Scattershots – 18mar19 (updated 21mar19)

George Rebane

Sen Liz Warren wants to reduce the size of big techs.  As we know, big corporations get that way and survive by practicing the fine art of corporatism.  That means essentially working with politicians and bureaucrats to buy competitive advantage through laws, regs, taxation, etc (all the ways that govt mangles markets) in exchange for contributing their monies through various channels to assure re-election success.  If Warren were an honest woman, she would know that corporations automatically resize themselves once you pull out the mechanisms of govt support.  IBM and GE discovered that for themselves.  There is nothing magical about big centrally controlled bureaucracies in the private sector being more efficient than the same organizational structures in government – both ultimately reach an inefficient size.  Corporations must suffer the uncompromising feedback from competitive markets, while governments – with the power of the gun – are immune to productive feedback and can keep on screwing up forever.  (more here)

TechTestJr 2019 was given on 5-6 March at the corporate campuses of AJA Video and Telestream (NC Tech Connection is also a corporate sponsor).  This year over 100 fifth through eighth graders took the STEM merit scholarship test which is sponsored and administered by the Sierra Economics and Science Foundation.  TTjr was launched eight years ago by Mr Mike McDaniel, and board member Mr David Pistone has been the director of TTjr for the last six years.  TechTest2019 for Nevada County juniors and seniors will be administered again this year on 30 March (9-1pm) in the NUHS Science Lecture Hall.  This is TT’s 13^th year as the county’s premier merit scholarship test for students heading for STEM majors in college.  The annual test is preceded by two seminars of which I gave the last one this past Saturday morning at NUHS.  (I have written the test and given these seminars since the beginning, and am now in the process of turning over the writing and reins of this project to younger turks.)  NUHS math teacher Mr Kevin Baker is the TT Academic Coordinator who will administer the test. (more here)

Union columnist George Boardman followed Clerk-Recorder and Registrar of Voters Greg Diaz off the rails with his 18mar19 column repeating the fake news with his “WHY DOES the Nevada County Tea Party want to discourage people from voting in the special election? Are they afraid the wrong Republican will win?”  This politically motivated error was covered in my last KVMR commentary, ‘Election Integrity – one more time’.  Mr Boardman’s insistence that he views our fables and follies “… from the center stripe” continues to bring a smile to those who can clearly see from which side of the road he continues to do his reporting.

[20mar19 update] Brainless Beto in the White House? Now there’s a jarring thought argued by David Marcus in The Federalist (here) “Beto O'Rourke looks a lot more like recent Democrats who won the White House than any other candidates. Don't underestimate him.”  And rubbing salt into such a wound, that lightweight promises to pick one of the Democrats’ female proto-communists as a running mate.  Can you imagine an O’Rourke/Warren or O’Rourke/Harris or … ticket?  Such a revoltin' possibility most certainly will cramp the cockles of me heart.

Reparations for blacks is on the Democrats’ marquee again.  All the usual collectivist congress critters are signing up for that proposal as a sure-fire way to insure the black vote in 2020.  Jason Riley asks “How can centuries-old oppression be to blame for problems that became sever only recently?” (here)  And no one dares mention the ‘reparations’ (e.g. Sec 8) that have been continually paid to blacks since the Great Society days, all to no avail as the Democrat mismanaged inner cities have become killing fields for drugs and crime, and home to millions of unmarried single moms trying to raise and educate their kids.  So we see once more how keeping them on the Democrats’ plantation works – they are always there, ready and willing, when their masters beckon with another manufactured social injustice.

[21mar19 update]  Democrats continue leftward march. The party is now starting to show some cracks as the more saner members try to put on the brakes.  In these parts the local lefties have been totally unaware of this massive ideological lurch which shifted into high gear under Obama.  These pages are replete with our leftwing commenters' arguments dunning the 'ignorance' of the conservative readers for not being aware that, according to their dim lights, the Dems have not moved, but it's been the Repubs who are drifting right.  This same knowledge base is amply reflected here in their other fractured assessments of the country's goings on.  Here' a hot flash for our lefties, the Repubs are also worried that their more mushy members are beginning to kowtow to the Dems' proto-communists. (more here)

Comments

[Todd Juvinall]

I was shocked that Boardman would side with Diaz on that fantasy. Just more diversion from a department that never gets it right since the 80's.

