OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kerouac said:
What I do not appreciate is being told to "Fall in line." If the party insists insulting and ignoring the progressive base, I might have to withdraw my support on principals alone.
Click to expand...


Especially considering how close the primary votes were yesterday.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
I think the Libertarians have a better shot at 5% than the Greens. They're just better organized.
Click to expand...

Yeah, neither has a shot at winning, but I would love to see a third party get some funding. Maybe it will ruffle the 2 parties feathers a bit. I'll keep my eyes on the polls up until the end.
 
Last edited:
Help!I'maRock! said:
I think the Libertarians have a better shot at 5% than the Greens. They're just better organized.
Click to expand...
This is true. And I have to remember it is about getting a third party. But completely free markets (or as free as they can be made in this country, which is not so much, given ineffective antitrust law and etc.) do not work for all. so if there is a third party, I am not sure this is the one for me.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
This is true. And I have to remember it is about getting a third party. But completely free markets (or as free as they can be made in this country, which is not so much, given ineffective antitrust law and etc.) do not work for all. so if there is a third party, I am not sure this is the one for me.
Click to expand...

Libertarian economic policy and I don't agree. My goal is to open the door for a third party and start a meaningful conversation.
 
Kerouac said:
If the party insists insulting and ignoring the progressive base, I might have to withdraw my support on principals alone.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as withdrawing your support on principles. I wish I could get this point across to everyone who has supported Sanders, but thinks they can't vote for for Clinton.

Not voting isn't a message. No one knows (or cares) when you don't vote. Sure, each party would like your vote, but they couldn't give a rats ass if you don't vote. It isn't a blip on their radar.

The issues are still as important as they ever were. Trump or Clinton will be in the White House. Trump or Clinton will replace one, two, or three Supreme Court justices. Trump or Clinton will make Middle East policy. Trump or Clinton will make immigration policy. Like it or not, you *will* be part of determining which it is.

Not voting isn't supporting principles, it is completely and utterly abandoning them.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
This is true. And I have to remember it is about getting a third party. But completely free markets (or as free as they can be made in this country, which is not so much, given ineffective antitrust law and etc.) do not work for all. so if there is a third party, I am not sure this is the one for me.
Click to expand...

I'm not for completely free markets either, just a third party that can actually join the conversation. It forces the other 2 to be a little more on their toes.
 
GomezAddams said:
There is no such thing as withdrawing your support on principles. I wish I could get this point across to everyone who has supported Sanders, but thinks they can't vote for for Clinton.

Not voting isn't a message. No one knows (or cares) when you don't vote. Sure, each party would like your vote, but they couldn't give a rats ass if you don't vote. It isn't a blip on their radar.

The issues are still as important as they ever were. Trump or Clinton will be in the White House. Trump or Clinton will replace one, two, or three Supreme Court justices. Trump or Clinton will make Middle East policy. Trump or Clinton will make immigration policy. Like it or not, you *will* be part of determining which it is.

Not voting isn't supporting principles, it is completely and utterly abandoning them.
Click to expand...

Nowhere did he say he wouldn't vote, he said he would withdraw his support for the Democratic party.
 
GomezAddams said:
There is no such thing as withdrawing your support on principles. I wish I could get this point across to everyone who has supported Sanders, but thinks they can't vote for for Clinton.

Not voting isn't a message. No one knows (or cares) when you don't vote. Sure, each party would like your vote, but they couldn't give a rats ass if you don't vote. It isn't a blip on their radar.

The issues are still as important as they ever were. Trump or Clinton will be in the White House. Trump or Clinton will replace one, two, or three Supreme Court justices. Trump or Clinton will make Middle East policy. Trump or Clinton will make immigration policy. Like it or not, you *will* be part of determining which it is.

Not voting isn't supporting principles, it is completely and utterly abandoning them.
Click to expand...

I didn't read his post as not voting, but rather voting for a 3rd party candidate.
 
GomezAddams said:
There is no such thing as withdrawing your support on principles. I wish I could get this point across to everyone who has supported Sanders, but thinks they can't vote for for Clinton.

Not voting isn't a message. No one knows (or cares) when you don't vote. Sure, each party would like your vote, but they couldn't give a rats ass if you don't vote. It isn't a blip on their radar.

The issues are still as important as they ever were. Trump or Clinton will be in the White House. Trump or Clinton will replace one, two, or three Supreme Court justices. Trump or Clinton will make Middle East policy. Trump or Clinton will make immigration policy. Like it or not, you *will* be part of determining which it is.

Not voting isn't supporting principles, it is completely and utterly abandoning them.
Click to expand...

Kodos it is then!
 
I like Bernie. A lot. But I doubt he'd be the more effective candidate.

The country elected an incredibly smart president with enormous potential, and he suffered 8 years of abuse and vehement obstructionism, and then he's been blamed for being ineffective.

Why would Bernie be better?

(Mind you, I honestly do believe that Obama was a terrific president, considered the House and Senate he had to deal with... Pelosi was was one of the best majority leaders the country has ever had, and that was apparently too good)

Clearly, as much as I hate Washington, you really do need someone who can work within the machine, at this point.

At least until we can get majorities.
 
rhino said:
I didn't read his post as not voting, but rather voting for a 3rd party candidate.
Click to expand...

Chad said:
Nowhere did he say he wouldn't vote, he said he would withdraw his support for the Democratic party.
Click to expand...

A vote for a third party candidate is the same as not voting (for the sake of this argument). I understand that voting for a third party may help that party financially, but for deciding who gets in the White House in 2016, a third party vote is the same as not voting.
 
Flamencology said:
(Mind you, I honestly do believe that Obama was a terrific president, considered the House and Senate he had to deal with... Pelosi was was one of the best majority leaders the country has ever had, and that was apparently too good)
Click to expand...

The Dems had Congress at the beginning.
 
GomezAddams said:
A vote for a third party candidate is the same as not voting (for the sake of this argument). I understand that voting for a third party may help that party financially, but for deciding who gets in the White House in 2016, a third party vote is the same as not voting.
Click to expand...

wanking.gif
 
I made my statement by voting for Bernie, but knowing all along that I will vote for HRC in the fall. I'm all for a strong conservative Libertarian 3rd party....to split the republican/conservative vote. IMHO that is all a 3rd party will ever be capable of in our current political state. Get rid of the EC and I might change my mind.
 
I have been absent this thread. I voted for Bernie yesterday, and will PROBABLY end up voting for the Republican in Democratic clothing come this fall, but frankly both candidates worry the shit out of me, because I think that they are both way too anxious to commit troops in the name of preserving the status quo (i.e. the rich get richer)...
 
GomezAddams said:
A vote for a third party candidate is the same as not voting (for the sake of this argument). I understand that voting for a third party may help that party financially, but for deciding who gets in the White House in 2016, a third party vote is the same as not voting.
Click to expand...

No it's not, but as long as people keep buying that bullshit it'll stay the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top