Big shock, another crooked politician

124

Comments

  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 12,766
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And we know how sacred some hold the Constitution. 


    Well, certain parts of it, anyway. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 37,927
    CM189191 said:
    jeffbr said:
    rgambs said:
    I always hear talk everywhere from people who claim that if you're truly informed you know about how both parties are just as bad and voting for them is the real sin.
    BULL-FUCKING-SHIT, look at the real world ramifications of a government faction in power that doesn't believe in global warming, that doesn't care about pollution, that wants to strip health care from millions of Americans to give a 30 billion dollar tax cut to the wealthiest few hundred.
    The list goes on and on, if you think the parties are the same, either you aren't paying attention to what's actually occuring on the ground, or you are just refusing to accept reality.
    Well, you've twisted the false premise that is being argued: "When you vote 3rd party, the only statement that gets delivered is : 'I don't understand how US government works '."

    That is the bullshit premise that caused the latest posts. You turned that false premise into something about there being no difference between the parties and they're both just as bad. Of course there are differences between the parties. And which one is worse depends on the issue.  But I'm happy to make a blanket statement that the Reps are worse than the Dems for a good number of issues I care about. But that is tangential to the debate about 3rd parties. And in my case, there was absolutely no downside to voting 3rd party. My state was always going to be strong for Hillary, and 3rd party votes did not provide Trump any advantage here.
    In political science, Duverger's law holds that plurality-rule elections (such as first past the post) structured within single-member districts tend to favor a two-party system and that "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism".

    In other words,


    Our system simply isn't structured that way and it was intentional.  I have never seen such brazen disregard for the principles upon which our government was founded.  
    Maybe we need more brazen disregard for the parts that aren't working. 

    "I believe in the mystery, and I don't want to take it any further than that. Maybe what I mean by that is love."
    -John Densmore











  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 6,534
    brianlux said:
    CM189191 said:
    jeffbr said:
    rgambs said:
    I always hear talk everywhere from people who claim that if you're truly informed you know about how both parties are just as bad and voting for them is the real sin.
    BULL-FUCKING-SHIT, look at the real world ramifications of a government faction in power that doesn't believe in global warming, that doesn't care about pollution, that wants to strip health care from millions of Americans to give a 30 billion dollar tax cut to the wealthiest few hundred.
    The list goes on and on, if you think the parties are the same, either you aren't paying attention to what's actually occuring on the ground, or you are just refusing to accept reality.
    Well, you've twisted the false premise that is being argued: "When you vote 3rd party, the only statement that gets delivered is : 'I don't understand how US government works '."

    That is the bullshit premise that caused the latest posts. You turned that false premise into something about there being no difference between the parties and they're both just as bad. Of course there are differences between the parties. And which one is worse depends on the issue.  But I'm happy to make a blanket statement that the Reps are worse than the Dems for a good number of issues I care about. But that is tangential to the debate about 3rd parties. And in my case, there was absolutely no downside to voting 3rd party. My state was always going to be strong for Hillary, and 3rd party votes did not provide Trump any advantage here.
    In political science, Duverger's law holds that plurality-rule elections (such as first past the post) structured within single-member districts tend to favor a two-party system and that "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism".

    In other words,


    Our system simply isn't structured that way and it was intentional.  I have never seen such brazen disregard for the principles upon which our government was founded.  
    Maybe we need more brazen disregard for the parts that aren't working. 

    What? Like casting a 3rd party/protest vote?  What has that ever got anyone?

    We're roughly four states away from a potential Constitutional Convention.  One Supreme Court Justice was hijacked and rumors of a second Justice retiring.  The ramifications of this election are going to be painful, span generations, and diminish America's status on the world stage.  

    Elections have consequences, I hope you enjoyed your protest vote.  


    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020 AT 07/07/2020
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 6,492
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 37,927
    CM189191 said:
    brianlux said:
    CM189191 said:
    jeffbr said:
    rgambs said:
    I always hear talk everywhere from people who claim that if you're truly informed you know about how both parties are just as bad and voting for them is the real sin.
    BULL-FUCKING-SHIT, look at the real world ramifications of a government faction in power that doesn't believe in global warming, that doesn't care about pollution, that wants to strip health care from millions of Americans to give a 30 billion dollar tax cut to the wealthiest few hundred.
    The list goes on and on, if you think the parties are the same, either you aren't paying attention to what's actually occuring on the ground, or you are just refusing to accept reality.
    Well, you've twisted the false premise that is being argued: "When you vote 3rd party, the only statement that gets delivered is : 'I don't understand how US government works '."

