I don't think he's trying to appeal to the left, I think he's doing his best to lose without losing face. But if he were trying to appeal to left sensibilities then that's how it would go down since it would 1) significantly depress the vote for Biden and 2) give some hope to the desperate to cling on to (not Communists, just people with leftists sensibilities and/or in a financial rut). Remember how his rep jumped up with the paltry Trump bux.
The point is that this is not his base, and the only result would be that he would piss off his base while few people would be swayed, and then there would of course be the risk of pissing everyone off even worse and maybe radicalising some people when he inevitably ended up not delivering.
Well arguably his donor base is different from Biden so he could deliver some of it if here were inclined so. He doesn't seem to have close enough ties to the pharmaceutical lobby (a few companies excepted), unlike Biden and I don't think it would piss off his supporters nor his donors if he were to create government incentives to massively invest in fusion and nuclear, and even thermal solar. But again this is a purely academic discussion because he has neither pivoted nor intends to do so.
First of all, fusion? The technology that doesn't even properly exist yet?
Second, both Trump and everyone else around the US government does have close ties to the pharmaceutical lobby, as well as the fossil fuel lobbies. And the majority of his supporters have severe brain worms and they think that M4A and renewables are evil communism.
Like, it just doesn't make any sense for him to pivot. EVEN if it went over well with his support, that's not all that matters. People in power always have to look at the long term consequences of what they are doing. It is dangerous for the American status quo if suddenly both parties just opened up stuff like public healthcare, renewable energy, expanding welfare, and various working class demands for discussion, claimed to support these things, and then never passed them anyways. They don't want to be doing that.
That's the great thing about it - it doesn't yet exist. So the state can shovel more corporate welfare to companies (and most of the time it's the very same oil and gas companies, as well as the MIC corporations) under the pretext that they'll now finally roll up their sleeves and start developing fusion for real. Even if takes decades and nothing comes out of it, no one will remember. The same with denouncing regime change ops and wars - it makes for a nice populist sound bite while the alphabet agencies can keep doing their stuff in the shadows. Remember Obama? So many promises - all of them broken. Did it make the situation any more dangerous for the status quo? Nope, they're raking in record profits, capitalist realism rules the day even stronger than before and the wealth disparity just keeps soaring. You have too much faith in the general public getting outraged at hypocrisy and lies. Even in past situations where people had it good and had their material comfort yanked out from them overnight the vast majority just bowed their heads to the new bleak reality.
But Obama can promise these things because the republicans exist, and then tm they can just say "we wanted these things, but the republicans didn't". The republicans can't do that because the Democrats already supposedly want them.
Why do you think 1) most of the left would be stupid enough to trust him and 2) that he is trying to appeal to the left?
I don't think he's trying to appeal to the left, I think he's doing his best to lose without losing face. But if he were trying to appeal to left sensibilities then that's how it would go down since it would 1) significantly depress the vote for Biden and 2) give some hope to the desperate to cling on to (not Communists, just people with leftists sensibilities and/or in a financial rut). Remember how his rep jumped up with the paltry Trump bux.
The point is that this is not his base, and the only result would be that he would piss off his base while few people would be swayed, and then there would of course be the risk of pissing everyone off even worse and maybe radicalising some people when he inevitably ended up not delivering.
Well arguably his donor base is different from Biden so he could deliver some of it if here were inclined so. He doesn't seem to have close enough ties to the pharmaceutical lobby (a few companies excepted), unlike Biden and I don't think it would piss off his supporters nor his donors if he were to create government incentives to massively invest in fusion and nuclear, and even thermal solar. But again this is a purely academic discussion because he has neither pivoted nor intends to do so.
First of all, fusion? The technology that doesn't even properly exist yet?
Second, both Trump and everyone else around the US government does have close ties to the pharmaceutical lobby, as well as the fossil fuel lobbies. And the majority of his supporters have severe brain worms and they think that M4A and renewables are evil communism.
Like, it just doesn't make any sense for him to pivot. EVEN if it went over well with his support, that's not all that matters. People in power always have to look at the long term consequences of what they are doing. It is dangerous for the American status quo if suddenly both parties just opened up stuff like public healthcare, renewable energy, expanding welfare, and various working class demands for discussion, claimed to support these things, and then never passed them anyways. They don't want to be doing that.
That's the great thing about it - it doesn't yet exist. So the state can shovel more corporate welfare to companies (and most of the time it's the very same oil and gas companies, as well as the MIC corporations) under the pretext that they'll now finally roll up their sleeves and start developing fusion for real. Even if takes decades and nothing comes out of it, no one will remember. The same with denouncing regime change ops and wars - it makes for a nice populist sound bite while the alphabet agencies can keep doing their stuff in the shadows. Remember Obama? So many promises - all of them broken. Did it make the situation any more dangerous for the status quo? Nope, they're raking in record profits, capitalist realism rules the day even stronger than before and the wealth disparity just keeps soaring. You have too much faith in the general public getting outraged at hypocrisy and lies. Even in past situations where people had it good and had their material comfort yanked out from them overnight the vast majority just bowed their heads to the new bleak reality.
But Obama can promise these things because the republicans exist, and then tm they can just say "we wanted these things, but the republicans didn't". The republicans can't do that because the Democrats already supposedly want them.
deleted by creator