[Bill Tozer]

Re March 20 update: Beto

Throw out the stats, throw out all conventional wisdom, throw out everything the pundits are saying. Toss it along with intersectionally in the trash. A different POV worth considering. Dovetails with update link above. Recommended 4 minute video...
The opposing party chooses the candidate.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qcW8HFH6QxI

[scenes]

@9:29PM

Good video. Of course, enraging the opposition is it's own reward.

I did like the jaunty Irish hat on Beto. It was a good point that there'd have been a national media meltdown if they'd plopped down a sombrero on Ms. Cortez. One irony of modern times is that, not being a member of a protected class, the Irish are once again at the bottom of the heap. Being a whiter shade of pale has betrayed them.

Long Live the Beto Males!

[Bill Tozer]

Re update March 21

Yep, the old hippies and liberals here don’t see it coming, so it doesn’t exist. Because they say so. The children would never turn on their mentors, right? The only question is what percentage of the former “Democrat Party” are the Leftinista Leninsts? 30% or 40% or over half? That is something we will find out by 2024, 2028. One big economic collapse and the time table will be accerated for the Jacobins and Co.

I have switched my focus from the 30’s in Europe to the 1920s. It feels more like the 20’s than the 30’s in Europe.

[Bill Tozer]

Beto-Mania

https://www.facebook.com/DankTrumpMeme/photos/a.1709492152606613/2102914969930994/?type=3&theater

Now they are making Harley style black leather biker jackets with BETO emblazoned across the back.

[AVMan]

,,,[21mar19 update] Democrats continue leftward march,,, No worries.

,,,The ‘Democarat’ and ‘Republican’ parties are redefining themselves as they have done for centuries

,,,Many are moving from the Right and Left to become Independents

,,,How else are we going to get to 4 or 5 candidate/party elections unless the ‘R’ and ‘D’ parties fracture and (((maybe))) two new right/left but more centrist parties emerge???

[scenes]

AVM: "How else are we going to get to 4 or 5 candidate/party elections unless the ‘R’ and ‘D’ parties fracture "

Dunno why this is necessarily better, but I'll go with it.

We've already gotten what is basically a third party Presidency, but instead of the Beltway Republicans breaking off their own organization they've been towed in the wake.

Personally, I'm surprised that real multi-party systems exist anywhere. I would think that if you looked at it as a sort of game theory problem, you'll always evolve a dominant coalition party which is then responded to with another (sometimes). I'd have to look, but perhaps two party systems are a natural result of imperial heads of state. Looking at the various caucuses (cauci?) in Congress, a parliamentary system might well imply multi-party.

It seems to me that California state government is a good Petri dish for this. The highly dominant Democratic party is ripe for stronger splitting along geographic and ethnic lines. It isn't like a Hispanic group in LA has much to do with Google employees has much to do with whiteopia coffee-shop dwellers in Sierra Foothill towns.

[Robert Cross]

"Personally, I'm surprised that real multi-party systems exist anywhere." Multi-party systems are more democratic and erratic and usually require coalitions in order to govern... not to the liking of big moneyed interests who prefer the status quo (them in control) over all else. As Edward Bernays put forth in his book "Propaganda" (the founding document of the Public Relations industry), two party systems are ideal for the ruling class because the rhetoric and policies are easier to control yet give the impression of some kind of opposition when in reality, given the wide spectrum of potential ideas, both parties are still in the same ball park yet make mountains out of mole hills to promote the false dichotomy.

[Walt]

Have the Proggys forgot that going FAR LIB LEFT is what got Trump elected? Guess so.
And a little evidence of just what rabid LIBism spawns.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/seattle-homeless-crisis-historic-cemetery-overrun-with-drugs-and-prostitution-amid-worsening-problem

LIBS have turned Seattle into a third world shithole.

[scenes]

Angry Bob: "Multi-party systems are more democratic ..."

That brings to mind two questions. Why? and So? If democracy is desirable, we might as well all vote on the internet for every single law.

My guess is that multi-party systems are an effect, not a cause. There's an underlying substrate, cultural or otherwise, that causes them to form. You don't simply paste the idea on top of an existing system and get some sort of simplistic and desirable result. It's the kind of magic pill that reminds me of how flat taxes will save the world.

We may well evolve multiple parties, but I'm strongly suspicious that it'll be the result of mass Third World immigration. With increasing non-integration, people will tend to vote for people that look like them. Lee Kuan Yew had it right I think.

[George Rebane]

Well sumbich, there seems to be something that we may be able to agree on. As always, my pref is four or more parties in a democratic republic - never a democracy.