    That is the bullshit premise that caused the latest posts. You turned that false premise into something about there being no difference between the parties and they're both just as bad. Of course there are differences between the parties. And which one is worse depends on the issue.  But I'm happy to make a blanket statement that the Reps are worse than the Dems for a good number of issues I care about. But that is tangential to the debate about 3rd parties. And in my case, there was absolutely no downside to voting 3rd party. My state was always going to be strong for Hillary, and 3rd party votes did not provide Trump any advantage here.
    In political science, Duverger's law holds that plurality-rule elections (such as first past the post) structured within single-member districts tend to favor a two-party system and that "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism".

    In other words,


    Our system simply isn't structured that way and it was intentional.  I have never seen such brazen disregard for the principles upon which our government was founded.  
    Maybe we need more brazen disregard for the parts that aren't working. 

    What? Like casting a 3rd party/protest vote?  What has that ever got anyone?

    We're roughly four states away from a potential Constitutional Convention.  One Supreme Court Justice was hijacked and rumors of a second Justice retiring.  The ramifications of this election are going to be painful, span generations, and diminish America's status on the world stage.  

    Elections have consequences, I hope you enjoyed your protest vote.  


    My vote had nothing to do with Trump getting elected and I already explained that.  I get the impression you don't read other people's posts very thoroughly.  You keep focusing on little pieces of what others post.  Why?  Mining more digs? 

    And your squeaky clean knowledge of text book politics is somewhat impressive, but if that neat and tidy box of politics is so great, why is it failing so poorly?  Why, for example, how on earth did it produce the clown we have as POTUS right now?

    Yeah, I look, think and- as much as possible- live outside the box.  Christ's sake, someone's got to.


    "I believe in the mystery, and I don't want to take it any further than that. Maybe what I mean by that is love."
    -John Densmore











  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 6,534
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    ...not unless you are referring to the constitutional law scholar who is currently running the deep state administration...
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020 AT 07/07/2020
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 6,492
    edited June 2017
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    ...not unless you are referring to the constitutional law scholar who is currently running the deep state administration...
    Hahaha, now that's a funny one!  Didn't know you were a jokester!  You do know that Batman is make-believe, right?  
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin LouisPosts: 20,124
    unsung said:
    Clinton spent over a billion dollars to gain a job that wouldn't pay a fraction of that.  

    I can't support that. 
    if ron paul could raise that amount, he would have spent it too. otherwise, he did not want to be president very much. just sayin.
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin LouisPosts: 20,124
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 31,640
    unsung said:
    Clinton spent over a billion dollars to gain a job that wouldn't pay a fraction of that.  

    I can't support that. 
    Got a link? Or are you adding 2008 primary campaign and her 2016 run?
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    unsung said:
    Clinton spent over a billion dollars to gain a job that wouldn't pay a fraction of that.  

    I can't support that. 
    Got a link? Or are you adding 2008 primary campaign and her 2016 run?
    Try this new website called google.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,119
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    Clinton spent over a billion dollars to gain a job that wouldn't pay a fraction of that.  

    I can't support that. 
    Got a link? Or are you adding 2008 primary campaign and her 2016 run?
    Try this new website called google.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/


    question, if trump had to buy the airtime he received , what would his toral spending have been on top of what bloomberg reported in your link?
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 31,640
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    Clinton spent over a billion dollars to gain a job that wouldn't pay a fraction of that.  

    I can't support that. 
    Got a link? Or are you adding 2008 primary campaign and her 2016 run?
    Try this new website called google.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/
    You have a google machine? Can you take it to Indianer with you?

    Raising a billion + and stating a billion + was spent does not equate to Hillary spent a billion. Some of that money goes to down ticket candidates on the dem side. My google machine found 600 million + spent by Hillary, from a Libertarian news source, no less. Enjoy your Shangra La of Indianer.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    I will enjoy leaving this cesspool.
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 31,640
    unsung said:
    I will enjoy leaving this cesspool.
    What took you so long?
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    edited June 2017
    Not really any of your business.

