Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "The Damage Report" channel.

  1. and what has that to do with the fact that the capitol was stormed, she was a target, and she and the staffer feared for their life and rightly so. And the "police" officer (if that was one) behaved either unprofessionally and unhelpful, or he was a sympathizer of the Trumpists and delighted in intentionally scaring them. Did not go so far that he would neglect to tell them to got to the other building (but no specifics where to go, how to be safe, nor did he offer to escort them). Not that he really wanted them harmed or killed - but he wanted to freak them out. Or he was just poorly trained and not very professional, and lost his cool. Or it was one of the Trump crowd posing as officer - but he did not want any casualties "just" a show of force.
    3
  2. Call me crazy, but isn't the job of a fighter pilot also risky ? And the U.S. I think ordered their personnel a few years ago to get small pox vaccination. It is not used and necessary in first world countries for civilians, around the mid 1970s, early 1980s they thought it had become extinct. Although the virus can survive in pockets). But the U.S. government started vaccinating again because they feared that could be used against their troops. If an enemy would spread the virus the unvaccianted would be helpless.
    3
  3. Also best wishes from Austria. The vaccines did not come one minute too soon, did they ?
    3
  4. Is low information the same as "poorly educated" ? - I seem to remember a certain presidential candidate of the Republican party that declared that he loved the poorly educated.
    3
  5. She is a Repub. She thinks SHE will not die if she gets it. Congress / Senate are older than the average population, but SHE has not problem. And of course some delusion about the risks for others on top. but if her life would be in jeopardy she might be able to process information correctly.
    3
  6. The cops will execute them. And they will cover for the right wingers if THEY are the aggressors.
    3
  7. Having fun with the phantasies ? (when Trump refuses to go and has to be persuaded to leave and a family "situation"Quentin Tarantino style ensues ....) He clearly had one or the other sleepless night to come up with that.
    3
  8. To think how much Obama - the establishment shill - has cost the U.S. in time and misery. he could have raised hell to get GOOD healthcare reform and a bailout for the citizens and not the banks. But he sold out already on the campaign trail in 2008. It showed in cabinet nomination, in action (or lack thereof) later proof with the Podesta emails.
    3
  9. i wish you the best, especially your father. If you do well, you at least have some immunity.
    3
  10. Get over yourself. By all means adjust your straps so it fights more loosely, (or wear a scarf) - it will decrease efficiency somewhat - but better than wearing none. So so out of respect of those who do work in retail and medicine and put up with much more hassle. Wear the damn thing. Even the not so professional masks help somewhat (if they only prevent 10 - 30 % of infections that culd happen during daily life interactions that is good - everything to shave off a few percent to get under the reproduction number of 1.
    3
  11. Take your meds. And thanks for commenting. it helps with the youtube algorithm.
    3
  12. Global warming (the average ! yearly ! global ! increase of temperature) triggers disruptive Climate Change. It IS warmer on the globe (that means MORE energy is in the system, so buckle up) even though Texas is freezing for a week. At the end of the year 2021 Texas might well have record setting high average yearly temperature: a too warm spring and a summer heat wave can easily compensate for a bad week in February. That's the thing with AVERAGE higher temperatures. It does not mean there will never be snow or cold areas or seasons. We just have the "balmy" temps in the Arctic (well, for the Arctic winter !), the recent more erratic distribution of heat is a little inconvenient for how we set up our settlements, and our needs for temps to be as usual (or many parts of our technology can malfunction), rain, agriculture, how much rain we can handle before we get flooding and mud slides, etc. Texas could also have gotten roofs caving in because of the snow load, try rain on snow, then more snow, refreezing it all. in exteme cases that can cause problems in regions that do have cold winter. That to all the cavalier people that say: "I do not believe it is getting warmer, but even if - so what ? I like it warm." No ... we are very dependent on stable and predictable conditions and our high level of technology exposes us in countless ways to components malfunctioing and little things going wrong. Then you have a cascade of failures and have a state of emergency. the same event would not have caused problems in Michigan or Vermont. But in Texase they are not used to. Likewise Michigan might get into trouble with unusual heat waves (that would make a Texan shrug their shoulders). it is what he planned for and set our systems up for. The "normal" (with a known range for extremes) changes. A nuclear power plant had problems with "instruments" and they shut it down. One of two in Texas - and those are alway LARGE providers. WTF.
