I'm very curious what Yang's next steps are if he does not get the nomination or a VP offer (if he'd even take that role). He's stated multiple times publicly he has zero interest in a cabinet spot and isn't looking to kiss anyone's ring. He was notably a domestic ambassador (biz/tech) in the Obama admin. I wonder if he has any public or private sector plans looming. I would personally love to see him take on a more media centric role focused on educating the public and promoting his values and ideas. Think Neil DeGrasse Tyson but for the intersection of government and technology.
Why does being in a cabinet 'kissing the ring"? Him being in actual government would help him find out the mechanism that could actually get his plans implemented.
So your 1st argument is that Trump won and the 2nd is that government can sustain. I thought the whole rational for Yang was to fundamentally change government?
This civil war you speak of where 400k lives have been lost - guess who has been arming the so-called "rebels" (who are in fact extremist terror groups) to incite and prolong the bloodshed? And Hillary Clinton's influential role in the un-lidding of the disaster? You say that the Assad family has been this infamous for so many decades (which yes the family is like the mafia) yet Assad himself was considered for knighthood by the UK in 2002? But of course due to the media spin he has since become the butcher "flavor of the month". There are atrocities just as heinous being committed by Saudi Arabia in Yemen, and yet we are selling the bombs to commit the insane carnage - who should be branded the butcher like Assad has been? So far, nothing in the media. I guess Saudi Arabia plays some important role for now that prevents them from being demonized. Just goes to show you how powerful the narrative spin machine is. They can take their pick of atrocities around the world and the men who create them just to create a "let's bomb them" hysteria out of it to fit whatever war propaganda suits them best. It seems to work most of the time, but I think enough of the public has had enough bloodshed. And that is why I like Gabbard's stance on war and our military adventurism. Yes, Assad is cut from the same cloth as a Hussein - these men are brutal dictators that use bloody means to keep their countries from becoming complete clusters. What to do to solve it? I have no idea, but I do know us bombing and getting involved DOES NOT WORK. When the sarin gas incident blew up in the media I immediately recalled WMD 2002, so yes, like Gabbard, I am a little skeptical when so-called "proof" gets bandied about in the media and becomes the green light as the WMDs did in 2002. Speaking of, you remember the atmosphere in the US at that time? You couldn't speak out against the war without being branded a traitor. So I am a little surprised that you do not bring a similar dose of skepticism around something that could become another trillion dollar disaster for the US and cost more lives of our troops.
