Implosions

24567

Comments

  • brianluxbrianlux Posts: 42,038
    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    I'm probably what some would assume to be anti-establishment. Not so. I'm reestablishment. Reestablish some common sense in people (I think we had more of that several decades ago) and particularly reestablish some stability in our environment.

    Single issue voter? I guess you could call me that. The single issue I care about is bringing stability to the environment. If we don't do that, we die and all else is moot.

    But of course there are other issues of social relevance I care about as well. I think your summation is too narrow.
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
    Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.













  • DegeneratefkDegeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    I'm probably what some would assume to be anti-establishment. Not so. I'm reestablishment. Reestablish some common sense in people (I think we had more of that several decades ago) and particularly reestablish some stability in our environment.

    Single issue voter? I guess you could call me that. The single issue I care about is bringing stability to the environment. If we don't do that, we die and all else is moot.

    But of course there are other issues of social relevance I care about as well. I think your summation is too narrow.
    There's more stability in the environment now than there ever has been. I'm not sure what more you want to see done.
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • jerparker20jerparker20 Posts: 2,501
    riotgrl said:

    I read an article this morning talking about wasted 3rd party votes. While I disagree with that the article did make a good point about creating viable 3rd parties at the local and state level. That is what will give the country a real shot at creating competition for a 3rd party at the presidential level.

    https://paulalanrichardson.com/2016/07/21/think-really-hard-before-voting-for-a-3rd-party-candidate-really/

    This.

    Honest question for those set on voting third party: If, and it's an impossible if, Stein or Johnson are elected how are they going to get any legislation passed through Congress? How are they going to make any meaningful legislative changes?

    Neither will have any support in either chamber and more than likely a lot of animosity from both parties directed their way. Now if a viable third party can begin to make headway at the local/state level the tide may begin to turn. The problem is that more often than not; those running as a third party candidate at the local level tend to be from the far fringes and not taken seriously. Remember the vast majority of Americans sit somewhere in the middle, we just often get stuck choosing the lesser of two evils.
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    polaris_x said:

    like i've been saying ... revolution ...

    Where to start such a revolution???since most of the world is fucked up
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • brianluxbrianlux Posts: 42,038

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    I'm probably what some would assume to be anti-establishment. Not so. I'm reestablishment. Reestablish some common sense in people (I think we had more of that several decades ago) and particularly reestablish some stability in our environment.

    Single issue voter? I guess you could call me that. The single issue I care about is bringing stability to the environment. If we don't do that, we die and all else is moot.

    But of course there are other issues of social relevance I care about as well. I think your summation is too narrow.
    There's more stability in the environment now than there ever has been. I'm not sure what more you want to see done.
    Anthropogenic Global warming, anthropogenically induced species die off a thousand times the pre-human rate, loss of habitat, oceans polluted and dying, fresh water aquifers disappearing, radiation at an all-time high, coral reefs dying. Nothing to worry about there?

    I'm out a here folks. This string of 100 degree F. is burning my brain. Going to go chill at 8,000 feet. Lucky to be able to do so. So many other problems not so easy to escape.
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
    Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.













  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    The GOP has been trumped. I love seeing them squirm.

    The Dems are actively working to alter results. I love that emails are showing the truth.

    The Libertarians nominated a CFR Globalist as VP. Nothing to love here.

    The LA Times calls for a coup if Trump wins. Nary a peep.

    Hillary proves over and over that she is the most evil person alive.


    Still going to vote? Voting validates all of the above. Good Luck.

    No offense but you're wrong, it's non voting that validates all of the above even if it comes down to choose the least dangerous candidacy.

    A. I don't get offended, because I don't use feelings when making decisions like these.

    B. I'm not wrong. Your participation in this system reinforces their entire charade. It is fixed to benefit the few. Clearly Sanders people can see that with this email release. Their entire system depends on division and distraction.

    C. I long for the day of a complete collapse of this political system. The system has become so power based and corrupt.

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result after this.
    C. Collapsus of this political system is not a good idea unless there's a solid replacement solution. (Which is needed btw)

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result since the Florida mess that got G.W Bush elected in 2000.