    3
  13. At least - he could have proudly stood by his insult. He wanted to say it, and he does not regret it - so why not have to guts and be seen as what he is ? Coward ! and deflecting to wife and daughters !
    3
  14. That's in general a Repubican thing: unless it does not AFFECT THEM it is not valid. they cannot extend their compassion to the abstract other, and a pandemic that is not tangible for them is no problem. To be fair it was like that for me when I heard about the problems in China, or even Italy - I currently live in Europe. China is FAR AWAY. The dictatorship had obviously covered up something, not responded fast enough, the local healtcare services (of European countries) are of first world countries, ..... There had been former epidemics, pandemics - and Europe and the U.S. had always been lucky (in hindsight, one warning shot after the next) It hit Asian countries more and then the outbreaks were containined. Just about - SARS-Cov-1 of 2003 anyone ? Must have been slightly less contagious, or the incubation period and how contagious people are when they are unaware that they are infected must be different. so it was possible to contain that with a serious effort. We were lucky with MERS (another corona virus, 2012 or 2013), that is nasty, hospitalization and mortality rate high - but it is not very contagious. Even when I heard that Italy was increasingly worried / in trouble I still was detached, cavalier. Most European countries dragged their feet too, I mean WHO wants to shut down the country and demage the economy. But then they got into overdrive. France was from "wash your hands" to "you need a good reason to be seen outside" within a few days. When nations all around the globe go in shutdown it is time to update.
    3
  15. the other reason: the stimulus package does not put small businesses at ease. They and regular citizens got crumbs, big biz is being favored. If the government would give help to those who really need it, they would not object as much to the close down. For some it might be the difference between pest and choleara so to speak.
    3
  16. So these people offer themselves up for herd immunity. Sadly they will also stuff the hospitals (also for other diseases) and put reasonable workers in medicine, and retail at risk. Or neighbours and family that are not plain stupid.
    3
  17.  @lesleyedgley8371  Actually the U.K. is one of the few developed countries that does NOT have a central register of residency and therefore automatic voter registration is not possible either. Under Blair (I think) they tried to get a central reigster, but then someone brought up how the Nazis had used centralized registers - and that was the end of the attempt. So the admin and civil services continue to be based on the SS number. The fact that the UK does not have a central register of residency (with nationality, or legal residency status as one of the listed traits) also came to harm the legal and longtime migrants from Jamaica. The info about their legal immigration in the 1960s would not have been purged, (or it would have been worked into a new database before being destroyed), they could have defended themselves much more easily if the UK would have updated to a more modern system.  So the voters in the U.K. MUST register to vote (almost all other nations print the voter lists based on the constantly and immediately updated central register of residency. That also has the names of all new borns and the place where the minors live with their paretns. And 18 years later ! (or 16 in some countries) they will print the invitation letter to vote for them, too and will add them to the voter lists. In the UK people have to register when they become legal adults and also when they move. But it is very easy to register to vote, and to update that registration. When people are not sure whether they did or did not update - they just can repeat the process (it overrides the older registration so to speak). Millions changed their registration in the last 2 elections (for parliament) within only 2 or 3 weeks. And almost all did it online, so litte effort and also little adminstrative cost for the government. In the election in 2017 where May lost the majority the government even had a catchy ad of how to register to vote and how long that would be possible (" ... hurry up - and tell your mates ")
    3
  18. How many guns were confiscated ? - Well how many (better: ho few !) persons were even searched ? - If they went away, cops let them gladly go. Very few arrests were made AT the ground. Almost all were made later and after analyzing footage and likely the interrogated ratting each other out. An intruder determined to use guns later on legislators, would not necessarily show them before. Why would they, police let them roam the building for the most part. In DC there are strict gun laws, so I guess they knew that they had to hide them. That was the mistake Ashly Babbit made. Police in soft uniform let them get beyond the perimeter, let then later run in the building no guns drawn. Other police was in riot gear at strategic points, with shields and maze - but they also did not draw their guns. When she saw that officer so close, only separated by a locked door with large glass panels, he was pressed at the left side of the ward as to not be an easy target from afar of the other side of the ward, and he had the gun drawn - she should have paused. After all she was an airforce vet. This officer behaved differently. Instread she cast a short glance over to him and continued to eagerly crawl throught the hole in the glass they had just broken. There was the door in the middle, the fixed panel at the sides, almost instictively they broke the glass in the right one of the fixed panels. The one the "farthest" away from the officer. Many rioters did use weapons - but if they had started using firearems in the crowd it would have become a blood bath. Police was afraid to use firearms - they should have shot at legs before and very early on when the first trespassed the perimter. We have seen that some waived them through, or at least they stood down and gave the intruders no trouble whatsoever. (Police can concede ground in Portland for instance w/o jeopardizing public safety, but NOT the building where they house a major part of the U.S. government !). Maybe a few warning shots (non lethal) would have deterred most of the crowd. If some of the rioters would have started shooting, police would have answered the fire.
