It was Project 2025 that drove me to reconsider my political position. The idea of Christian Nationalism scares me to death. I have honest questions about Democratic ideals and like Frazier “I’m listening.”
How 'bout a little substance, people, instead of just kissing up to Heather? Sure, it's important to defeat photo-fascist, Donald Dumpster, but his awfulness makes it easy for Democrats to be preferable without being more than relatively good. In truth, Kamala is no Bernie Sanders, and she may well continue Biden's policies, including a pretty unsavory foreign policy. He didn't start a war, which is an important plus, but he's empowered Israel to wage a murderous one. Is Heather just a flack for the Democratic Party? She makes it sound wonderful. I grant you, but does it deserve all that praise, simply because Dumpster Don is the alternative?
Personally, I’m glad VP Kamala Harris is not Senator Bernie Sanders. While I like a lot of Sanders’s policy proposals, he comes across as a grumpy old man, bitching and kvetching his way through life, and that is not good leadership. But, I voted for Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 Primary, so what do I know?
I would take issue with your implication that Prof. Richardson is a somehow a shill for the Democratic Party. I have been reading and listening to her Letters, as well as her Politics Chat on YouTube each week, and I have never read nor heard her say anything that could be considered factually inaccurate. If she seems to imply that the Democrats are on the right side of history, compared to the current GOP, I’m afraid I’d have to say that is a correct assessment coming from a professor of political history. A few months ago, there was a survey given to 150+ historians, asking them to rank all US presidents from first to last, in terms of being a good leader for the country in their period of history. You can’t get 150+ historians to agree on almost anything, but they all placed Donald Trump last. That kind of consensus is not an accident.
Regarding the Gaza War, I think Netanyahu has committed crimes against humanity, but I’m not an expert in international criminal law. I am concerned about the role the USA has played in civilian deaths by supplying weapons to the Israelis. Still, Middle East politics and policy is not a simple black and white issue. I don’t agree with those who would sit out the election, but otherwise would vote for Harris, because they are “one-issue” voters. We don’t live in a one-issue world, and politics is the art of the possible, not the art of the perfect. I think they are shooting themselves in the foot…or maybe the neck.
Have you checked out the books Dr. Richardson has published? If you're looking for substantial and thought provoking material, that's a good place to start. One of her key observations was to relate the thinking of Civil-War era politicians to modern times and point out that the similarities haven't gone away. Donald is the latest symptom, while she keeps pointing to the disease.
As a Louisiana Republican I agree with you substance is what I need not attacks and emotional responses. To say Republicans have given up on Democracy is a bit much. I came here to try to understand please help me.
Good for you, Mike. I'm a lifelong New-Deal Democrat, and we probably disagree on many things, but not all the truth and value lies on one side, so it's good to listen to the other side, too.
It was Project 2025 that drove me to reconsider my political position. The idea of Christian Nationalism scares me to death. I have honest questions about Democratic ideals and like Frazier “I’m listening.”
I appreciate everyone who reaches across to the other side, even if just trying to understand and not necessarily conceding anything. And I realize "the other side" suggests the ideology is binary, which just isn't so. No point of contention is binary, each having complicated facets. But we simplify our slogans and sometimes our comments - especially when addressing a large and diverse crowd - because substance can defeat getting the main point across. You have made a point on which a substantive conversation can grow. Thank you, I hope it bears fruit! Project 2025, civil servants pledging allegiance to Donald personally, "dictator for one day," partisan rulings by SCOTUS that relieve Donald specifically from obeying the law, extreme jerrymandering, and more support our fear of ending Democracy in this country.
I’ve watched most of the key speeches at the Democratic National Convention on Monday and Tuesday and am still digesting it all. There is still Wednesday and Thursday to go. I am going to avoid making sweeping conclusions or oracular pronouncements about what the Dems and Harris/Walz will or will not do if elected, and whether or not their proposals are detailed enough until the convention is finished. Even then, political conventions are typically more show than substance, designed to rally and motivate the troops. I imagine more info will be rolled out between the end of the convention and the election, as well. I think Prof. Richardson’s Letters are useful in summarizing and putting things in historical context.
Thank you all. I feel instructed by your replies. Richardson's depth of historical knowledge may give her the right to full-throated endorsement to the Democratic Party's current agenda, but the MAGA rank and file, if not their leader, have wounds and sorrows that we can't dismiss. Their expectation, fostered by the good times following WWII, that that everyone in America is on an escalator leading to greater and greater affluence is one the Dems are still promoting. Much could be done, with government programs like those of the New Deal, and heavier taxation on corporations and the rich. But capitalism is now global, and they might be able simply to desert the U.S. and take their growing economy elsewhere. Finding a balance between wealth-creation and -distribution is a problem that Dems are chary of enunciating explicitly, and that their own billionaire backers won't support. Or am I wrong?
Gratitude to you HCR and every TruthTeller on this planet. The history of both harming and helping must be told, shared and remembered. We all have only so many chances and this election, this Democratic choice of Harris/Walz belongs to us and America NOW.
Wonderful as always...
Yes, Heather makes the world go round !
After the election, we will be left with Robert Reich and our Heather !
She is smart and a great writer …, Makes our mornings bright !
Michele truly was extraordinary! Thanks, Heather. From where I was sitting, it felt like the glass ceiling had shattered!