    But, I used to be a Democrat.
    Post edited by unsung on
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 6,492
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin LouisPosts: 20,124
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
    no but there will be one at some point. if things keep going as they are. it's been 150+ years since the last one. it has been longer since that war than the age of the country at the time of the war. maybe not a civil war, but people will attempt a violent overthrow of the government. maybe not in the next 100 years, but the foundation and motivation for it is there. that anger is generational. when the government isn't working for them, and poverty is so bad, sometimes rebellion is a better option. i'm not advocating for it, just saying if discourse is this bad now, imagine it in 10 years, 30 years, 50 years.
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 6,492
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
    no but there will be one at some point. if things keep going as they are. it's been 150+ years since the last one. it has been longer since that war than the age of the country at the time of the war. maybe not a civil war, but people will attempt a violent overthrow of the government. maybe not in the next 100 years, but the foundation and motivation for it is there. that anger is generational. when the government isn't working for them, and poverty is so bad, sometimes rebellion is a better option. i'm not advocating for it, just saying if discourse is this bad now, imagine it in 10 years, 30 years, 50 years.
    I always find it ironic when liberal leaning people talk about the government not working for them and then advocate for more government power.  When the left has power, the right feels government isn't working for them and vise versa.  I actually imagine a better world in 50 years due to medical advances and the lack of baby boomers running things, but that's just me.  In general, quality of life for most Americans is WAY better today than it was even 30 years ago.  If you spend 12 hours a day watching all of the negative headlines that the media regurgitates, you might have a different perspective leaning towards cynicism.  I think that the odds of us getting into some kind of world war again are way more likely than a legitimate civil war. 
  • riley540riley540 Denver ColoradoPosts: 1,088
    Bernie sanders was the trump of the left. Play off fears of people and promis unreachable false hopes. Equally as shitty. 
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,659
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
    no but there will be one at some point. if things keep going as they are. it's been 150+ years since the last one. it has been longer since that war than the age of the country at the time of the war. maybe not a civil war, but people will attempt a violent overthrow of the government. maybe not in the next 100 years, but the foundation and motivation for it is there. that anger is generational. when the government isn't working for them, and poverty is so bad, sometimes rebellion is a better option. i'm not advocating for it, just saying if discourse is this bad now, imagine it in 10 years, 30 years, 50 years.
    I always find it ironic when liberal leaning people talk about the government not working for them and then advocate for more government power.  When the left has power, the right feels government isn't working for them and vise versa.  I actually imagine a better world in 50 years due to medical advances and the lack of baby boomers running things, but that's just me.  In general, quality of life for most Americans is WAY better today than it was even 30 years ago.  If you spend 12 hours a day watching all of the negative headlines that the media regurgitates, you might have a different perspective leaning towards cynicism.  I think that the odds of us getting into some kind of world war again are way more likely than a legitimate civil war. 
    government-run does not equal government power. it is a long standing misconception that the left like big government. we don't. or I don't. just necessary government. I just prefer programs being run by our elected officials so everyone has access to them and to keep them at a not-for-profit cost base. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 7,700
    riley540 said:
    Bernie sanders was the trump of the left. Play off fears of people and promis unreachable false hopes. Equally as shitty. 
    Decent troll post 
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 37,927
    riley540 said:
    Bernie sanders was the trump of the left. Play off fears of people and promis unreachable false hopes. Equally as shitty. 
    And just as bad as golf no doubt, that commie freak loser!  :lol:
    "I believe in the mystery, and I don't want to take it any further than that. Maybe what I mean by that is love."
    -John Densmore











  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin LouisPosts: 20,124
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
    no but there will be one at some point. if things keep going as they are. it's been 150+ years since the last one. it has been longer since that war than the age of the country at the time of the war. maybe not a civil war, but people will attempt a violent overthrow of the government. maybe not in the next 100 years, but the foundation and motivation for it is there. that anger is generational. when the government isn't working for them, and poverty is so bad, sometimes rebellion is a better option. i'm not advocating for it, just saying if discourse is this bad now, imagine it in 10 years, 30 years, 50 years.
    I always find it ironic when liberal leaning people talk about the government not working for them and then advocate for more government power.  When the left has power, the right feels government isn't working for them and vise versa.  I actually imagine a better world in 50 years due to medical advances and the lack of baby boomers running things, but that's just me.  In general, quality of life for most Americans is WAY better today than it was even 30 years ago.  If you spend 12 hours a day watching all of the negative headlines that the media regurgitates, you might have a different perspective leaning towards cynicism.  I think that the odds of us getting into some kind of world war again are way more likely than a legitimate civil war. 
    i don't know man. the government is supposed to work for all of the people. not just for your particular base. i agree that quality of life is better now, but that does not mean that there are less people in poverty now than there were then. the wealth discrepancy is worse now, and more wealth is in the hands of fewer people now, so that is not a good thing. we will have better advances in medicine in 50 years, but with for profit insurance who is going to pay for them? if trumpcare goes through, less people will be able to afford insurance and less will have medicaid, so their life expectancy will go down. we have great advances now that insurance companies will not pay for. we wanted to take some cadaver knee cartilage and transplant it into one of our patient's knees, a procedure that has shown great potential in the literature, and insurance denied it. they paid for an inferior procedure. i am not sure how this kid is gonna do, but we all feel that had he gotten the other surgery the prognosis for his knee would be better, but that is a different discussion. 

