Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Defeats Joe Crowley In Major Upset" video.

  1. It gets expensive if you must pay the campaign workers. And the whole money in campaigns circus is not meant to provide a living for lowly staffers. The business model is to funnel money into the pockets of media, consultants, strategists, TV stations. - These are the places that also provide a part of the jobs for ex-politicians. Some are voted out and need provision, some do politics just as preparation for such careers. Sanders was asked what he was surprised about in his campaign - he said the number of consultants that offer their services. He is long in politics but he had never that much money to spend, they calculated with 30 millions and got over 200. And I read a story headline where a self-funded newcomer in the D primaries was told that she had to sign a pledge to hand over 80 % of the donations to a certain "consultant". Likely in order to get their endorsment - or that they would not work against her. That is ONE aspect, it becomes a self-serving circle-jerk, it is not even about winning anymore. That is one of the reasons why the Clinton campaing was so utterly clueless. I think Bill was the only one who had second thoughts. He has got instinct at least.
    1
  2. No, no they totally get it ! -
    1
  3. Fairy godmother to Corporate Dems: Chose between 2 scenarios They can win the midterms in a landslide (so they can do damage control on Trump), in 2020 they win the presidency and get a supermajority in the Houses. Then they can SHAPE policies and the Supreme Court. Undo the damage caused by Trump. They can save the country, partially even the world (Global Warming) Getting reelected is EASY, campaigning is mostly pleasant, grassroots efforts. Their jobs, the salaries and benefits as representatives are secure. Oh - and they MUST switch to publicly funded campaigns, and small individual donations. No SuperPac Money. MONEY OUT OF POLITICS: Important. Also restrictions on the Revolving door. It gets much harder to cash in for pro Big Biz votes after they leave office. (Other Western "democracies" still have corruption and the politicians working for Big Biz because of THAT). So they must be content with the pay they are getting. And work for their constituency - not Big Donors. **************************** OR 2) They can KEEP the MONEY in POLITICS. They continue to get Big Donations for party leadership and individual campaigns. And the whole lucrative circus for ex-politicians continues (incl. them becoming part of the election game, in media, as strategists or consultants) There are higher risks involved, one can lose a seat - therefore it is important to have served the party leadership + the Big Donors loyally. Then they will provide cushy jobs and lucrative contracts for ex politicians. Oh and they might not pull off a win in the midterms (or not enough to prevent Trump from packing the Supreme Court with right wingers). And they might hand ANOTHER TERM to Trump damned be the country. **************************** The Corporate Dems can chose only ONE scenario (with all pro and cons of the package) What would the Democratic Party establishment choose ? Well, scenario 2 - MONEY - OF COURSE. P.S: Scenario 1) is realistic (even the super majority). - If they would rally behind a Sanders platform in a BELIEVABLE MANNER they could win convincingly and with increasing numbers.
    1