    3
  19. The Russians are NOT a threat to U.S. democracy. They can't possibly compete with the domestic rigging and insanity or the sellout of corporate media.
    3
  20. fall 2013, Obama admin wanted to pass an infrastructure bill with simple majority. Guess WHO KILLED it ?? Manchin and 2 other Senators posing as Democrats. Needless to say before that Republicans had refused to be on board. Obama had offered the Grand Bargain putting SS on the table, but the Freedom Caucus = Tea Party wing were hell bent on not letting Obama have it, so R House speaker Boehner had to let that chance pass. This was about the vote so they would only need a simple majority. Manchin was elected in 2010 (special election, had been 5 years govenor before). In 2012 he endorsed Mitt Romney. 3 years in he helped nuke the infrastructure bill. you have to give it to him, he is not shy about throwing his weight around. VERY much unlike Progressives. Midterms 2014 did not go so well for Democrats.
    3
  21. The grad school student loses money for the time she already invested (and money) and having pics on social media is overstepping their right. I get that they would kick her out for having drug problems (obviously if she can handle that later). Likely it is a private school os she could sue for violation of her fist amendment rights.
    3
  22. As per the Wikipedia article * one officer (alone) tried to delay the first group of the mob that made it in and redirected them when they were already in the second floor (nearby the Chamber of Senate, that was not yet sealed or just in the process of being secured). That might have been the man shown in the footage. * Storm on the U.S. Capitol
    3
  23. Caucas states always have lower turnout than the primary states (and both are much lower than the general9. That said, I saw an exit poll where half said they participated for the first time in a caucus (it was 48 or 52 % don't remember which one were the first timers, doesn't matter anyway). In other words a LOT of people were activated. And you bet many of them went to Sanders. the early caucus did help to increase turnout - on election day in the general you have at least the whole day - but they had long lines, so that was not an easy process. It means something that people were willing to wait their turn.
    3
  24. Well, people did not "want" Biden they voted "not-Trump" - but thanks.
    3
  25. Where did they get the footage from (or did they later reenact the scenes)
    3
  26. a new business niche: working for campaings that primary sitting Democrats. - The campaigns are not going to get DNC/DCCC approved strategists and PR experts to fight those Republicans with a D before their name. Agencies that have a chance to get larger DCCC contracts will not dare to work for them. It was announced by the DCCC that such companies and persons will be blacklisted. But even before that - Cynthia Nixon had problems to hire staff - no one wanted to be part of the campaign against Cuomo, but at that time that was an inofficial rule only. After the AOC shock and after some other rebel rousers rocked the boat (Ilhan Omar comes to mind) they came up with that plan to hinder progressives and grassroots campaigns. It that may be a blessing in disguise. Meanwhile there should be some upstarts that cannot hope for contracts with the DCCC anyway. So they can as well get into this new niche and make it their own - which could mean they dominate it if they are the early ones. And progressives like AOC can flat out inform the base that it is a good idea not to donate to the DCCC but directly to the candidates. It was a good idea even before - but AOC couldn't tweet that out w/o provocation - now she can.
    3
  27. ebay seems to be better (also prices !)
    3
  28. + david the states organize the elections and have the ballots printed, the federal gov has no "watermarks" but some or all states used a QR code. The states. - Big words do not make it right, there is no algorithm that can prove what you claim (do you even know and understand what the word means ? you should not just repeat what you read in a blog, you should understand the claim that is made and all the words that are used). The Trump campaign could have had a recount in Michigan, they would have needed to pay because it was outside the margin for a mandatory recount. Funny how they did not want one.