    C. But there already is, govern yourselves. Why do people feel the need to continue to elect others to rule over them.
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562

    tonifig8 said:

    unsung said:

    tonifig8 said:

    Free said:

    What's funny about all this is that Clinton continues to deny that the DNC was and continues to be rigged, while at the same time she says her "good friend" Debbie Wasserman Schultz will continue as her honorary campaign manager. She's fooling no one here and she looks like a jackass.

    She doesn't really want more votes does she. Completely out of touch.

    At this point she knows a larger percentage of us will never vote for her. Now it's time to flex some muscle and bring some of her soldiers home. there is a new battle on the horizon and I'm sure we'll see more of it within hours.

    The age of information. Interesting times.
    A true Sanders supporters would never vote for Clinton, then again he ended up endorsing her though.

    In 08 and 12 when I supported Ron Paul I voted 3rd party after he dropped out, and he didn't endorse the nominee of the party that just worked to get him out.
    Sanders needs to get some Ted Cruz balls. At first I understood his sacrifice, I didn't agree but I understood. To see him on TV as recently as yesterday and to hear him say we need to do everything we can to elect Clinton broke my heart. I donated a lot of money and time to fight against the establishment, and now he's basically turning his back on us. I get that he's been in politics for decades and that he too is a politician, I'm not blind to that, but I thought he and the movement was about a greater cause- it's about "US", not her or him.
    F' you Sanders for saying that! Rant over

    Anyhow- welcome back ...
    I don't understand how sanders gets the anti establishment label when he's been in the establishment for so long.
    People really tend to forget that Sanders is a socialist working inside a capitalist system. Really guys? Do you not listen to one word that he Has been talking about all this time? Blind eye....
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562

    riotgrl said:

    I read an article this morning talking about wasted 3rd party votes. While I disagree with that the article did make a good point about creating viable 3rd parties at the local and state level. That is what will give the country a real shot at creating competition for a 3rd party at the presidential level.

    https://paulalanrichardson.com/2016/07/21/think-really-hard-before-voting-for-a-3rd-party-candidate-really/

    This.

    Honest question for those set on voting third party: If, and it's an impossible if, Stein or Johnson are elected how are they going to get any legislation passed through Congress? How are they going to make any meaningful legislative changes?

    Neither will have any support in either chamber and more than likely a lot of animosity from both parties directed their way. Now if a viable third party can begin to make headway at the local/state level the tide may begin to turn. The problem is that more often than not; those running as a third party candidate at the local level tend to be from the far fringes and not taken seriously. Remember the vast majority of Americans sit somewhere in the middle, we just often get stuck choosing the lesser of two evils.
    The entire point of Sanders platform is to get everyone out and be leaders. And they are, progressives are going out and being leaders in their communities and getting things done. The revolution has started on a community level.
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Posts: 20,275
    unsung said:

    I guess where is Bernie? Why doesn't he rescind his endorsement of her with these revelations?

    Bernie is solid for Hillary. It wasn't something she had anything to do with so why would he change his mind? He was saying all along that something funny was going on.
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
    The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
  • benjsbenjs Posts: 9,145
    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    People also talk about anti-establishment as though it itself isn't a spectrum, as though a person can so simply label someone as anti-establishment and understand precisely where they stand on each and every topic, and as though two people who are anti-establishment (as people allude to the fact that Sanders and Trump are), are more or less equivalent candidates with equivalent positions.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    The GOP has been trumped. I love seeing them squirm.

    The Dems are actively working to alter results. I love that emails are showing the truth.

    The Libertarians nominated a CFR Globalist as VP. Nothing to love here.

    The LA Times calls for a coup if Trump wins. Nary a peep.

    Hillary proves over and over that she is the most evil person alive.


    Still going to vote? Voting validates all of the above. Good Luck.

    No offense but you're wrong, it's non voting that validates all of the above even if it comes down to choose the least dangerous candidacy.

    A. I don't get offended, because I don't use feelings when making decisions like these.

    B. I'm not wrong. Your participation in this system reinforces their entire charade. It is fixed to benefit the few. Clearly Sanders people can see that with this email release. Their entire system depends on division and distraction.

    C. I long for the day of a complete collapse of this political system. The system has become so power based and corrupt.

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result after this.
    C. Collapsus of this political system is not a good idea unless there's a solid replacement solution. (Which is needed btw)

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result since the Florida mess that got G.W Bush elected in 2000.

