1·
2 days agoThat’s all bipartisan system and predetermined positions. Can’t attack your own camp because at the pres race you’d hurt already choosen pres candidate and would be seen as your own camp’s traitor to target so-called allies. Even after she is irrelevant, for it gives a signal you can do this to everyone else, and gives free fuel to the opponent’s platform. Playing favorites in cases of infosec breachea seems wild, but here we are.
Since it was dropped in the heat of the race, I can get why it was downplayed as a rep-based attack on Hilary, but she’s still okay after all of that, and I fear, she is still pickable for the next pres race instead of any other better candidate.
He and Trump and GOP aren’t petty there. They inject more distrust about the whole idea of voting. Rich people and corporation can lobby, but they still can’t directly buy an election or a cabinet seat in the open. They spend a lot to push up some candidate after ensuring their loyalty, and it seems suboptimal to them. There is a golden moment where you probably can game the system to make max profits and then grab the bag and run. Because democracies are at least stable, and when they roll into dictatorships, you stop playing solitaire, it’s now blackjack and you are walking a thin line between bankruptcy and being shot dead by a firing squad, because your elected politician has too much power to be securely bought.
I feel like it’s disproportionally favors developing startups\companies\scams who need some boost to start to break even, or old blood that can tolerate some pain if they may consume every other actor on the scene.
There are benefactors to that, and they are the worst people on the market who would only accelerate the collapse for their short term gains.