    3
  29. "They have proof how 6 million votes were switched on election night." No, they haven't or the Trump campaign would have used it before court. There are still BALLOTS as backup. Now the voting machines in some states or counties cannot be verified on principle, and Republicans were super comfortable with that situtation. Plus: this is the situation in some areas in Tx and also of Ohio. Usually in R dominated areas or states. The states that were purple this time often have a R legislature and often also governor. If you mean to imply that the votes were flipped in the machines, it must have been done on R watch (no one flips votes in Oklaoma or Nebraska - red anyway, or CO and NY - blue anyway. If you mean to imply that the mail ballots were not counted correctly - that would be lame because they keep the ballots and can do a recount. Only the voting machines with no paper trail (like in Ohio) are highly problematic. I agree that they shouldn't exist - but that would only put a question mark on wins of Donald trump.  Many judges (incl. many appointed by R presidents, even appointed by Trump shot down the over 40 lawsuits of the Trump campaign, they lost all but 1 or 2 - and those won cases do not mean that the errors had any influence on the outcome, or that it was fraud. in 2020 Biden has 6 more in the popular vote. so that is where this claim comes from. Gullible Trump fans will believe everything.  Like 3 million illegals had voted for HRC so she had that margin of the popular vote. The guy that had brought up that nonsense was grilled in an interview said he would provide evidence, that was the last we heard of thim. The Trump admin set up a comission to investigate the "3 millions voted illegally" claim. They dissolved that quietly and w/o any final report. Of course not the report would have either stated with have found evidence or we have found nothing to back up this extrordinary claim. Plus: this would have needed to be prosecuted.
    3
  30. I assume interested persons fear retaliation from the system. Remember how few "dared" to endorse Sanders ? And it is possibly a thankless job if you do not pursue your own selfish interest. So ideallysuited for the darlings of the Big Donors and people that do insider trading and have partners that get rich in real estate while the wife is in politics. (case in point: Nancy Pelosi)
    3
  31. you are not NOW a Trumper you alway were. A decent person (even if Republican and even if against migration) would object to that.
    3
  32.  @barbiquearea  What makes you think he is much older than her ? She is not 18, could be a 30 year old in good shape (and lucky genes), and a bald head does not equal old. Some men lose the hair early and it looks better to shave the head alltogether.
    3
  33. 4 months and they hired 350,000 people between July and October 2020. At those rates Amazon spits out 1 million people per year. The U.S. has 330,000 million residents. But if you look at those who are in the group that would potentially work at Amazon (not in the upper 30 % income bracket. Blue collar, not a child or a retired person, and also not aspiring middle class but trying to earn extra bucks for college): They will be through with half of the potential applicants within a few years. Moreover for every person that has a very good or very bad experience you have 5 - 10 people that they are close to who learn about it. The more out of the norm the experience is, the more the (former) employees will tell others about their unusually good or bad experiences. I do not even understand it from the standpoint of greedy capitalism. Amazon working hard to build up a sizeable group within the voting age population who despise them (and will also rather NOT buy from them) because of their work experience. What company works so hard to alienate future clients ? and masses of voters ? Amazon got really big in the last 10 years. so there will be also an increasing number of those who kept up with the pace but at some point they get injured (because of the insane pace) or they burn out. The experience of having given it all over 4 - 6 years and then being spit out (after being worn down so it is harder to get and hold any other job) will embitter their former employees. So in that case 10 or 20 people will learn what a sweatshop Amazon is. What is the endgame here ? Creating a class of angry voters that are convinced across the nation that Amzon must be reigned in ?? Greed does not explain it. qhen the former bosses throughout most of the era of industrialization ruthlessly abused workers and miners - those were not used to better treatment, could not share via social media and did not have the vote.
    3
  34. You can assume that 1 % of diagnosed cases (positive test) will die. Somewhere between 1 - 2 % seems a realistic number for most first world countries - I checked out several nations, it depends how they test, and some nations got a lot of their deaths in spring so that may also skew the numbers because testing was not fully deployed.