    C. But there already is, govern yourselves. Why do people feel the need to continue to elect others to rule over them.
    That's just silly, government is the only thing standing between you and utter ruin from thousands of sources. You can't protect yourself, without the rule of law, and government to maintain it, none of us would be any better off than Mad Max.


    Welcome back, btw!
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    lukin2006 said:

    polaris_x said:

    like i've been saying ... revolution ...

    Where to start such a revolution???since most of the world is fucked up
    most of the world is not nearly as fucked up ... the US is majorly fucked up ...
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    I'm probably what some would assume to be anti-establishment. Not so. I'm reestablishment. Reestablish some common sense in people (I think we had more of that several decades ago) and particularly reestablish some stability in our environment.

    Single issue voter? I guess you could call me that. The single issue I care about is bringing stability to the environment. If we don't do that, we die and all else is moot.

    But of course there are other issues of social relevance I care about as well. I think your summation is too narrow.
    There's more stability in the environment now than there ever has been. I'm not sure what more you want to see done.
    what!?? ... how does someone even remotely say something like this?
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559

    polaris_x said:

    Lets pretend for 5 minutes that none of this happened. No emails from inside the DNC tried to slow a Sanders namination. Would the outcome have been different?

    yes and no ... if you add other caveats to your IF - such as a more objective media outlet ... no voter suppression ... etc ... then I would say the outcome could very well be different ...

    but either way - turning a blind eye to methods that are anti-democratic regardless of whether the outcome would have changed is really a self-rationalization of a personal bias ...
    Yes and no? You can't change the media. Fox is always going to be right and CNN is always going to be left. Always. So I ask again, does it really matter that there were a few emails stating that some people in the DNC preferred Clinton to sanders. No, it wouldn't have mattered. I say partly because sanders ran as an anti establishment candidate, when he is in fact part of the establishment.
    "you can't change the media" is the same rationalization as voting for clinton because she is the lesser of 2 evils ... it's the same rationalization that thinks your current electoral system is democratic ... it's the same rationalization that allows this country to be run by specific interests rather than the people ... it's defeatist in the way the "establishment" wants you to think ... just pick the person with the D or R next to their name and you've done your duty for your country ...

    i do agree sanders is part of the establishment tho ...
  • jerparker20jerparker20 Posts: 2,501
    polaris_x said:

    lukin2006 said:

    polaris_x said:

    like i've been saying ... revolution ...

    Where to start such a revolution???since most of the world is fucked up
    most of the world is not nearly as fucked up ... the US is majorly fucked up ...
    As someone who works with immigrants and refugees from around the world, i can guarantee you that the US is not as fucked up as some of you would like to think it is.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559

    polaris_x said:

    lukin2006 said:

    polaris_x said:

    like i've been saying ... revolution ...

    Where to start such a revolution???since most of the world is fucked up
    most of the world is not nearly as fucked up ... the US is majorly fucked up ...
    As someone who works with immigrants and refugees from around the world, i can guarantee you that the US is not as fucked up as some of you would like to think it is.
    if you're comp is people coming from war torn countries ... sure ... it's utopia ... but is that the standard you want to use?
  • KatKat Posts: 4,871
    edited July 2016

    polaris_x said:

    lukin2006 said:

    polaris_x said:

    like i've been saying ... revolution ...

    Where to start such a revolution???since most of the world is fucked up
    most of the world is not nearly as fucked up ... the US is majorly fucked up ...
    As someone who works with immigrants and refugees from around the world, i can guarantee you that the US is not as fucked up as some of you would like to think it is.
    Thanks for this post. I need to find the story of Chicken Little. Did it have a happy ending? Did she come to realize the sky wasn't falling? It's been a very long time since I read it. :)

    EDIT: Ah yes, Foxy Loxy to the rescue. :)
    Post edited by Kat on
    Falling down,...not staying down
  • riotgrlriotgrl Posts: 1,895
    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    The GOP has been trumped. I love seeing them squirm.

    The Dems are actively working to alter results. I love that emails are showing the truth.

    The Libertarians nominated a CFR Globalist as VP. Nothing to love here.

    The LA Times calls for a coup if Trump wins. Nary a peep.

    Hillary proves over and over that she is the most evil person alive.


    Still going to vote? Voting validates all of the above. Good Luck.

    No offense but you're wrong, it's non voting that validates all of the above even if it comes down to choose the least dangerous candidacy.

