I think the British people are leading the 'revolution'....
...against income inequality and global economics. They are tired of their jobs shipped to wherever the labor is the cheapest. They blame immigration for most of their domestic turmoil.
There are probably more Americans, than we wish to think, that believe in a similar way.
People talk about a "change" election. It is difficult for an establishment figure to win in such a political environment. In my opinion, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are the embodiment of "change" candidates.
That is why Hillary needs every vote she can garner to win this upcoming race. She needs Bernie voters and everyone else she can get. The Catch-22 is that it will very difficult to accomplish with moderate positions on the issues. People want change. How can Hillary convince these voters that she stands for change?
We should not follow the polls too closely. Donald Trump could very easily win the White House. There is no room for complacency.
That's the way I see it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
People will pull themselves up by their bootstraps the way God intended! 
I think that's why there is a petition for a re-vote: they have already found out the truth, and it isn't pretty.
I don't think it's as much that we're ready to vote for TPP/TTIP...it's better known than the butchers want it to be and people are mostly opposed. I think the turkeys are about to be betrayed by politicians that lied and said they oppose TPP; they were believed and nobody laid attention to the knife behind their back.
No more FTAs! It's time the US used its bully-pulpit and walked away from the ones we're in. Not negotiated withdrawal...unilateral "Fuck you, we're not doing this anymore" and "Fuck you, we're not recognizing the legitimacy or authority of the entities of this agreement."
What are Canada and Mexico or South Korea going to do if we simply refuse to abide the authority of the star-chambers of these FTAs? Go to war against us? 
That's change. So I what I really want is just change.
However, I'm likely to see work conditions deteriorate, and my neighborhood's only likely to get worse.
That's change.
Gee, I'm getting what I want. I wanted change. I get change.
If you don't get past the superficial form of words and look at the word's referents; if you don't realize that some words don't so much have unique and clear referents but function as placeholders; if you don't realize that one very nice, very appealing, and very specious form of argumentation relies on shifting the meanings of words subtly so that people are led to want what they don't want; then discussion is difficult. Polemic is much easier, however.
Look at the polls. Brexit was split in its vote. You look at partial data, and it's the enlightened versus the troglodyte. But if you were liberal or Tory or UKIP, you gave pretty much the same answers for why you voted Remain. If you were liberal or Tory or UKIP, you gave the same answers for why you voted Leave.
Remain wanted primarily financial benefits, and the EU provided them. The Leavers wanted more say, they wanted to feel empowered. Both are needs: one is material, although accoutrements of wealth also go to psychological well being for many. The other is psychological. Call it "respect" and "dignity", to use politically popular words. Yeah, there's some racism thrown in there, just like more than a few of the Remain voters are greedy consumerists. (Diversity and nuance. Empathize with it.)
You see the same effect in the US. A lot of people want benefits, but they want more say. That can be retirees wanted reduced government but more benefits. It can be welfare recipients wanting more benefits and with fewer restrictions on how they can use them. It can be the sick wanting increased public health care but less preaching on lifestyle choices and their risks, or students wanting free education but no restrictions on what they can study (or "I want the prestige of English degree from this school, but you have to revise it to include just what I want"
. We like the perquisites but not the requisites. For some, the perks are more important; for others, the desire to avoid what's requisite.
What's really hard is that often it contradicts our notions of class consciousness. (But that's okay, we have "false consciousness" to fall back on--we really know what's best for those poor benighted people, if only they'd trust us.)
Take, for example, the "red alert" post yesterday: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027959733
The concern is that all the EU regulations that Britain may not have wanted will fall by the wayside, and this is a horrible thing. Well, if we like democracy then if "Britain" doesn't want all the enviro-regs then they shouldn't be force-fed them. If Britain wants them, they'll reinstate them. However, the attitude is that British Leavers hate being told what to do with immigration and such, but luvs them some forced-feeding of environmental regulations. In other words, we see what *we* want to see, not what the voters say. Being force-fed regulations and having immigrants imposed on them is, as far as the polls go, the same thing: The average voter is being talked down to by technocrats and bureaucrats who make far more than he does and have cushier jobs. Call it "respect" if you want to. But ultimately, the technocrats win because if they don't get what they want the first time, it comes back over and over. Many of those saying the electorate voted and there must not be a re-do are the opposite when it comes to what they want--it just takes one vote, so hold the vote over and over until you get what you want.
Their voters were alienated. And they voted their alienation. But that alienation takes on a lot of forms and has a lot of causes. In a democracy, the government has to be concerned about satisfying those citizens, whether the rulers agree or not. Talking down to their lessers will not produce joy and gladness.
"the revolution," then the UK have just screwed themselves royally ... right off a cliff and likely into their own break-up.
Please stop this iteration of RW (or RLW) TPs.
ONE! Not TWO or THREE! ONE!
Handing the whole show over to the Conservative Party, the oldest and probably the most dominant party political elite the world has ever seen, one of the brightest stars in the neo-liberal firmament?
Some revolution I must say.