    2
  35. High case number and high growth rate with that - the U.S. is likely going to have overwhelmed hospitals and not enough ICU beds. And then the mortality rate goes up. See Italy in spring. "Spreads like wildfire" beats "realistically we have much higher case numbers so the real mortality rate is not that high". They U.S. jumped in the last month to having 8 times more diagnosed (= tested) cases. If you wait you are going to get the high case numbers that easily counteract low percentages in mortality. It is a numbers game, and the dead and harmed people, and the high costs are an inevitable fallout of the high numbers (even though 99.xx % survive. Does not mean survive well or will have a full recovery). AND: there is no assessment of the long term health damage, the costs now for all cases or later for potential long term damage.
    2
  36. Have they voted ? I expect Trump to be aqcuitted. - One good thing. The "Democrats" that like to PRETEND they are so worried about bipartisanship are running out of lame excuses why they cannot end the filibuster. Or why they have to work WITH Republicans. (because they serve the same donors, that's why).
    2
  37. People will either rent from for-profit or non-profit sources (gov. or with gov. assistent). Non-profit can be much, much better than the private market - if done right.
    2
  38. Have ENOUGH offers and no scarcity. - I know the generational thing as well, it is testimony that these aparments are MORE AFFORDABLE. - But is the rational to make it HARDER for people after prison (most are NON violent offenders and also not sexual offenders) to find a place to live. Do you want them to resort to crime right away ? Hang out maybe with more questionable buddies because they cannot go and stay a time at their families place ? If they landed themselves in prison and the family has public housing - they do not have money (an affluent middle class offspring would not have been to prison and can usually return to their family place, that is not an achiement they are just luckier). There is a chance they are not good in having their ducks in a row to begin with. And EVERY extra obstacle increases the chance of them slipping again. All ethical considerations aside. Do you know what prosecution and prison accomodation COST. - I heard numbers like 70,000 or 80,000 per year.
    2
  39. good that you got out of it. Now imagine a person can GET a good paying union job and CAN stay in the public housing, which would of course RAISE the level of the neighbourhood, would it ? you would have mix of lower and medium income people. The single moms and the fathers of the children fade compared to the TRILLIONS that the banks got (not only the bailouts, QE !!), bailouts for Big Auto (they closed the plants anyway after taking the Trump tax-cuts too), subsidies for Big Oil, the healthcare insurance industry and their profits are protected. The single mom children at least have their father in their life.
    2
  40.  @grahamgordon3210  multigenerational homes (see Italy and Spain in spring). It is easer to quarantine in a spacious house with 2 ! toilets and baths. More rural areas where also a lot of people live (so they do not infect each other because they meet less persons per day compared to living in a densely populated area. It is easier to maintin discipline if you have a garden etc.
    2
  41. Who has taught you that ? That is the first time I ever heard that claim and I can't imagine WHY that should impact rotation speed IF the poles would be ice free. (The ice caps have an impressive height but it is not the Himalaya). The amount melted right now would not prompt such effects anyway. The problem is that you get at a point of no return, the melting itself of ALL the ice would take a a few hundred years. Bad enough to raise sea levels within a few decades and different weather patterns, the fresh water affecting ocean currents etc. - and it does not matter what humans do then, it cannot be stopped.
    2
  42. She is angling for conservative votes. (Which I do not like - not in that regard, transparency and stuff, I think it is good when she appears on FOX to talk about regime change / wars - BUT: she broadens the base of voters that will vote in the Democratic primaries. She might activate voters that would vote for no other Democrat. That is good since the many candidates are sent into the race to take votes away from Sanders (does not seem to work, I am positively surprised that Harris does not well, I thought she could really challenge him. If Gabbard wins delegates, I think she would endorse Sanders - she will not win the nomination !), that could help him to win in the first round - no 2nd round and supererdelegates then.  And Sanders was right and principled to say something - took him long enough. She is no Russian asset. - HRC either has lost it - or this was a test run with low level targets with no little support who had already been somewhat smeared by the media. If they get desperate to contain Sanders he would be the next that allegedly has help by Russian bots and what not - and they would likely paint him is an unwitting asset. And: Tusli Gabbard really took a risk in 2016 by endorsing him.