[Scott O]

Walt - The only thing the Dems care about is that they didn't carry enough states to win the EC and the presidency. They don't have to worry about how left-looney they have become as long as they can swing states like Texas and Florida into their house. With an increasing number of the brain-washed young turning 18 combined with changing demographics of the formerly solid red states (CA used to be a red state, remember?) and a failure by Trump and the Rs to do anything about rampant illegal immigration, I would say we can expect a Dem in the White House in the next term. The economy is always the joker in the deck and stuff does happen. Increasingly, free stuff has been the winning promise even if once elected the free stuff promoters end up doing nothing.

[Scott O]

scenes - "My guess is that multi-party systems are an effect, not a cause. There's an underlying substrate, cultural or otherwise, that causes them to form."
Amen.
Remember that Trump was actually a 3rd party who ran as an R but against the Dems and the established Rs. Lincoln and the Rs became a 3rd party as the Whigs imploded. If there is an actual need for several parties it will happen. As long as the Rs and Dems can put together a narrative that includes enough checked boxes for all sorts of disparate groups, they will be our 2 main parties.

[Robert Cross]

George 8:38 -- a true democracy is next to impossible to institute. Perhaps at some future point a secure internet voting system (if possible) may bring that about. Of course, that would require the powers that be allow such a system, which is highly doubtful. Those in power, regardless of party registration, aren't likely to give up the reins to the masses...too hard to predict..not good for the stock market. Then, as now only of greater importance, the issue becomes voter knowledge which is the elephant in the room. Voters now don't really know squat about what/who they are voting for and are easily swayed by persuasive appeals that often have no substance but rely on emotional responses rather than rational ones. Controlling the masses (steering the stupid in the proper direction) while giving the impression that 'voting counts' is in play, is what politics is all about. However, when the two choices are between twiddle dee and twiddle dumb as in a two party system, there really isn't that much difference in choice...except as painted by the message manipulators.

[AVMan]

,,,gimmee a break!!! Trump was not a 3rd party candidate!!! Bernie was a 3rd party candidate. If you run as an 'R' on the 'R' ticket you are an 'R'

[Walt]

Uh,, Dougy,,, Just who's ticket did the Burn run on? It sure wasn't the "Soclist" party. Third party my ass.
Even the Dems today are admitting they are "Socialist". Just a kinder, gentler Communist.

[AVMan]

,,,Poor Altered Walter,,,stuck in a mental ditch again

[George Rebane]

RobertC 929am - Yes, you have just rehashed RR's longstanding position on political parties and the American electorate. History shows that it doesn't take a 'perfect' democracy to destroy itself. However, it does sound as if you're in favor of such a democracy were a "secure internet voting system" to become available. Am I reading too much into your statement?

[Walt]

This should make our Anti-Semite on the ridge happy. LIBS showing their antisemitism is alive and well. Not one Proggy is going to AIPAC.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/03/22/donald-trump-blasts-anti-jewish-democrats-for-skipping-aipac-conference/

[Walt]

What's wrong Dougy? Forget that Bernie ran as a LIB?
Forget that DEMS rigged the election?
Sucks to be you.

[scenes]

Angry Bob:

"Then, as now only of greater importance, the issue becomes voter knowledge which is the elephant in the room. Voters now don't really know squat about what/who they are voting for and are easily swayed by persuasive appeals that often have no substance but rely on emotional responses rather than rational ones. "

A few questions for both Angry Bob and George.

Why does great voter knowledge improve the outcome of a large mass vote? How do you define the quality of an outcome? Why are more knowledgable voters less likely to be swayed by persuasive appeals?

[scenes]

...no doubt George has discussed some of this, but I'm not seeing a good way to find any pertinent articles aside from a brute force look through all of them.

[George Rebane]

scenes 1018am - 1) That is tautological issue and the premise of the value of education in our society. We always believe that smarter (more knowledgeable) people make 'better' decisions than dumber (less knowledgeable) people - and 'better' wrt their own utility. 2) 'quality of an outcome' is usually issue specific, and can be measured with any of several metrics. In general though, one widespread measure would be minimizing the aggregate level of regret that each voter feels after casting his vote and experiencing the result of the election. 3) More knowledgeable voters have more secure, persistent, and factually correct belief tenets than those swayed by dynamic emotions evoked by the last sound bite, especially if delivered by a widely hailed personage. (e.g. 'consensus science' on climate change). Thoughts?

