You are not logged in.
One concern is that if Democrats call themselves "Democratic Socialists" or in any way embrace socialism, then they won't get elected. Americans will not elected a communist government, or anything that smacks of communism.
In 2014 professors Martin Gilens (Princeton) and Benjamin Page (Northwestern) published a study. They analyzed over 20 years of data to measure how voter preferences affect federal legislation. They found Congressmen do not care what voters say. They do not care how many voters contact them on a bill. Zero impact. But then they analyzed the data gain, this time only including donors who had donated $1 million or more to their election campaign. There was a direct correlation. America is not a democracy, America is a plutocracy. That means rule by the rich.
The rich controlled both the Democrat and Republican parties. It didn't matter who was elected. Then Donald Trump. He promised to "drain the swamp". Well, he did eliminate influence by those who bought and paid off Congress before Trump. However, Trump replaced one swamp with another swamp. One group of rich people were replaced by a different group of rich people. Trump still doesn't care what average voters want.
So who is going to actually "drain the swamp"? Senator John McCain et al passed a law closing a loophole in election spending limits. The law restricted third party spending. One group called "Citizens United" wanted to campaign against Hillary Clinton. They didn't like the law that said they can't spend however much money they want. They appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Chief Justice Roberts completely rewrote the case, then sat as chief justice hearing the case that he himself rewrote. Rather than seeking permission to spend money on billboards in one county, it became a broad principle that created Political Action Committees (PACs) and Super PACs. So when Congress tried to solve the problem, Justice Roberts undid all that work. He didn't just perpetuate the problem, he expanded it.
I'm still not hearing any American politicians address the real problem.
Offline
Like button can go here
socialist for the people and not at the government control...
Project 2025 is a 900-page conservative policy blueprint titled Mandate for Leadership, published by The Heritage Foundation alongside former Trump administration officials. While Donald Trump distanced himself from the plan during his campaign, his administration has enacted numerous executive actions and policies that closely mirror its core proposals.
Executive Power and the Federal Workforce
Reclassify tens of thousands of civil service workers as political appointees to ease terminations and instill political loyalty.
Bring independent regulatory agencies and the Department of Justice under direct presidential control.
Build a database of vetted conservative personnel to rapidly replace career federal employees.Dismantling Federal Agencies
Move to abolish or heavily downsize the Department of Education.
Restructure or scale back agencies like the FBI and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Terminate all Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) offices and programs across federal departments and the military.Immigration and Border Security
Launch mass deportation operations and targeted immigration raids.
Dismantle aspects of the asylum system and restrict humanitarian protections.
Challenge birthright citizenship through executive and legal measures.Reproductive and LGBTQ+ Rights
Restrict access to abortion medication, including efforts to revive the Comstock Act to stop mailing abortion pills.
Rescind federal guidance or policies protecting emergency abortion care and travel funding for reproductive services.
Implement restrictions on gender-affirming medical care, ban transgender individuals from military service, and remove gender-identity language from federal regulations.
Offline
Like button can go here
In Canada, education is provincial jurisdiction. There's a constant debate whether the provincial government should have more control, or school boards. For a long time it was back-and-forth. When I was a child, some years we had to write provincial exams at the end of the year. Other years not. I haven't followed a lot since I left university. Did get involved in 1999 when a candidate for provincial Premier promised to reduce post-secondary tuition, but didn't say how. I had been an instructor at a major community college in 1992, and had strong opinions based on when I was a student. I wrote a formal paper, and presented to the provincial Minister of Education. My ideas got corrupted, because university administration wanted to pad their budget. They didn't want efficiencies that made education more efficient, affordable and more accessible to students.
The point is the Canadian federal government is not involved with education. So I don't see why the US federal government has a department of education. Shouldn't that be state?
Terminating DEI is actually a good idea. When trying to get rid of prejudice, there were be a point where not all prejudice is eliminated, but any further DEI efforts will not be effective. Further efforts simply perpetuate prejudice by enforcing prejudice in reverse direction. This will result in backlash by those now prejudiced against. Once emancipation has gotten to a certain point, eliminate all DEI efforts. The goal is to ensure individuals are hired entirely and solely on their ability to do the job. Again, once blatant segregation and prejudice is eliminated, allow ability to be the sole criteria. The US passed that point years ago. So yes, it's long overdue to eliminate DEI.
The rest is shocking. "Scale back agencies like the FBI"? That's America's federal police. How can you scale back the FBI?
Offline
Like button can go here