Immigrant kids in cages. IDF sniping Palestinian kids in the back. Irreversible climate change. 5-4 or maybe even 6-3 Supreme Court for the next 40 years. The return of white nationalism across the world.
Yeah this is what your slow reform has gotten you. No thanks, let's try something else.
Your "something else" isn't coming. We're stuck with what we have. The only method to stopping that is with the Democrats, which means working in the system.
She can't maintain her image if she doesn't broadcast it or has to cover it a mask. This:
She has find out how do this right, or she won't have a career.
Is not how revolutions happen. It's how stagnancy happens. Try to change the system slowly and the system changes you. This is the nature of systemic corruption. This is why reform is so difficult, so seemingly impossible. And by the time your slow reform makes it to the courts, its already been so watered down that it doesn't address fundamental issues, and you need to wait another 50 years to try again.
Reagan and Thatcher changed their countries significantly from their positions in government. It's a powerful influence, one progressives and socialists haven't mastered. Corruption can be an issue, I agree. The problem here is, this is all we have at the moment. You're not going to get a better chance at reforming the system then now with the Justice Democrats. This is winning idea, however, you only win by learning how to turn the system to your ends. Slow reform is slow, arduous, frustrating work, and it's better than nothing at all.
Meanwhile, people are suffering and hurting all those 50 years and the system is strengthening itself the entire time. This is the story of the Civil Rights movement and why, 50 years later, we now need BLM to remind us of the old struggle.
I didn't say I liked it, I'm informing you of how politics goes in the US and other countries. The system won't disappear by ignoring it, it does need to be fought and reformed but doing it poorly helps nobody. Socialists have tried working outside the system and failed miserably, now they have a chance at affecting the government from the inside where it matters.
Her being an "effective politician" would be great, but it's not her pivotal role in my imagination. I want her to be a revolutionary icon yes, being a successful politician is only a step towards that goal. It allows her to get a lot of cred and if she can navigate the political labyrinth while keeping her principles intact, wonderful.
It should be, as that is what her job is. You want to make change? This is the only method how to with her position. Had she wanted to be a symbol she could have become a high profile activist, revolutionary or media personality, but it'd never get the same opportunities she has to where she is in congress. That credibility isn't potent in congress where the real things happen, she's highly outnumbered there.
She can skip the part where we revolutionize the government and just wave a magic wand that says "reform".
That's not an option.
Again, how well have these "politicians using policies to get things done" been working out for us? The historical record is against you. Punditry is the current state of American politics, it's you who wishes it were otherwise. I've already made my peace with it.
History tells me there have been more reforms from my side than yours. The system has been awful, and there are numerous drawbacks. I'm not doing this because I want to, I'm doing this because your side hasn't given me any worthwhile options to pursue. So I'm stuck with Democrats fixing climate change, gun rights etc they're the only party close to getting anything done realistically.