[Bill Tozer]

The (Democrat) party is now starting to show some cracks as the more saner members try to put on the brakes. In these parts the local lefties have been totally unaware of this massive ideological lurch which shifted into high gear under Obama. These pages are replete with our leftwing commenters' arguments dunning the 'ignorance' of the conservative readers for not being aware that, according to their dim lights, the Dems have not moved, but it's been the Repubs who are drifting right.”——-Dr. Rebane

Think it was yesterday that someone in Sandbox said JFK could not be elected/ nominated today by the Dems, drawing the predicable retort of Reagan could not be nominated/elected today by the R’s. Totally disagree 100% with the latter, agree with the former.
Reagen stood for limited government, respect for law and order, reducing taxes as well as reducing the obscene burden of government and regulations on America’s citizens and enterprises, Reagen stood against illegal immigration and passed the one time amnesty (the amnesty to end all amnesties) in exchange for the promised “border security”. Reagen’s conservatism and beliefs of American Expectionalism and founding ideas stated in the DoI and Constitution remains to this day in the hearts of the Right.

JFK’s famous words are twisted in the minds, beliefs, and core values by today’s Left such to a extent for the Dem Party to unabashedly proclaim, “Ask what that government can to for ME.” And it is no longer asking, it’s demanding. Privileges have become rights as the foundation of today’s Left.
Let’s see how far the Left has moved to the far left...yesterday’s “Radical Left.”

The Left today is afraid of the Constitution.
-Destroy the Electoral College and you destroy the Republic and, by extention, you destroy minority protections.
-Stack SOCTUS to bypass the Legislature to achieve desired goals and separation of powers.
-Demand Government do for its citizens what they should and could for themselves.
-every Dem candidate has announced they will boycott AIPAC, a hard line in the sand not to be crossed.
-open borders, a threat to sovereignty and rule of law.
-Assaults (pun indeeded) of the 2nd Amendment.
-It’s has taken a EO by Trump yesterday to protect the right of free speech on campuses of all places, ROFLMAO. Like, why did it take so long? It should have been a no brainer. Attacks on the 1st Amendment.
-The 1st Amendement stops where the group’s feeling begin.
-Nancy Pelosi said a year or two ago there is no room in the Dem party for pro-life women. We are no longer debating abortion, but the debate from the Dems is now filicide.

I could go on, but overall, the Left has moved, the right not so much. The reason a reasonable person like Howard Schultz would not draw any of the Leftinistas in 2020 is because he would tell the children, “No”. No, that high tax rate would be counter productive, no to this and no to that Leftinista idea. The Left does not like being told no. The Left does not believe that the inmates should not run The Asylum.

To be fair, the sole reason we have a Speaker Peloski today is because of moderate congressional districts. As the Blue State controlled Dem party becomes the Democrat Socialist Party, the old Dem moderates will be crushed. The Blue Mob takes no prisoners, nor compromises. As the middle class is being carved out in CA, the old liberals and Dem ‘party of the working man’ is also being carved out. The Regean Democrats, the Blue Dog Democrats have some choices to make.

Awhile back, Steve wondered on these pages why the R’s (us racists dinosaurs) are so obsessed with Law and Order or lawbreakers. Well, it’s cause the R did not move. We still believe in telling the children,”No.” No dessert until after you eat your veggies.

31 seconds, replay
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgle_7BhlHI

[AVMan]

,,,poor Altered one,,, you fail!!!
Hillary was nominated at the D convention and ran on the D ticket. Trump was nominated by the R convention an ran on the R ticket. Trumpski was not a 3rd party candidate. He is the R's hopey-changey candidate. Come on buddy,,,think hard,,,you can do it. Dig your way out of that mental ditch!!!

[Walt]

Teachers get a dose of realism. Seems many prefer to wait for the real thing.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Teachers-were-reportedly-shot-with-pellet-guns-at-13706727.php
Sheriff's deputies directed teachers at a Twin Lakes School Corporation elementary school in Monticello, Indiana, into a room four at a time, told them to crouch down and then shot them execution-style with pellets in rapid succession, according to Zeheralis's testimony.

ALSO
New Zealand bans 'military-style' guns after mosque attacks
Missouri student charged for alleged 'upskirt' photos
"They were injured to the extent that welts appeared and blood was drawn," according to Zeheralis's prepared testimony, which was shared with The Washington Post. "There was screaming."

Zeheralis said teachers waiting outside the room heard their co-workers screaming, and then were brought into the room and shot with the pellets. She said the teachers were told not to relay what happened to anyone.