Is anyone else sick and tired of the NYT's commentary and coverage of this election? Surely they can do better?
A Brilliant talk, at a level with a clear true understanding of the issues of the DNC convention, and how we got here...
It was Project 2025 that drove me to reconsider my political position. The idea of Christian Nationalism scares me to death. I have honest questions about Democratic ideals and like Frazier “I’m listening.”
How 'bout a little substance, people, instead of just kissing up to Heather? Sure, it's important to defeat photo-fascist, Donald Dumpster, but his awfulness makes it easy for Democrats to be preferable without being more than relatively good. In truth, Kamala is no Bernie Sanders, and she may well continue Biden's policies, including a pretty unsavory foreign policy. He didn't start a war, which is an important plus, but he's empowered Israel to wage a murderous one. Is Heather just a flack for the Democratic Party? She makes it sound wonderful. I grant you, but does it deserve all that praise, simply because Dumpster Don is the alternative?
Personally, I’m glad VP Kamala Harris is not Senator Bernie Sanders. While I like a lot of Sanders’s policy proposals, he comes across as a grumpy old man, bitching and kvetching his way through life, and that is not good leadership. But, I voted for Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 Primary, so what do I know?
I would take issue with your implication that Prof. Richardson is a somehow a shill for the Democratic Party. I have been reading and listening to her Letters, as well as her Politics Chat on YouTube each week, and I have never read nor heard her say anything that could be considered factually inaccurate. If she seems to imply that the Democrats are on the right side of history, compared to the current GOP, I’m afraid I’d have to say that is a correct assessment coming from a professor of political history. A few months ago, there was a survey given to 150+ historians, asking them to rank all US presidents from first to last, in terms of being a good leader for the country in their period of history. You can’t get 150+ historians to agree on almost anything, but they all placed Donald Trump last. That kind of consensus is not an accident.
Regarding the Gaza War, I think Netanyahu has committed crimes against humanity, but I’m not an expert in international criminal law. I am concerned about the role the USA has played in civilian deaths by supplying weapons to the Israelis. Still, Middle East politics and policy is not a simple black and white issue. I don’t agree with those who would sit out the election, but otherwise would vote for Harris, because they are “one-issue” voters. We don’t live in a one-issue world, and politics is the art of the possible, not the art of the perfect. I think they are shooting themselves in the foot…or maybe the neck.
Have you checked out the books Dr. Richardson has published? If you're looking for substantial and thought provoking material, that's a good place to start. One of her key observations was to relate the thinking of Civil-War era politicians to modern times and point out that the similarities haven't gone away. Donald is the latest symptom, while she keeps pointing to the disease.
As a Louisiana Republican I agree with you substance is what I need not attacks and emotional responses. To say Republicans have given up on Democracy is a bit much. I came here to try to understand please help me.
Good for you, Mike. I'm a lifelong New-Deal Democrat, and we probably disagree on many things, but not all the truth and value lies on one side, so it's good to listen to the other side, too.
It was Project 2025 that drove me to reconsider my political position. The idea of Christian Nationalism scares me to death. I have honest questions about Democratic ideals and like Frazier “I’m listening.”
I appreciate everyone who reaches across to the other side, even if just trying to understand and not necessarily conceding anything. And I realize "the other side" suggests the ideology is binary, which just isn't so. No point of contention is binary, each having complicated facets. But we simplify our slogans and sometimes our comments - especially when addressing a large and diverse crowd - because substance can defeat getting the main point across. You have made a point on which a substantive conversation can grow. Thank you, I hope it bears fruit! Project 2025, civil servants pledging allegiance to Donald personally, "dictator for one day," partisan rulings by SCOTUS that relieve Donald specifically from obeying the law, extreme jerrymandering, and more support our fear of ending Democracy in this country.
I’ve watched most of the key speeches at the Democratic National Convention on Monday and Tuesday and am still digesting it all. There is still Wednesday and Thursday to go. I am going to avoid making sweeping conclusions or oracular pronouncements about what the Dems and Harris/Walz will or will not do if elected, and whether or not their proposals are detailed enough until the convention is finished. Even then, political conventions are typically more show than substance, designed to rally and motivate the troops. I imagine more info will be rolled out between the end of the convention and the election, as well. I think Prof. Richardson’s Letters are useful in summarizing and putting things in historical context.
Thank you all. I feel instructed by your replies. Richardson's depth of historical knowledge may give her the right to full-throated endorsement to the Democratic Party's current agenda, but the MAGA rank and file, if not their leader, have wounds and sorrows that we can't dismiss. Their expectation, fostered by the good times following WWII, that that everyone in America is on an escalator leading to greater and greater affluence is one the Dems are still promoting. Much could be done, with government programs like those of the New Deal, and heavier taxation on corporations and the rich. But capitalism is now global, and they might be able simply to desert the U.S. and take their growing economy elsewhere. Finding a balance between wealth-creation and -distribution is a problem that Dems are chary of enunciating explicitly, and that their own billionaire backers won't support. Or am I wrong?
Gratitude to you HCR and every TruthTeller on this planet. The history of both harming and helping must be told, shared and remembered. We all have only so many chances and this election, this Democratic choice of Harris/Walz belongs to us and America NOW.
Wonderful.