OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
micwalt said:
My wife and I went through our voter pamphlets and consulted https://ballotpedia.org/Main_Page on all the state and local props and measures. My polling place is within walking distance. I'm all set.
Click to expand...

We did the same. We did it with our kids as well, one is almost 13 and the other is 11. We are trying to teach them to not just tow the party line and actually be informed when you vote.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
It's Breitbart, so take it for the piece of shit that it is, but this would be very interesting.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presi...-wont-vote-hillary-clinton-electoral-college/
Click to expand...
That is probably true. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...obert-satiacum-says-he-wont-vote-for-clinton/

Satiacum is the son of Robert Satiacum, a former Puyallup tribal member, fought and won against the state in charges of illegally fishing the Puyallup river for salmon, based on old treaty rights that (surprise, surprise) were not being honored. The WA supremes overturned his conviction. In the 70's Satiacum was involved when the Puyallups took over a juvenile correctional center that was on tribal land that had been "appropriated" along the way. Satiacum Sr. was always kind of a wild card and was ultimately convicted of racketeering, arson, gambling and trafficking, and fled to Canada, where he ultimately died of heart failure. Satiacum Junior apparently is not worried about the $1000 fine and wants to make a point.

http://lmtribune.com/biography/robe...cle_1f561466-cbc2-5a74-aeb9-7940196673a1.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Satiacum

Tribal stuff including Cascadia and Fishing rights:
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900225&slug=1058033

I like this article from the Freedom Socialist Party. No wonder Jr. prefers Bernie and wants to make a point.
http://www.socialism.com/drupal-6.8/articles/puyallup-evicts-state-tribal-property
I remember when that was in the Tacoma News Tribune with pics of the tribe up on the roof triumphantly holding the building.

Lots of cool historical documents on that here as well:
https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/document/0142/1103424.pdf
 
Chad said:
So I just asked my daughters if they wanted to go to the polls with me Tuesday and watch me cast my vote for the first female presidential nominee and they both yelled yes. It got me thinking about the biggest reason to vote for Clinton. There are 2, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush. Both republicans and could not disagree with Clinton on her political stances more. They both have been president, W for 8 years and H. W. for 4+ years (he was president for a bit after the Reagan assassination attempt). H.W. lost to her husband and Clinton attacked W for years. They both know her personally, despite her being in the public eye for 30 years, none of us know her, we know the media portrayal of her. They both have crossed party lines and said they are voting for her. To me that speaks volumes about the issue we are faced. Neither of them have anything to gain by doing this, they will never run for office and both are set for life.
Click to expand...
That is very cool with your daughters. Wonderful.

About the rest, I saw on facebook a meme with the Bushes, Carter, Clinton and Obama all listed as presidents voting for Clinton, and
Kim Jong-un and Putin being the "presidents" voting for Trump. Pretty striking comparison.

13912668_10154594727316159_2098095263475404768_n.jpg
 
so......the big question is: is this thread going to be very relevant after thanksgiving (presuming trump does not win)?
 
now that hillary has been cleared by the fbi in the latest email scandal wannabe......director comey should be terminated by the attorney general first thing tomorrow morning, unless he resigns before then.
 
jp_nyc said:
If you want to change the system you’ll have to start by electing mainstream candidates who are willing to enact voting reforms like ranked choice and instant runoff.
Click to expand...

Or throw enough support to a 3rd party so they can get official recognition in things like televised debates andget in on the game that D & R currently can't afford to have anyone else playing.
 
BlockInlay said:
Or throw enough support to a 3rd party so they can get official recognition in things like televised debates andget in on the game that D & R currently can't afford to have anyone else playing.
Click to expand...

I tried in 2000. Nader was head and shoulders above this years third party candidates. If these are the best candidates the third parties can come up with, getting them matching funds and including them in the debates accomplishes nothing.
 
Yeah, I'm all for 3rd parties.

(And, having lived abroad, I'd take a parliamentary system any day)

But I'm a little irritated by those who continually emphasize the need for 3rd parties, but who rage during presidential election years, and then do nothing about it.

For a 3rd party to be viable, two things should happen:

1) people need to start supporting 3rd parties at a local and state level, year after year.

2) advocacy for instant runoff voting.

That's it. That's the best you can do.

At this point, I think borderline counterproductive to show up once every 4 years either to support for a Nader surrogate (at best) or to support an idiot fringe candidate like Ron Paul whose ideas have zero substance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top