The teachers union, which supports the safe-schools grants, called for an amendment prohibiting drills that include shooting at teachers.

"We believe adding a sentence prohibiting the firing of any projectile during these drills is a sufficient and necessary guideline going forward," Zeheralis's testimony read. "No one in education takes these drills lightly. The risk of harming someone far outweighs whatever added realism may be sought."

[Walt]

So Dougy is now saying Burn didn't try and run as a LIB?
He ran as a Dem seeking the DEM nomination. Nice try.
Beck to your ALT. head meds. GOD what a douche....

[scenes]

George@10:43 "Thoughts?"

I suppose when you boil it all down, I'm thinking about two separate problems....

Do groups produce better decisions than individuals?
Does the quality of the group particularly matter when the group is of sufficient size?

No doubt, the answer is 'it depends", but the second question looks answerable to me. Someone must have done that study, within reasonable boundaries of 'quality' of course.

A pure play in that kind of thing would be to ask a large set of stock market analysts where they think the market is going, and then ask the general public to make a prediction. I'm aware of (at least some of) the work concerning groups and the value of bits of information that individuals bring. It's not an area of expertise I hold, but it's interesting to the layman.

My take on the local multi-party proponents is that they have a desired result in mind and think that multiple political parties would cause that to happen. My own guess is that the Law of Unintended Consequences takes over. In terms of politics, I think that the main value to democracy is not that it produces particularly good results, but that it sometimes serves to form upper bounds to government. However, it could just be that it acts like a form of dike. Everything is fine until is isn't and when it isn't you get a disaster due to built up forces.

Perhaps the future will consist of separately trained AIs all voting against each other.

[Walt]

What? Google in the tank for LIBS? They seem to have done what Russia didn't do.
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/03/22/research-google-search-bias-flipped-seats-for-democrats-in-midterms/

Election meddling anyone?

[fish]

Posted by: Roberta Cross | 22 March 2019 at 09:29 AM

Of course, that would require the powers that be allow such a system, which is highly doubtful. Those in power, regardless of party registration, aren't likely to give up the reins to the masses...too hard to predict..not good for the stock market. Then, as now only of greater importance, the issue becomes voter knowledge which is the elephant in the room. Voters now don't really know squat about what/who they are voting for and are easily swayed by persuasive appeals that often have no substance but rely on emotional responses rather than rational ones. Controlling the masses (steering the stupid in the proper direction) while giving the impression that 'voting counts' is in play, is what politics is all about. However, when the two choices are between twiddle dee and twiddle dumb as in a two party system, there really isn't that much difference in choice...except as painted by the message manipulators.

That is the funniest paragraph you have ever left here Roberta.......you sound just like the rightist of right wingers.....what's next.....you going to piss Ozz off by penning a screed about "Operation Jade Helm"? Something about Chemtrails or Crop Circles maybe?!

Qanon directed me to write that!

[scenes]

BillT: "Think it was yesterday that someone in Sandbox said JFK could not be elected/ nominated today by the Dems, drawing the predicable retort of Reagan could not be nominated/elected today by the R’s. Totally disagree 100% with the latter, agree with the former."

I doubt that any candidate of either party prior to Obama (or really any leader back to the Sumerian King List) would be acceptable to the modern Democrats. They're on a train to some new place and want to take everyone with them.

An opinion I have is that they are similar to the Soviets in that it's an expansionistic philosophy. You either suborn everyone to your belief system, or your internal problems and dealings with your competitors eventually cause a collapse.

[Paul Emery]

Odds are the Dems will go with Biden scenes because he stands the best chance of defeating Trump, which is the #1 priority for the Dems. He also will have Hillary's financial base so money will not be a problem.

[AVMan]

,,,nice try there Walter,,,I said Bernie ran as a 3rd party candidate. You can be a Lib, a Rep, an Independent whatever...but if you run on the R or D ticket you are not a 3rd party candidate,,,

,,,again very admirable effort on your part,,,but epic fail!!!

This seems to be a pastime with your ilk. Alter the message to suit your agenda so you have something to argue about,,,

[Paul Emery]

So George is it a sign of intellectual enlightenment that the Republicans picked Trump as their candidate in the last election?

[George Rebane]

scenes 1130am - "Do groups produce better decisions than individuals?" Yes, it does depend on the individual competing against the group. However, short of pulling out a brown number, there is some definite benefit in soliciting 'the wisdom of the crowd' (q.v.), at least when the crowd is drawn randomly from a population.

