance typically prioritizes protecting elite assets, enforcing tax structures favorable to capital, and maintaining the socioeconomic status quo."(Oxfam)
FL CD7 has had Marialana Kinter running since March last year. She is the most progressive candidate in this fight! No PAC money!! Multiple food and clothing drives to help our communities.
Fantastic Hour , Celinda Lake was great to hear from. That access to the Democratic Party is so difficult is outrageous,yet makes crystal clear their declining numbers from voters . Thank you to all .✌️👍 Free Ben & Jerry's from corporate tyranny .
What’s so great about California Gov candidate Steyer? He’s against Medicare For All, while pontificating about “improving access” (which always boils down to lip service & BS). Don’t such half-assed measures like this strike you as a Big Red Flag?! And why keep electing billionaires for public offices anyway?!
I’m very disappointed that Butch Ware’s name has not even been mentioned here. He is by far the best candidate for California governor. Butch Ware would make California as progressive as it currently only pretends to be.
I just finished reading the article you subnitted. That last paragraph’s “Bottom Line” highlights his earlier advocacy for a “public option” (a milquetoast “solution” designed to fail). It was convenient for Steyer, as a gubernatorial candidate, to switch positions on that and endorse a single payer system; but how committed would he have been to that, had he been elected? What I also find concerning was mention of him “preserving private insurance as an option where feasible”. What's THAT supposed to mean?!! We need to GET RID of private insurance, because it is nothing but a scam. Preserving it “where feasible” is does not sound like eliminating private insurance... not to me anyway! And let’s not forget the simple fact that wealthy people (billionaires in particular) have no “skin in the game” when it comes to healthcare. Whether or not we obtain a public nonprofit healthcare system, those people will always have what they need, when they need it, and always the best of the best. Their survival, and that of their family members, is not contingent upon us eliminating the profit motive from our healthcare system.
I think that at this point, Steyer’s campaign for California governor is a non-issue. According to Wikipedia, on June 2nd “Steyer finished in third place in California's nonpartisan primary, failing to advance to the Election Day runoff. He was eliminated by Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton. On June 9, he conceded the race and endorsed Becerra.
Steyer is a hedge fund billionaire, founder of Farallon Capitral. To me this translates to a strike against him right away. Hedge funds are designed to conform to a sleazy business model, and hedge fund billionaires are not to be trusted. They are vulture bottom feeders by design, orchestrating hostile takeover of various businesses, gutting them and leaving them deeply in debt; just hollowed-out carcasses of their former selves, while the employees of those gutted businesses suddenly find themselves out of a job.
I’ve just spent an hour or more surfing a lineup of articles about California’s gubernatorial candidates. Unfortunately, and for some mysterious reason, I was unable to re-locate that article I saw yesterday, in which it was stated that Steyer supported “better access” to care but not a single payer system like Med4All.
His “Tom Steyer For Governor” article focused on healthcare acknowledges that healthcare is a right not a privilege, that there’s “too much profit” in healthcare. That’s good at its face; also good that the California Nurses’ Association supports him. That article elaborates at length about the shortcomings of our current healthcare system and why it needs to be replaced by a single-payer system. Yet there’s no mention of Med4All. But to be fair, I will say that his stated intention to cut out the profiteers was encouraging. The “Channel 4 LA” article also supports his claim to support a single payer system for Californians.
However I remain highly skeptical of billionaires running for public office. Nobody becomes a billionaire by working harder than everyone else. Becoming a member of what I call the Parasite Class always entails the exploitation of workers. I question the legitimacy of a “democracy” run by billionaires. And it bothers me greatly that in all these articles I’ve seen that profile California’s gubernatorial race, Butch Ware is not even mentioned. He’s been systematically excluded from the lists of California’s gubernatorial candidates. Only duopoly party candidates are profiled. Does that sound “democratic” to you? Not to me it doesn’t. Were I a still a California resident, Butch Ware (the one & only 3rd party candidate) would have my vote. The Democrat & Republican parties are both parties of war & Wall Street. Meanwhile Butch Ware is on the right side of every issue impacting the lives of “ordinary” people, with no allegiance to either duopoly party. Having watched how those duopoly parties operate throughout my adult life (and I am now in my seventies!), I’ve found it harder and harder to trust any candidate running as a Democrat. During this past presidential election, this lifelong Democrat re-registered as a third party voter, with no regrets.
After 35 or 40 years of punishing austerity, BOTH duopoly parties get my middle finger not my vote. Obama was the last "lesser evil" politician to get my vote.
The vets without legs and arms are pretty hard to deify. Air Force Fighters over football fields are a tell. Chris Hedges. We are always lied into war by our leaders and others. IF God's on our side why doesn't he stop the next war? Dylan from the 60s. Bush 2 thought he was chosen by God…. God is one both sides of every war . We knew they where repeating Vietnam Nam when kept adding time over their 2 week war. The state of fear and God's plan? Time to wakeup!