    i agree about war. i think we are closer to a regional conflict now than we were a year ago. i wonder why that is...
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 6,534
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
    no but there will be one at some point. if things keep going as they are. it's been 150+ years since the last one. it has been longer since that war than the age of the country at the time of the war. maybe not a civil war, but people will attempt a violent overthrow of the government. maybe not in the next 100 years, but the foundation and motivation for it is there. that anger is generational. when the government isn't working for them, and poverty is so bad, sometimes rebellion is a better option. i'm not advocating for it, just saying if discourse is this bad now, imagine it in 10 years, 30 years, 50 years.
    I always find it ironic when liberal leaning people talk about the government not working for them and then advocate for more government power.  When the left has power, the right feels government isn't working for them and vise versa.  I actually imagine a better world in 50 years due to medical advances and the lack of baby boomers running things, but that's just me.  In general, quality of life for most Americans is WAY better today than it was even 30 years ago.  If you spend 12 hours a day watching all of the negative headlines that the media regurgitates, you might have a different perspective leaning towards cynicism.  I think that the odds of us getting into some kind of world war again are way more likely than a legitimate civil war. 
    i don't know man. the government is supposed to work for all of the people. not just for your particular base. i agree that quality of life is better now, but that does not mean that there are less people in poverty now than there were then. the wealth discrepancy is worse now, and more wealth is in the hands of fewer people now, so that is not a good thing. we will have better advances in medicine in 50 years, but with for profit insurance who is going to pay for them? if trumpcare goes through, less people will be able to afford insurance and less will have medicaid, so their life expectancy will go down. we have great advances now that insurance companies will not pay for. we wanted to take some cadaver knee cartilage and transplant it into one of our patient's knees, a procedure that has shown great potential in the literature, and insurance denied it. they paid for an inferior procedure. i am not sure how this kid is gonna do, but we all feel that had he gotten the other surgery the prognosis for his knee would be better, but that is a different discussion. 

    i agree about war. i think we are closer to a regional conflict now than we were a year ago. i wonder why that is...
    What would a regional civil war look like?  This isn't 1865

    The largest defense contractors are HQ in the NE.  
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020 AT 07/07/2020
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin LouisPosts: 20,124
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
    no but there will be one at some point. if things keep going as they are. it's been 150+ years since the last one. it has been longer since that war than the age of the country at the time of the war. maybe not a civil war, but people will attempt a violent overthrow of the government. maybe not in the next 100 years, but the foundation and motivation for it is there. that anger is generational. when the government isn't working for them, and poverty is so bad, sometimes rebellion is a better option. i'm not advocating for it, just saying if discourse is this bad now, imagine it in 10 years, 30 years, 50 years.
    I always find it ironic when liberal leaning people talk about the government not working for them and then advocate for more government power.  When the left has power, the right feels government isn't working for them and vise versa.  I actually imagine a better world in 50 years due to medical advances and the lack of baby boomers running things, but that's just me.  In general, quality of life for most Americans is WAY better today than it was even 30 years ago.  If you spend 12 hours a day watching all of the negative headlines that the media regurgitates, you might have a different perspective leaning towards cynicism.  I think that the odds of us getting into some kind of world war again are way more likely than a legitimate civil war. 
    i don't know man. the government is supposed to work for all of the people. not just for your particular base. i agree that quality of life is better now, but that does not mean that there are less people in poverty now than there were then. the wealth discrepancy is worse now, and more wealth is in the hands of fewer people now, so that is not a good thing. we will have better advances in medicine in 50 years, but with for profit insurance who is going to pay for them? if trumpcare goes through, less people will be able to afford insurance and less will have medicaid, so their life expectancy will go down. we have great advances now that insurance companies will not pay for. we wanted to take some cadaver knee cartilage and transplant it into one of our patient's knees, a procedure that has shown great potential in the literature, and insurance denied it. they paid for an inferior procedure. i am not sure how this kid is gonna do, but we all feel that had he gotten the other surgery the prognosis for his knee would be better, but that is a different discussion. 