"Does the quality of the group particularly matter when the group is of sufficient size?" I would agree with Bryan Caplan that the quality of the group always matters - so did the Founders, cf Jefferson's 'A nation ignorant and free ...'
https://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2008/07/how-elections-r.html

[Robert Cross]

George 10:13-- Ultimately in a utopian society a pure democracy would be the best form of government as it would neutralize special interest lobbying and actually allow people to govern themselves rather than delegate their power to representatives who tend to vote for the donors rather than their constituents. However human evolution is far from the point where such an idea is even feasable or desirable.

[George Rebane]

PaulE 1146am - Monday morning quarterbacking says 'very definitely', given who was ready to take on Hillary and Obama redux. Although I don't think that any conversation with you about Trump would be profitable, since ALL you see in the man is the alt-Left's vision of him as a corrupt womanizer businessman and liar. You should read a bit of presidential history, and VDH's latest book is a timely place to start.

[George Rebane]

RobertC 1159am - So what do you propose we do in the interval?

[scenes]

Angry Bob: " Ultimately in a utopian society a pure democracy would be the best form of government"

lol. I like that idea. Let's all vote on what the Federal Reserve fund rate should be.

My new proposed vote: Should all left-handed people be slaves to right-handed people? As Paul would say, YES OR NO?!!!

[Walt]

Proof positive. Dougy's elevator can't make it to the fourth floor, let alone the top. Right now the Burn is running as a LIB.
Before. He tried to get the Nom. as a LIB.
He got elected in nowhere VR. as an Ind. Yet sucked up to the Left.(Commie land)

Elect Burn,, turn the U.S. into Seattle.

Read the labels on your photo developer chemicals. You have been sucking up those fumes for WAY too long.

[Bill Tozer]

" Ultimately in a utopian society a pure democracy would be the best form of government"

Wow. A true democracy is Mob Rule. “Look at the apple, is it not pleasing to the eye?”
Many moons ago on day one of some business class at a small private university, my good Professor related a story that happened in Cambridge in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Harvard students packed the Cambridge City Hall and voted to build a bridge to Japan. Legal and lawful. Majority rules. The Dean got a call from the alders and told them, “Come on, knock that stuff off.” lol. Steamrolled.

The more I look history, the more I fear pure democracy. That is why education of the voter concerning our history is of upmost importance. Critical and crucial to be informed of the basics, if nothing else. Civics classes, if you will. The Constitution, our founding, the agruments made pro and con in framing our form of government. Minority protections go out the window in a pure democracy.

Me thinks on a boarder scale, some confuse (like moi in the past) confuse liberty with freedom. Liberty leads to lawlessness, chaos, anarchy, Mob Rule. We have freedoms that are protected against the liberties of the majorities.

*As a side note to the Bridge to Japan story, the point my good Professor was making that one does not need to have a viable business plan, basis for profit, or even a feasible idea to form a corporation. Not a requirement. It can be the stupidest idea on Earth.

The Left is always pushing for bigger and bigger and bigger government...with little to no restraints. Goodbye private property rights....among others. The GND’s social and environmental goals demand it, Every single Dem Party leader, star, spokespersons, and canidate are all pushing for bigger government....lusting for it and pushing hard.

[scenes]

BillT: The GND’s social and environmental goals demand it, Every single Dem Party leader, star, spokespersons, and canidate are all pushing for bigger government....lusting for it and pushing hard.

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." - Famous Journalist Guy

[Scott O]

Poor Bobby 11:59 - "...as it would neutralize special interest lobbying and actually allow people to govern themselves..."
So Bobby's goal is to get rid of 'special interests' like the NAACP and the Sierra Club. I see.
And THEN we could govern ourselves.
First of all, Bobby - there is and has been for the last couple of eons a large cohort of humans who just don't seem to be able to 'govern' themselves in any sort of situation. I realize you might have magically done away with them in your new Eden you are fantasizing about, but let's stick to reality here.
Pure Mob-ocracy doesn't get rid of lobbying, it just moves the lobbying to a different level and style.
Look Bobby - you're a 'people' and I'm a 'people' and so are George and everyone else who posts here. Just what kind of govt is it that suddenly lets everyone get pure and happy when we get rid of 'special interests'?
More to the point - say we have pure democracy and 51% of 'the people' vote to confiscate scary black guns?
Now what? We got rid of the NRA in this scenario so everything will be peachy keeno?
It's amusing that the left reviles such a large percentage of the population, yet is confident that things will get better once that same group has more power at the ballot box.