Thank you! I love and support this ‘Contract for America’ :
• Raising the federal minimum wage
• Raising Social Security benefits
• Restoring taxes on the super-rich
• Establishing a children’s tax credit
• Instituting Medicare for All (-/- the super-super-rich)
• Cracking down on corporate crooks
• Adopting social safety nets
• Passing labor law reforms
• Investing in crumbling public services and infrastructure
• Ending corporate welfare
• Exporting this ‘Contract for America’ to all other countries in the world that need the same, because of the same corporate-crooks, Me Myself and I super-rich and other predators.
Let's make it happen.
Thanks. Great list. What needs to change in the USA:
1. Impoverished working class
2. Endless war
3. Militarized police
4. Largest prison system in the world
5. Corporations legally exploit the vulnerable
6. Wealth transfering into the billionaire class.
7. Legislative bodies, courts, & media all hostage to corporate power.
8. Unaffordable health care, housing, medications, and education.
9. Non-living wages.
10. Student debt
Claire the correct spelling in today’s interview should be ‘the word CONTRACT is misspelled as COMPACT’ 🙏
Thank you! I changed it. This word makes more sense to me too.
I sent a note to Ralph's team too, because I want to share his great podcast, but CONTRACT is misspelled as COMPACT in so many places. It reminds me of a comic I saw once that said "I do my best proofreading after I press SEND" hahaha
It's "Compact" not "Contract." Newt Gingrich's 1995 thing was a "Contract."
Thank you for this! Every time "compact" has come up I'm like, "what the f...."
I've got this handy tool, an online dictionary. It would be wise for others to use it too. And there is nothing in the dictionary's definition of "compact" that justifies how people are using that word nowadays. You'd think that in an English-only country such as ours, people would have a better grasp of that one language... I guess we can thank our grrrrreat education system for that!! hahaha
You can't change the DNC. It's rotten from the top down. It's full of criminal recidivists and zionists.
Right on the mark!!! Must stop being polite.
Blue dog sounds innocuous! They are traitors!!!
Thanks Ralph and team for the discussion with Celinda Lake and the campaign tool of a ‘Progressive Contract for America’.
I always point back to my vetted source when sharing across social media but I would first ask that your essay and graphic has multiple typo’s where the word CONTRACT is misspelled as COMPACT…can you correct this asap please? Even the header line and graphic image are misspelled.
👍✊💕
We meant to say "Compact" not "Contract." An agreement between parties; a covenant or contract.
Steve, thanks for your note, but everyone will see it as a typo for contract. When Celina Lake says to make each of the ten bullet points a one sentence concise statement, how messed up would that be to constantly explain why Democrats would choose COMPACT to mean CONTRACT? Voters complained in 2024 about verbiage used and they said many times the Republicans spoke in terms that is not just for the elites.
Really? It's just a synonym. But point taken.
Hi Steve, I’m not trying to be disrespectful or stubborn, but as someone who really hopes we can get as many voters to the polls. I put the question to Google Gemini AI, and I’ll paste here:
‘The choice between "contract" and "compact" matters significantly because they carry different psychological meanings, legal weights, and levels of familiarity for voters.
While they are synonyms in a broad sense, they are not interchangeable in political communication. Here is a breakdown of how these words affect voter perception.
Word Familiarity and Accessibility
* Contract is a universally understood word. Every voter knows what a contract is because they sign them for cell phones, employment, and housing.
* Compact is much less common in everyday speech. Many voters may only associate it with makeup, cars, or historical documents like the Mayflower Compact.
* The Verdict: "Contract" is far more accessible to the average voter's vocabulary.
Psychological and Political Impact
* "Contract" implies accountability. It suggests a binding, two-way agreement. Voters feel that if the politician breaks the "contract," there will be consequences. This format was famously used in the 1994 "Contract with America," which resonated because it felt legally enforceable.
* "Compact" implies a loose alliance. It sounds more like an agreement between governments or factions rather than a promise to the citizens. It can feel high-minded, bureaucratic, or distant.
* The Verdict: "Contract" builds more immediate trust and a sense of mutual obligation.’
I don't care what Gemini says. it's designed to tell you what you want to hear.
Steve - you don’t seem to care about how these words affect voter perception. I’m signing out of this discussion. You would rather win a disagreement than get the GOP out of office.
