OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
335clone said:
This is why we can't have 3rd party candidates. They want to skip all that preparation and experience and shit. So you get candidates that are unprepared for questions from the press, let alone actual real world decisions that put lives in the balance. And you want more money for them to have access to a larger stage? Why?
Click to expand...

Because the 2 party system is a failure and we need real choice. But they need to have candidates who can answer questions. That said, I'm sure Trump couldn't answer the questions Johnson was asked either. He's got at least 40% of the vote, so matching funds aren't an issue for him.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
Because the 2 party system is a failure and we need real choice. But they need to have candidates who can answer questions. That said, I'm sure Trump couldn't answer the questions Johnson was asked either. He's got at least 40% of the vote, so matching funds aren't an issue for him.
Click to expand...

I don't consider Johnson or Stein to be anything close to a real choice, but I said the same about Trump. Trump has at least answered questions on that level. Whether they are completely pulled from his ass or not is another matter. And, that is still a pretty damn low bar.

Please explain why you are so adamant that the libertarian and green parties deserve to have matching funds when they field candidates that make Trump look qualified by comparison. If you think the 2 party system is a failure, what do you think would happen if we had 3 active parties? Pretty much impossible to pass ANY legislation with less than a simple majority vote. Gridlock. I guess the best that could be hoped for is some type of coalition govt?
 
335clone said:
I don't consider Johnson or Stein to be anything close to a real choice, but I said the same about Trump. Trump has at least answered questions on that level. Whether they are completely pulled from his ass or not is another matter. And, that is still a pretty damn low bar.

Please explain why you are so adamant that the libertarian and green parties deserve to have matching funds when they field candidates that make Trump look qualified by comparison. If you think the 2 party system is a failure, what do you think would happen if we had 3 active parties? Pretty much impossible to pass ANY legislation with less than a simple majority vote. Gridlock. I guess the best that could be hoped for is some type of coalition govt?
Click to expand...

Independent candidates have to earn matching funds. That threshold is 5%. Just like they have to earn 15% in the polls in order to debate on a national stage. Those are pretty low bars. But every candidate has to earn my vote. No party or candidate is entitled to it.
 
You know what? Fuck all of these people. I am now voting against every fucking incumbent lawmaker on my ballot this year. All they are ruled by is their own self interest. Fucking bullshit. "Obama didn't reach out to me after he sent a pretty clear fucking message by vetoing this in the first goddamn place". McConnell and pelosi and Ryan. Every fucking one of them. http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/29/politics/obama-911-veto-congressional-concerns/index.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Mark Wein said:
You know what? Fuck all of these people. I am now voting against every fucking incumbent lawmaker on my ballot this year. All they are ruled by is their own self interest. Fucking bullshit. "Obama didn't reach out to me after he sent a pretty clear fucking message by vetoing this in the first goddamn place". McConnell and pelosi and Ryan. Every fucking one of them. http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/29/politics/obama-911-veto-congressional-concerns/index.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

I think the only politician I've ever voted for twice is Chuck Schumer. Kinda regretting that second time. So far, I'll vote for Gillibrand again. Other than that, it's always been opposition candidates. That being said, there's little change in my voting district across the ballot. Every incumbent should win by a landslide this year.

Next year is gonna be a shitshow with De Blasio. That should be interesting.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
Independent candidates have to earn matching funds. That threshold is 5%. Just like they have to earn 15% in the polls in order to debate on a national stage. Those are pretty low bars. But every candidate has to earn my vote. No party or candidate is entitled to it.
Click to expand...

Yet you have stated that you will vote for a candidate based on helping their party get matching funds for the next election, not what they bring to the table for this election. I'm all for backing a candidate that you believe in, but you seem to be more interested in protesting the 2 major parties. And, 15% of the 146 million registered voters is a pretty big number to hit.
 
335clone said:
Yet you have stated that you will vote for a candidate based on helping their party get matching funds for the next election, not what they bring to the table for this election. I'm all for backing a candidate that you believe in, but you seem to be more interested in protesting the 2 major parties. And, 15% of the 146 million registered voters is a pretty big number to hit.
Click to expand...

I'm all for backing a third party candidate as a protest vote. That being said, with this latest gaffe, there's no way Johnson hits 5%. He had a chance before this. No chance now. I also don't think there's anything wrong with having to show you're a serious candidate to make the debates. Go get it, y'know?

So the question becomes who do I want to waste my vote on? I can waste my vote on Hillary, who will win NY by at least a 10% margin. I can waste my vote on Trump who will lose by at least 10%. I can waste my vote on Johnson or Stein who will get 2% and 0.2%. Staying home isn't an option. I'll never vote for Hillary. Trump is a joke. Might as well go for one of the other two.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
I think the only politician I've ever voted for twice is Chuck Schumer. Kinda regretting that second time. So far, I'll vote for Gillibrand again. Other than that, it's always been opposition candidates. That being said, there's little change in my voting district across the ballot. Every incumbent should win by a landslide this year.

Next year is gonna be a shitshow with De Blasio. That should be interesting.
Click to expand...
I think I've just hit my tipping point. That bullshit the kind of excuse I get from my 11 year old son when I ask him why the trash didn't get taken out and he says I didn't tell him to do it after he was told it is always his fucking job the last time he was told to take it out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
So far, I'll vote for Gillibrand again.
Click to expand...

Kv9U6DgK.jpg


TapThat8-14-2012-2.jpg
 
335clone said:
This is why we can't have 3rd party candidates. They want to skip all that preparation and experience and shit. So you get candidates that are unprepared for questions from the press, let alone actual real world decisions that put lives in the balance. And you want more money for them to have access to a larger stage? Why?
Click to expand...

Well Johnson was a state governor for 8 years. He has experience, he just didn't prepare. He also was a Republican until 2011. His biggest issue was being out of politics for over a decade. Had he still been in, he may have been more up to the challenge but he has been in the private sector for too long and hasn't been keeping up. Weld was a governor for 6 years, US Assistant attorney general criminal division and US attorney.
I say this not to defend him, I wouldn't vote for the guy, but he has about as much experience as anyone else who has run for president.
 
Chad said:
Well Johnson was a state governor for 8 years. He has experience, he just didn't prepare.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm pretty sure he "prepared"-

vy7Gsy6g.jpg


Chad said:
he has about as much experience as anyone else who has run for president.
Click to expand...

This is true.

The point of voting libertarian at this stage isn't even the candidates themselves, it's about having more choices in the long run. Today, a tiny party like the libertarians just doesn't attract more qualified/capable candidates because they can't offer them what the big parties can in terms of money, visibility, and the chance to actually, you know, win. This will change if the party gets more viable through funding, visibility and support, and this will mean changes for the party, too.

Right now the 2-party system has a stranglehold on American politics, and that has to be broken.
 
mongooz said:
that is pretty huge. their putting in writing that he is a 'serial liar' may draw a defamation suit, but so what. trump isn't THAT rich, that he can beat them.
Click to expand...
I never liked the man and never for one minute entertained the notion of voting for him, but they really solidified it in my mind...

Their take on HRC works for me as well...

Not yet sure how I'm going to vote, but I damn sure intend to...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top