    2
  43.  @TCt83067695  +Charlie talks about the "nuclear" option (not about the Obama deception). FDR used it against a right wing Supreme Court. They struck down one New Deal bill (the same court that had before 1929 decided that child labor was O.K.and the government could not ban it). so the admin of FDR saw it coming that the Supreme court might dismantle the New Deal - bill after bill. FDR announced that he considered appointing ADDITIONAL judges - which would have changed majority and composition of the Supreme Court (Dems had both houses and supermajorities). The constitution does not specify how MANY justices there should be. Public opinion was very much against the Court, they felt some pressure. The next decision was about the minimum wage, which the Dems had introduced. The court found it constitutional. And some justices resigned over the course of the next years. FRD had such a long time that he could shape the court although he never made good on the threat to "pack the court".
    2
  44. Biden could kick ass immediately. He did inherit a mess in many areas. BUT: Biden does not need to do anything (maybe a talking to to defecting Democrats behind closed doors), he could let his cabinet do the tour on media, with Sanders giving it a boost. Or talking to the unions. This is ON the SENATE. A few Senators that pose as Democrats are the obstacle. A friendly heart to heart talk in the White House does not take so long. FDR did not negotiate with Republicans, he negotiated with Democrats that thought the masses would have to suck it up and tighten the belt. He twisted their arms. Of course showing some action and fighting made him very popular, the first bills that were passed brought relief. So the president had MORE LEVERAGE. Over his party. The threat behind closed doors that he would campaign against them come next election so they would lose their seat, got even more weight. That is on the Republicans with a D to their name that hinder the Democrats even IF the voters give them all 3 branches of government. VP Harris gave WV local TV an interview. That was an encouraging start, I was pleasantly surprised even though that was the weaker plan B. But they did not increase the pressure. It was an one-off. The problem with plan B is that they can use the reconciliation process only twice (and that is with luck because the Trump admin did not pass a budget last year, so Dems can use 2020 and 2021 so to speak). But even better would have been to drag all of those that refused to end the filibuster. = Plan A. Plan B is also not applicable to all issues. It was originally meant to finetune the budget not to sidestep obstruction in the middle of a pandemic. 51 votes are enough and every amendment that is demanded gets 2 minutes to deal with. So the Republicans cannot hold it up with long speeches forever.
    2
  45. Senators Sinema and Manchin said that they would not vote to end the filibuster (the better plan A) under any circumstances. THAT is the green light for Mitch McConnell to obstruct. One other "Democrat" said he is against ending it BUT he could imagine it under certain cricumstances, if the Repubs are really obstructing .... . B.S. but at least he did not so openly enable them. IF the Dems were ALL willing to end the filibuster the Repubs might have caved - and they could let it in place. THAT was the intent of the little stunt of Sinema and Manchin to deprive the Democrats of leverage over Republicans. All Repubs and most Dems serve the same big donors. Which hate the idea that the unwashed masses get anything and certainly not with few strings attached. THAT is for the rich and big biz only.
    2
  46. He could have said he was in Ranger school. He tried to create an impression that was more formidable than that. To advertise himself.
    2
  47. Wait: Father works for Lincoln Project - of course Trump would fire the mother for that. And the daughter at 15 ousts the mother (bitches about her) and seems to have left ideas. Now that scared the parents out of their pants and back into private life :) It is delightfully absurd. Bannon and Conway were installed by Robert Mercer the billionaire that saved the Trump campaign in summer 2016 (money and organization and STAFF). He might sit that election out, so no reason to hold on to Conway. And Conway lead his campaign to a win, a narrow one but it was a major upset.
    2
  48. In January 2020 a new more contagious variant emerged, by March it conquered the world. (they found that out with some delay in April). Except for that variant it might have been one more "warning shot" - an epidemic that affected Asia, but could be contained there. If the new variant is now even more contagious that that ?? while NOT being more harmless. Holy shit ! The mutation virus we had so far (March 2020 till end of fall 2020) is estimated to have an R(0) of 2 - 3.5 (R Naught means: with no counter measures and as a new infection so no immunity by having survived one infected person would give it to 2 - 3.5 other persons). That is bad enough and already fairly contagious and enough to lead to exponential growth (as is obvious). If the SA/UK strain is now even MORE contagious than that .... I mean if it would be less deadly, cause less symptoms while replacing the former strain I would not complain. But we are not so lucky. Measles is one of the most contagious infectious diseases it has R(0) 12 - 18.