An addendum to the new contract with USA outlined above. Antitrust and anti monopoly laws have been an abject failure since 1980 and Reaganism/SCOTUS corruption/GOP complicity. I propose that a single new law/constitutional amendment replace the current mismash of laws and regulations. Enact a law that says ALL corporations can only have 5% or less national and international market share for any product or service they sell to the consumer public. There would be mandated quarterly or annual mandatory audits by a reinvigorated and funded IRS. Then the top 20 corporations will have to compete against each other on price, quality and customer service. Market share law would also have these provisions: 1) any market share above 5% must be divested/sold off. 2) all employees must have 67% of all voting stockholder shares, with the 33% left going to outside investors. 3) Citizen United corporate personhood SCOTUS decision is forever repealed. 4) Natural monopolies that cannot be divested would then be forced to become chartered federal NONprofit corporations like AMTRAK and the USPS. All of the internet and social media companies and the entire military industrial complex are obvious candidates for that change.
I read the initial list. For me the main thing missing from the list is getting money out of politics, so thank you for including the repeal of the Citizen's United decision in your list.
Great show Ralph & team!
This ten‑point Progressive Compact for America needs substantial revision. Several proposals conflict with fiscal reality or with the political environment we're actually operating in.
To start, it’s unclear how anyone proposes to increase Social Security benefits when the program already struggles to fund existing obligations.
A federal minimum wage is also a questionable federal priority. Most blue and purple states have minimum wages that significantly exceed the federal minimum. See the DOL's Consolidated Minimum Wage Table at
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/mw-consolidated. The minimum wage should be a labor union and state priority.
The proposal to "tax the super‑rich" also ignores the current political landscape. With Donald Trump as president, there is no viable path to raising income taxes on high earners. The real key to taxing the wealthy is taxing capital, not labor. Historically, the Founders supported taxing property to fund national defense. Today, roughly 80% of defense spending is financed by taxes on earned income rather than wealth or capital gains -- an imbalance that deserves attention.
Social Security's architects themselves anticipated that general revenues would eventually be needed to sustain benefits. After the 1939 amendments, even the Secretary of the Treasury supported the idea that general funds would ultimately supplement payroll taxes.
Instead of advancing proposals that are fiscally or politically unrealistic, Democrats should focus on protecting the American people from corruption -- whether it comes from Trump, the GOP, or from within their own ranks. Any Democrat engaged in corruption should be removed immediately.
Your show gives me life and hope. thank you so much.
Here in Maryland’s Congressional District 3 , now represented by first‑term House member Sarah Elfreth who got $4.2 million from AIPAC affiliates during her first 18 months in office. We are working to replace her with Austin Dyches, a social democrat and a veteran. Look him up and support him.
Some good political recommendations on the first part of the program but compromises will be necessary, $25 an hour as a national wage is completely unrealistic in our rough economy and under the current dictatorial leadership. We should be learning the lessons that Hungary did with their defeat of Victor Orban. They focused on the corruption, and had a positive and realistic message. Policies should have broad appeal for politicians to be viable, not be linked up with controversial things that cause significant segments to block out potential political reform and recovery of democratic ideals.
As far as "Ben and Jerry's" goes, this was never a righteous company as the product is unhealthy and they fought environmental recommendations all along such as not buying milk from dairy farms that use atrazine on their fields and other highly toxic practices. If you want to have dental problems, eat plenty of ice cream and soft drinks, they never fail. Yogurt by contrast can be consumed without sugar and other unhealthy or weird things added and it does have health benefits.
Good to have some of the former military or intelligence people on your program who are frequent guests on many Youtube interview programs week by week.
One idealogy is that Democrats are the party of the poor. Try simply identifying the politic of Democrats as the party of common sense and stop attacking the millionaire class and billionaire class. After all many with big money do identify with environmental, educational and technological paths that benefit everyone including the old and new money wealth in the USA.
Good glory carlspackler. Corporations and big money are the enemy of the middle and poor classes. Their exorbitant power destroys democracy. If you doubt that, a major research study was done by highly regarded academicians and professors Gilens & Page revealing oligarchic governance led to miniscule legislative benefits for the middle and poor socioeconomic classes. Please do yourself and us a favor and google Gilens & Page to judge for yourself. "Oligarchic systems often maintain a facade of democratic processes while the levers of power are manipulated behind the scenes. This can result in a gradual erosion of public trust in institutions, a skewing of the political landscape and the suppression of voices advocating for broader societal interests."(Democracy toolkit)"In an oligarchy, the interests of the middle and poor classes are rarely served. Because political and economic power is concentrated in the hands of a wealthy few, governance typically prioritizes protecting elite assets, enforcing tax structures favorable to capital, and maintaining the socioeconomic status quo."(Oxfam)
FL CD7 has had Marialana Kinter running since March last year. She is the most progressive candidate in this fight! No PAC money!! Multiple food and clothing drives to help our communities.