    A. I don't get offended, because I don't use feelings when making decisions like these.

    B. I'm not wrong. Your participation in this system reinforces their entire charade. It is fixed to benefit the few. Clearly Sanders people can see that with this email release. Their entire system depends on division and distraction.

    C. I long for the day of a complete collapse of this political system. The system has become so power based and corrupt.

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result after this.
    C. Collapsus of this political system is not a good idea unless there's a solid replacement solution. (Which is needed btw)

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result since the Florida mess that got G.W Bush elected in 2000.

    C. But there already is, govern yourselves. Why do people feel the need to continue to elect others to rule over them.
    That's just silly, government is the only thing standing between you and utter ruin from thousands of sources. You can't protect yourself, without the rule of law, and government to maintain it, none of us would be any better off than Mad Max.


    Welcome back, btw!
    If we all chose to govern ourselves wouldn't we just divide into smaller groups to create a way to protect ourselves? It's human nature to seek out others, at the very least, for social reasons.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    The GOP has been trumped. I love seeing them squirm.

    The Dems are actively working to alter results. I love that emails are showing the truth.

    The Libertarians nominated a CFR Globalist as VP. Nothing to love here.

    The LA Times calls for a coup if Trump wins. Nary a peep.

    Hillary proves over and over that she is the most evil person alive.


    Still going to vote? Voting validates all of the above. Good Luck.

    No offense but you're wrong, it's non voting that validates all of the above even if it comes down to choose the least dangerous candidacy.

    A. I don't get offended, because I don't use feelings when making decisions like these.

    B. I'm not wrong. Your participation in this system reinforces their entire charade. It is fixed to benefit the few. Clearly Sanders people can see that with this email release. Their entire system depends on division and distraction.

    C. I long for the day of a complete collapse of this political system. The system has become so power based and corrupt.

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result after this.
    C. Collapsus of this political system is not a good idea unless there's a solid replacement solution. (Which is needed btw)

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result since the Florida mess that got G.W Bush elected in 2000.

    C. But there already is, govern yourselves. Why do people feel the need to continue to elect others to rule over them.
    That's just silly, government is the only thing standing between you and utter ruin from thousands of sources. You can't protect yourself, without the rule of law, and government to maintain it, none of us would be any better off than Mad Max.


    Welcome back, btw!
    So you are saying that people are inherently bad?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487

    polaris_x said:

    lukin2006 said:

    polaris_x said:

    like i've been saying ... revolution ...

    Where to start such a revolution???since most of the world is fucked up
    most of the world is not nearly as fucked up ... the US is majorly fucked up ...
    As someone who works with immigrants and refugees from around the world, i can guarantee you that the US is not as fucked up as some of you would like to think it is.
    So let's bring more of them in to spread their goodwill.
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    polaris_x said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    I'm probably what some would assume to be anti-establishment. Not so. I'm reestablishment. Reestablish some common sense in people (I think we had more of that several decades ago) and particularly reestablish some stability in our environment.

    Single issue voter? I guess you could call me that. The single issue I care about is bringing stability to the environment. If we don't do that, we die and all else is moot.

    But of course there are other issues of social relevance I care about as well. I think your summation is too narrow.
    There's more stability in the environment now than there ever has been. I'm not sure what more you want to see done.
    what!?? ... how does someone even remotely say something like this?
    Yeah, no kidding.
  • DegeneratefkDegeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    polaris_x said:

    polaris_x said:

    Lets pretend for 5 minutes that none of this happened. No emails from inside the DNC tried to slow a Sanders namination. Would the outcome have been different?

    yes and no ... if you add other caveats to your IF - such as a more objective media outlet ... no voter suppression ... etc ... then I would say the outcome could very well be different ...

    but either way - turning a blind eye to methods that are anti-democratic regardless of whether the outcome would have changed is really a self-rationalization of a personal bias ...
    Yes and no? You can't change the media. Fox is always going to be right and CNN is always going to be left. Always. So I ask again, does it really matter that there were a few emails stating that some people in the DNC preferred Clinton to sanders. No, it wouldn't have mattered. I say partly because sanders ran as an anti establishment candidate, when he is in fact part of the establishment.
    "you can't change the media" is the same rationalization as voting for clinton because she is the lesser of 2 evils ... it's the same rationalization that thinks your current electoral system is democratic ... it's the same rationalization that allows this country to be run by specific interests rather than the people ... it's defeatist in the way the "establishment" wants you to think ... just pick the person with the D or R next to their name and you've done your duty for your country ...

    i do agree sanders is part of the establishment tho ...
    If you've got the money to purchase CNN from Ted turner, more power to you.
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    riotgrl said:

    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    The GOP has been trumped. I love seeing them squirm.