    2
  49. + Zooma Well if these are voters that are easily convinced and just lack information ("low information" voters) how come the Republicans do not have a blast with simply pointing out their record of service for most of the population ? ....... Low information also would mean: it is easy to come in with new and extra information. The arguments better be convincing though, and the message straightforward. People would need to see the advantage of voting for Republicans. both parties serve the big donors. Of Republicans I know only Ron Paul that was a honest actor (ideological for sure, I do not agree with many of his stances, but at least he was acting in good faith. And he had his own line on the War on drugs on regime change wars, the Patriot Act etc. he was no big donor puppet. Needless to say the party did what they could to derail his run for president. His son on the other hand is a sorry example of a politician that knows better, but has been captured. the Democats have a few good people that are not bought and paid for shills. The Left that you are against are the honest players in the game. They must join the D party, the 2 party system does not allow them to be Independent or to run under another party, it would be even harder to win elections against the Big Donor candidates.  It does not matter if you agree or disagree with a politician, it is a BODY OF REPRESENTATIVES. There should be diversity of opinon, and experiences. As long as they are not plain stupid, are not too ideological (they will come from their point of world view and that is good: it REPRESENTS a part of the population, so some ideology is fine). The most important point: they should be content with what the taxpayers pay them for their work and not chase the donations of the big donors. Or the cushy jobs for ex politicians (an often overlooked but MAJOR toxic incentive for elected representatives to betray their constituents).
    2
  50. + Zooma As for the well informed voters, that have wisened up to the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine of D and R on behalf of the big donors: Those voters know that the most important elections in the U.S. are the DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES (held by a private organization the Democratic party, that can override the will of the voters, cheat and break promises btw - see law suit regarding the 2016 primary). Corporate Dems and Republicans have the same big donors. And serve THEM. Those interests rarely align with the well being of the general population, but the big donor interests almost always take precedence (and if not, it takes an epic struggle of grassroots). Low information voters of both parties have not yet understood the good cop / bad cop routine. I get that many affluent and rich people vote Republican, they protect their interests even better than Corporate Democrats. If a person has no patriotism (no, I do not mean the fake display, you cannot declare to love your country when you do not give a crap about the people in it). Affluent voters that are only motivated by selfish interests, that care about their family and inner circle but no one else, and do not give a damn about the country (or the well being of the troops for that matter) will be well represented by Republicans. These are not enough votes to win elections, it is one reason the Republican party since Nixon started to specialize in all kinds of fringe groups, actively attracted racists (the former Dixiecrats that were pissed off by the Civil Rights legislation). The Republican party got more and more fringe in the process, too. With voter suppression and gerrymandering and a strategy of death-by-a-thousand cuts in voter suppression they could hold on to power. Of course a New Deal style Democratic party that would not constantly betray their own base could easily defeat Republicans. (but the Democratic leadership has betrayed their base in 1968, and in 1968 and 1972 undermined their own candidate in the general because they were not lusting enough for war ... so nothing new here. And that was before money in elections totally captured U.S. politics.The Corporate Dems also use voter suppression - in the primaires. Same tactics as the Republicans use on a larger scale in the general. The Corporate Dems would like to win the general too of course. But keepint the donors happy and keeping their money coming in is even more important. If a candidate does not "get that" the party leadership will straighten them out (and use their excellent and incestuous contacts to the Corporate media to derail their campaigns). The big donors pay the Democrats to win primaries, not necessarily the general. The big donors had it with Trump though, this time they cared who would win the general, Trump is just too uncough, unpredictable and inept for their liking and also drew too much attention of the voters (the big donors do not like the unwashed masses to vote or to get organized. Lower income people not voting and not paying attention to politics and giving up on politics suits them just fine). After the primaries the ballot will offer the "choice" between a spineless careerist Republican Lite (aka Corporate Democrat) and a fierce ideological Republican. Pro or against safe and legal abortions, gun control, gay marriages, ..... whatever. The establishment of both parties is riling up the base with issues that do not cost the big donors profits and the donors do not care what comes out of it. The base is supposed to get all riled up about guns, abortions, LGBTQ rights (One or the other side of the medal). Last but not least Identity politics (white nationalism and right wing grievance messaging is a version of that (War on Christmas anyone ?). The Dems have a different version of identity politics. The masses are supposed to be happy if they are screwed by a person of color or a female. All those wedge issues that the donors allow their shills to run on, are supposed to make the base forget that almost all politicians work for the special interests and constantly screw most of the citizens in their service for the big donors.
    2