Fantastic Hour , Celinda Lake was great to hear from. That access to the Democratic Party is so difficult is outrageous,yet makes crystal clear their declining numbers from voters . Thank you to all .✌️👍 Free Ben & Jerry's from corporate tyranny .
What’s so great about California Gov candidate Steyer? He’s against Medicare For All, while pontificating about “improving access” (which always boils down to lip service & BS). Don’t such half-assed measures like this strike you as a Big Red Flag?! And why keep electing billionaires for public offices anyway?!
I’m very disappointed that Butch Ware’s name has not even been mentioned here. He is by far the best candidate for California governor. Butch Ware would make California as progressive as it currently only pretends to be.
You are mistaken. Steyer came out for Medicare for All. https://factually.co/fact-checks/politics/tom-steyer-health-care-funding-94a06f
I just finished reading the article you subnitted. That last paragraph’s “Bottom Line” highlights his earlier advocacy for a “public option” (a milquetoast “solution” designed to fail). It was convenient for Steyer, as a gubernatorial candidate, to switch positions on that and endorse a single payer system; but how committed would he have been to that, had he been elected? What I also find concerning was mention of him “preserving private insurance as an option where feasible”. What's THAT supposed to mean?!! We need to GET RID of private insurance, because it is nothing but a scam. Preserving it “where feasible” is does not sound like eliminating private insurance... not to me anyway! And let’s not forget the simple fact that wealthy people (billionaires in particular) have no “skin in the game” when it comes to healthcare. Whether or not we obtain a public nonprofit healthcare system, those people will always have what they need, when they need it, and always the best of the best. Their survival, and that of their family members, is not contingent upon us eliminating the profit motive from our healthcare system.
I think that at this point, Steyer’s campaign for California governor is a non-issue. According to Wikipedia, on June 2nd “Steyer finished in third place in California's nonpartisan primary, failing to advance to the Election Day runoff. He was eliminated by Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton. On June 9, he conceded the race and endorsed Becerra.
Steyer is a hedge fund billionaire, founder of Farallon Capitral. To me this translates to a strike against him right away. Hedge funds are designed to conform to a sleazy business model, and hedge fund billionaires are not to be trusted. They are vulture bottom feeders by design, orchestrating hostile takeover of various businesses, gutting them and leaving them deeply in debt; just hollowed-out carcasses of their former selves, while the employees of those gutted businesses suddenly find themselves out of a job.
I’ve just spent an hour or more surfing a lineup of articles about California’s gubernatorial candidates. Unfortunately, and for some mysterious reason, I was unable to re-locate that article I saw yesterday, in which it was stated that Steyer supported “better access” to care but not a single payer system like Med4All.
His “Tom Steyer For Governor” article focused on healthcare acknowledges that healthcare is a right not a privilege, that there’s “too much profit” in healthcare. That’s good at its face; also good that the California Nurses’ Association supports him. That article elaborates at length about the shortcomings of our current healthcare system and why it needs to be replaced by a single-payer system. Yet there’s no mention of Med4All. But to be fair, I will say that his stated intention to cut out the profiteers was encouraging. The “Channel 4 LA” article also supports his claim to support a single payer system for Californians.
However I remain highly skeptical of billionaires running for public office. Nobody becomes a billionaire by working harder than everyone else. Becoming a member of what I call the Parasite Class always entails the exploitation of workers. I question the legitimacy of a “democracy” run by billionaires. And it bothers me greatly that in all these articles I’ve seen that profile California’s gubernatorial race, Butch Ware is not even mentioned. He’s been systematically excluded from the lists of California’s gubernatorial candidates. Only duopoly party candidates are profiled. Does that sound “democratic” to you? Not to me it doesn’t. Were I a still a California resident, Butch Ware (the one & only 3rd party candidate) would have my vote. The Democrat & Republican parties are both parties of war & Wall Street. Meanwhile Butch Ware is on the right side of every issue impacting the lives of “ordinary” people, with no allegiance to either duopoly party. Having watched how those duopoly parties operate throughout my adult life (and I am now in my seventies!), I’ve found it harder and harder to trust any candidate running as a Democrat. During this past presidential election, this lifelong Democrat re-registered as a third party voter, with no regrets.
After 35 or 40 years of punishing austerity, BOTH duopoly parties get my middle finger not my vote. Obama was the last "lesser evil" politician to get my vote.
The vets without legs and arms are pretty hard to deify. Air Force Fighters over football fields are a tell. Chris Hedges. We are always lied into war by our leaders and others. IF God's on our side why doesn't he stop the next war? Dylan from the 60s. Bush 2 thought he was chosen by God…. God is one both sides of every war . We knew they where repeating Vietnam Nam when kept adding time over their 2 week war. The state of fear and God's plan? Time to wakeup!