Democrats claim to oppose "threats to democracy" but replace their candidates after nomination to maintain control over the party faithful. They appointed Biden after Kamala's campaign was rightly and completely destroyed in a debate with Tulsi Gabbard but the facts of Kamala's incompetent and tyrannical past, abusing minorities for political gain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1-CRrMDSLs

Democrats ignore democracy at the drop of a hat when they believe it suits them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/06/climate/tim-walzs-big-climate-ambitions.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Union_Party_(Syria)

Potential Biden contenders: - Gavin Newsom, California governor - J. B. Pritzker, Illinois governor - Phil Murphy, New Jersey Governor - Gretchen Whitmer, Michigan Governor

Currently running on the left: - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. - Marianne Williamson - Cornel West (Green Party)

examples: - Ralph Nader (2000) Green Party - Bernie Sanders (2016) (less evidence of this)

What is the current separation of political and civil society in America in 2023? Do the differences in these two (particularly with respect to Antonio Gramsci's framing) still have distinguishing features?

Context: Lindsey Graham had just proposed a bill for a nationwide abortion ban after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

McConnell's position seems to be one that choice about abolition is an option, but one which is reserved for white men of power over others. This is painful because that choice is being left to people without any of the information and nuance about specific circumstances versus the pregnant women themselves potentially in consultation with their doctors who have broad specific training and experience in the topics and issues at hand. Why are these leaders attempting to make decisions based on possibilities rather than realities, particularly when they've not properly studied or are generally aware of any of the realities?

If this is McConnell's true position, then why not punt the decision and choices down to the people directly impacted? And isn't this a long running tenet of the Republican Party to allow greater individual freedoms? Isn't their broad philosophy: individual > state government > national government? (At least with respect to internal, domestic matters; in international matters the opposite relationships seem to dominate.)

tl;dr:<br /> Mitch McConnell believes in choice, just not in your choice.

Here's the actual audio from a similar NPR story:<br /> https://ondemand.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/npr/me/2022/09/20220914_me_gop_sen_lindsey_graham_introduces_15-week_abortion_ban_in_the_senate.mp3#t=206

McConnell is also practicing the Republican party game of "do as I say and not as I do" on Graham directly. He's practicing this sort of hypocrisy because as leadership, he's desperately worried that this move will decimate the Republican Party in the midterm elections.

There's also another reading of McConnell's statement. Viewed as a statement from leadership, there's a form of omerta or silent threat being communicated here to the general Republican Party membership: you better fall in line on the party line here because otherwise we run the risk of losing power. He's saying he's leaving it up to them individually, but in reality, as the owner of the purse strings, he's not.

Thesis:<br /> The broadest distinction between American political parties right now seems to be that the Republican Party wants to practice fascistic forms of "power over" while the Democratic Party wants to practice more democratic forms of "power with".

The deregulation part has hurt us immensely. Cross reference this with the thesis found in American Amnesia by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson.

Which parts of the Democratic party went along with this? Evidence? More of the deregulation parts seemed to be identified with the Republican party.