    The Dems are actively working to alter results. I love that emails are showing the truth.

    The Libertarians nominated a CFR Globalist as VP. Nothing to love here.

    The LA Times calls for a coup if Trump wins. Nary a peep.

    Hillary proves over and over that she is the most evil person alive.


    Still going to vote? Voting validates all of the above. Good Luck.

    No offense but you're wrong, it's non voting that validates all of the above even if it comes down to choose the least dangerous candidacy.

    A. I don't get offended, because I don't use feelings when making decisions like these.

    B. I'm not wrong. Your participation in this system reinforces their entire charade. It is fixed to benefit the few. Clearly Sanders people can see that with this email release. Their entire system depends on division and distraction.

    C. I long for the day of a complete collapse of this political system. The system has become so power based and corrupt.

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result after this.
    C. Collapsus of this political system is not a good idea unless there's a solid replacement solution. (Which is needed btw)

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result since the Florida mess that got G.W Bush elected in 2000.

    C. But there already is, govern yourselves. Why do people feel the need to continue to elect others to rule over them.
    That's just silly, government is the only thing standing between you and utter ruin from thousands of sources. You can't protect yourself, without the rule of law, and government to maintain it, none of us would be any better off than Mad Max.


    Welcome back, btw!
    If we all chose to govern ourselves wouldn't we just divide into smaller groups to create a way to protect ourselves? It's human nature to seek out others, at the very least, for social reasons.
    Exactly. You'd also seek out those that are of similar mind instead of having social program experiments forced upon you.
  • DegeneratefkDegeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    polaris_x said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    I'm probably what some would assume to be anti-establishment. Not so. I'm reestablishment. Reestablish some common sense in people (I think we had more of that several decades ago) and particularly reestablish some stability in our environment.

    Single issue voter? I guess you could call me that. The single issue I care about is bringing stability to the environment. If we don't do that, we die and all else is moot.

    But of course there are other issues of social relevance I care about as well. I think your summation is too narrow.
    There's more stability in the environment now than there ever has been. I'm not sure what more you want to see done.
    what!?? ... how does someone even remotely say something like this?
    I don't know the numbers, but I can't imagine the United States is pumping more pollution into the atmosphere than they were 5p years ago. The laws enacted by Obama and the EPA have made it almost impossible to ignore. Are you telling me that the unregulated Mills of the 40s, 50s, and 60s polluted less?
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    Now only government is allowed to destroy rivers.
  • riotgrlriotgrl Posts: 1,895
    unsung said:

    riotgrl said:

    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    unsung said:

    The GOP has been trumped. I love seeing them squirm.

    The Dems are actively working to alter results. I love that emails are showing the truth.

    The Libertarians nominated a CFR Globalist as VP. Nothing to love here.

    The LA Times calls for a coup if Trump wins. Nary a peep.

    Hillary proves over and over that she is the most evil person alive.


    Still going to vote? Voting validates all of the above. Good Luck.

    No offense but you're wrong, it's non voting that validates all of the above even if it comes down to choose the least dangerous candidacy.

    A. I don't get offended, because I don't use feelings when making decisions like these.

    B. I'm not wrong. Your participation in this system reinforces their entire charade. It is fixed to benefit the few. Clearly Sanders people can see that with this email release. Their entire system depends on division and distraction.

    C. I long for the day of a complete collapse of this political system. The system has become so power based and corrupt.

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result after this.
    C. Collapsus of this political system is not a good idea unless there's a solid replacement solution. (Which is needed btw)

    D. I don't know how anyone can trust an election result since the Florida mess that got G.W Bush elected in 2000.

    C. But there already is, govern yourselves. Why do people feel the need to continue to elect others to rule over them.
    That's just silly, government is the only thing standing between you and utter ruin from thousands of sources. You can't protect yourself, without the rule of law, and government to maintain it, none of us would be any better off than Mad Max.