    i agree about war. i think we are closer to a regional conflict now than we were a year ago. i wonder why that is...
    What would a regional civil war look like?  This isn't 1865

    The largest defense contractors are HQ in the NE.  
    i'm talking about a regional war in the middle east. between us, russia, syria, and some arab countries.
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 6,534
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    unsung said:
    Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate.  I bet other options would emerge.

    The law had two parts: 
     "the double ballot majority system and proportional representation tend to favor multipartism"
     
    You would have to change more than just the threshold for entry.  You would have to change the way votes are counted and the way Congress is structured.

    In other words, re-write the Constitution.  
    And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution?  The current administration?
    whomever wins the civil war.
    What civil war?  Did I miss something?  
    no but there will be one at some point. if things keep going as they are. it's been 150+ years since the last one. it has been longer since that war than the age of the country at the time of the war. maybe not a civil war, but people will attempt a violent overthrow of the government. maybe not in the next 100 years, but the foundation and motivation for it is there. that anger is generational. when the government isn't working for them, and poverty is so bad, sometimes rebellion is a better option. i'm not advocating for it, just saying if discourse is this bad now, imagine it in 10 years, 30 years, 50 years.
    I always find it ironic when liberal leaning people talk about the government not working for them and then advocate for more government power.  When the left has power, the right feels government isn't working for them and vise versa.  I actually imagine a better world in 50 years due to medical advances and the lack of baby boomers running things, but that's just me.  In general, quality of life for most Americans is WAY better today than it was even 30 years ago.  If you spend 12 hours a day watching all of the negative headlines that the media regurgitates, you might have a different perspective leaning towards cynicism.  I think that the odds of us getting into some kind of world war again are way more likely than a legitimate civil war. 
    i don't know man. the government is supposed to work for all of the people. not just for your particular base. i agree that quality of life is better now, but that does not mean that there are less people in poverty now than there were then. the wealth discrepancy is worse now, and more wealth is in the hands of fewer people now, so that is not a good thing. we will have better advances in medicine in 50 years, but with for profit insurance who is going to pay for them? if trumpcare goes through, less people will be able to afford insurance and less will have medicaid, so their life expectancy will go down. we have great advances now that insurance companies will not pay for. we wanted to take some cadaver knee cartilage and transplant it into one of our patient's knees, a procedure that has shown great potential in the literature, and insurance denied it. they paid for an inferior procedure. i am not sure how this kid is gonna do, but we all feel that had he gotten the other surgery the prognosis for his knee would be better, but that is a different discussion. 

    i agree about war. i think we are closer to a regional conflict now than we were a year ago. i wonder why that is...
    What would a regional civil war look like?  This isn't 1865

    The largest defense contractors are HQ in the NE.  
    i'm talking about a regional war in the middle east. between us, russia, syria, and some arab countries.
    that makes more sense - i misread posts skimming
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020 AT 07/07/2020
  • RiotZactRiotZact Posts: 6,050
    riley540 said:
    Bernie sanders was the trump of the left. Play off fears of people and promis unreachable false hopes. Equally as shitty. 
    Decent troll post 
    I got so sick of having this argument when Bernie was running. The things he promised have been accomplished by tens of other countries, Trump was/is promising fairy tales. Additionally, Bernie has infinitely more experience that Trump. They are not equal in any aspect whatsoever. Period.
  • ^^^
    If you want to have a better conversation w/ the people you got sick of change it up a bit and discuss how the investigation on Sanders is going since he lawyered up.


  • RiotZactRiotZact Posts: 6,050
    ^^^
    If you want to have a better conversation w/ the people you got sick of change it up a bit and discuss how the investigation on Sanders is going since he lawyered up.


    Already did that awhile back. If you're going to troll, that's cool, but at least try to keep up.
Sign In or Register to comment.