Hell, I'd also take it as a good sentencing guideline when the great trial awaits I guess /s

I probably don't love this sort of sloganeering without the content behind it actually being rolled out as well, but generally speaking this sounds like a decent social and economic policy message, understanding the floor as a commitment to a stronger safety net here.

Yeah, I think the auto loan problem is the instructive example because it demonstrates the limits of existing protections and that the population is safe and profitable to target for this type of online gambling.

My tangentially related maybe too hot take is that the 24 cycle very explicitly actually warrants dem leaders to be significantly more transactional with the upper levels of the big blue collar unions, even if you otherwise do not deviate from a distinctly pro-labour line.

Ignoring that lasting inroads in local political structures require a permanent basis that a bunch of independents couldn't manage if they tried, which party's network do you think would their funding and staffing would come from?
Also idk how you look at 21-24 and think labour was too loyal to dems

I guess if you don't deal with the predatory auto loans to newly enlisted issue, that's kind of a signal to all the various legs of the modern scam economy, something unlikely to get any better as long periods without pay etc are hardly going to improve financial decision-making

Also anyone interested in (pro labour!) dem governance federally should probably be extremely sceptical of a long run strategy that rules out building up the party from the bottom in red states at their most vulnerable point in almost 20 years.
Just doing the Obama campaign infrastructure BS again.

I think the bigger case study this type of (imo very wrong) article is focused on is Dan Osborn, someone who notably did not actually win, nor has anyone of his type won.
But even ignoring the underbussing that campaign style involves, to actually wield power you need some degree of party structure

With Bernie Sanders' talent for picking staffers

Whenever you start posting quotes I feel like I should read it again ffs

I'm not sure it can cope with either of the two personalities in a functionally personalist party attempting to subvert the committee decision.

Also having non-MP/lay leadership is going to be a nightmare of the party wants to be serious inside parliament.

Then again, Frederick the Great's place in German national myths mostly is ironic anyways considering his own disdain for any conception of the "German" or "Germany".

A lot of the context flattening that occurred with how national myths translates into broad based popular movements has led to losing how cosmopolitan class solidarity remained a feature of the (educated, bourgeois) national-liberals as with their aristocratic rivals.

Fair enough, I guess she already pretty much beat him when that was the informal setup before the party came into being, and he seems like the kind of cold war leftist who loves awful collective leadership arrangements

Genuinely, is there any legal or other constraint that would have prevented them from picking a German Greens type setup of having dual leadership, for which both of the culprits here would have been an incredibly easy lock?

It got a little funny when he tried to explain what/who the Baath party and Assad family were to some country bumpkin seniors

It generally helps how many of the actors involved are only barely capable of reasoning at all individually let alone collectively.

In a better world you'd see all of the large European countries with broad DIBs willing to do some degree of specialisation and bargaining for effort sharing etc, but in practice it just seems to draw out planning and increase the odds of programme collapse.

Market size and presumably US execs that don't get that the PC Gaming Strategy DLC goldmine is ripe for even mediocre products from the big franchises.