    Welcome back, btw!
    If we all chose to govern ourselves wouldn't we just divide into smaller groups to create a way to protect ourselves? It's human nature to seek out others, at the very least, for social reasons.
    Exactly. You'd also seek out those that are of similar mind instead of having social program experiments forced upon you.
    In theory, I like that idea but in reality I don't see that working. I see fighting over territory and resources as we have throughout most of human history.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    edited July 2016
    Chicago has had public housing for how long? When the decision was made to reduce it by eliminating the big highrises in favor of integrated neighborhoods crime did in fact skyrocket, and remains so to this day, as you are correct in that territorial lines were redrawn.

    I still prefer the system of being able to choose over being forced.
  • riotgrlriotgrl Posts: 1,895
    unsung said:

    Chicago has had public housing for how long? When the decision was made to reduce it by eliminating the big highrises in favor of integrated neighborhoods crime did in fact skyrocket, and remains so to this day, as you are correct in that territorial lines were redrawn.

    I still prefer the system of being able to choose over being forced.

    I prefer choice as well but to do so, IMO, would require wholesale economic and political change or destruction. How many are willing to give up capitalism? Democracy? At the global scale very few I think.

    Personally, I would love to see an end to globalism and a return to local economies but I'm not holding my breath.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559

    polaris_x said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    It really seems to me that the anti-Clinton faction is a group of single issue voters.

    Do they not care about anything beyond establishment vs anti-establishment?

    If you vote on a broad range of issues, the choice of Trump or Clinton is obvious, even if it uncomfortable.

    I'm probably what some would assume to be anti-establishment. Not so. I'm reestablishment. Reestablish some common sense in people (I think we had more of that several decades ago) and particularly reestablish some stability in our environment.

    Single issue voter? I guess you could call me that. The single issue I care about is bringing stability to the environment. If we don't do that, we die and all else is moot.

    But of course there are other issues of social relevance I care about as well. I think your summation is too narrow.
    There's more stability in the environment now than there ever has been. I'm not sure what more you want to see done.
    what!?? ... how does someone even remotely say something like this?
    I don't know the numbers, but I can't imagine the United States is pumping more pollution into the atmosphere than they were 5p years ago. The laws enacted by Obama and the EPA have made it almost impossible to ignore. Are you telling me that the unregulated Mills of the 40s, 50s, and 60s polluted less?
    i don't know the actual numbers either but pollution is a function of the economy as well ... a lot of manufacturing died in the early parts of the obama admin and have started to increase so I wouldn't be surprised to see pollution levels going accordingly ...

    sure ... there have been advances in technology that helps remove particulates into the air but that has largely been offset with technology that makes us consume more resources and pollute even more ...

    plus - as we look at carbon emissions ... even if they decline year over year - we are still way above what is a sustainable amount ... hence the fact that many foreign trips now have global warming as a primary discussion point ...

    in any case - things are not rosy on the environment side ... nowhere close to it ...
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562

    polaris_x said:

    polaris_x said:

    Lets pretend for 5 minutes that none of this happened. No emails from inside the DNC tried to slow a Sanders namination. Would the outcome have been different?

    yes and no ... if you add other caveats to your IF - such as a more objective media outlet ... no voter suppression ... etc ... then I would say the outcome could very well be different ...

    but either way - turning a blind eye to methods that are anti-democratic regardless of whether the outcome would have changed is really a self-rationalization of a personal bias ...
    Yes and no? You can't change the media. Fox is always going to be right and CNN is always going to be left. Always. So I ask again, does it really matter that there were a few emails stating that some people in the DNC preferred Clinton to sanders. No, it wouldn't have mattered. I say partly because sanders ran as an anti establishment candidate, when he is in fact part of the establishment.
    "you can't change the media" is the same rationalization as voting for clinton because she is the lesser of 2 evils ... it's the same rationalization that thinks your current electoral system is democratic ... it's the same rationalization that allows this country to be run by specific interests rather than the people ... it's defeatist in the way the "establishment" wants you to think ... just pick the person with the D or R next to their name and you've done your duty for your country ...

    i do agree sanders is part of the establishment tho ...
    If you've got the money to purchase CNN from Ted turner, more power to you.
    GE owns CNN.
Sign In or Register to comment.