My 2 cents

[hedgetrimmer]

Hi,

We're pushing hard for the past. Clinging to dreams, ideas and feelings that propelled us to be enraptured with the political process. Yet the future that sits before us is entangled in this past. As we hold to past performers and career politicians we are missing the fundamental ground swell this country wants.

This country wants change. It doesn't want career politicians.
If it did it would not have elected either Obama nor Trump.
As we sit here grasping for contenders of an era that has gone by the future gets further ahead and we fall deeper behind.

As a nation we need to embrace tomorrow.
We need to protect our own in policy and transform our understandings to create policy for the ever changing world so that everyone feels safe.

However, it requires us to be brave. It requires us to step into the new. To step into changing the status quo and reflect the populous. The populous will speak and when they do it will be against the status quo.

As a man I know said after voting for Trump, "I know I've got to hold on because it's going to be a hell of a ride but we can't keep doing this." He was a lifetime Democrat.

I'm for Yang. I agree with Yang's assessment that we need to stop talking about Trump. Lets start talking about our candidates and recapture this election cycle.

Be well, hedgetrimmer

[Sherman A1]

1. Eloquently Stated

[hedgetrimmer]

6. Thank you

But is that enough?

[Sherman A1]

12. Perhaps, Perhaps Not

But, it certainly a good start. I see Yang as being about 3 steps ahead of the entire field in his thinking as based upon his policy proposals. They are the direction in which I believe we should be both discussing and headed, which I why I support his campaign, posted all his policy suggestions here & in the Yang Group and have donated what I can to it.

[Ferrets are Cool]

2. I do agree. We must find someone to run who has the charisma of President Obama....

that is not easy. I could be made to believe that he was a once in a lifetime candidate.

[hedgetrimmer]

8. Charisma is part of the package

Obama was a relative outsider whose words were seductive.
Trump was a relative outsider whose words were seductive.
The discontent in this country is giving rise to populist ideology.
That in turn, regardless of the status quo will override all prevailing dissenters. This generally comes to an authoritarian process with revolution or war. We can redirect that energy but currently it seems to be the direction of our country.

We have overwhelming amounts of corporate money buying our politicians and writing our bills that become laws. Our courts are stacked to benefit a small group of people. Discontent is the prevailing winds of this country. We heed it and ride that sail full of wind or we become those embattled in the aftermath of another sail that did take heed. Its not doomsday, but we're heading there.

[guillaumeb]

3. HRC received far more votes than Trump.

And "new" is not synonymous with "better".

But I do agree that we must have a long term outlook and long term goals.

[hedgetrimmer]

5. She did!

We've got gerrymandering... Amongst other issues...
None of that ought to have held back victory except for discontent.

New is definitely not synonymous with better.
Regardless of how much advertising thrusts that idea into our psychs.

[redqueen]

4. I completely agree with you of course

Half the country doesn't vote. They either actively hate politics / politicians, or they just don't believe anything really helps them with the issues that affect them most immediately.

Yang's candidacy speaks to those groups. His platform is focused on the future. His policies are not just addressing the same problems we've been discussing for years, but also the ones that are only just starting to affect us.

The choice is clear to me. He's our best candidate to beat Trump imo, hands down.

[hedgetrimmer]

10. Its not too hard to see.

The future is ours to win or lose.

[stopdiggin]

7. sorry, but the average voter doesn't have the slightest idea

what he wants .. and the average citizen even less. The problem with listening to people that say they want "change" .. is that for half of them will mean voting Trump, and half of them it will mean Warren. So .. the next time you run into somebody that is voting for "change" .. you can be pretty sure they have pudding for brains. We're stuck with em' .. but that doesn't mean we should be paying a lot of attention to what they say.

[hedgetrimmer]

9. Don't know what you're sorry for...

Its not that your saying anything different than I did.

I don't think that "pudding for brains" considers warren a change.

And that vast group of people who wanted sanders in 2016 and got bamboozled aren't going to be happy with another routing. Because that will be just more politicking.

The people of this country want change ... And if they are pudding brains I'd prefer for them to vote for a progressive then an authoritarian who's promising change.

[stopdiggin]

11. perhaps we share more than I thought

but I am NOT a big fan of the "we need somebody to shake things up" crowd. I think that kind of unthinking nonsense went a long way toward getting us where we are right now.

If you have specific actions in mind, fine .. if you're just voting for change .. without any notion at all what that means, other than "not this".... I'm heading for the exits