The Democratic Candidates

Spiritual_Chaos

HE'S ON!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_QchDDJVYQ

mrussel1

Meltdown99 said:

mrussel1 said:

Three parties can be corrupt as two.  Liberal parties can be as corrupt as conservative.  Socialist and communist governments are certainly as corrupt as any capitalistic one,  historically.  The common denominator is people.  The solution, as an easy and material start,  is McCain-Feingold.   I don't see how the number of parties is relevant at all.  

Also,  what generation am I product of?

The want it now generation.  You have no use for 3rd parties because they can not enact change in the now.  I am saying that it may take generations for a 3rd to begin to make a difference, but they will never make a difference with your attitude because to you it's a wasted vote.  Ask the folks on Victoria Island if they wasted their vote on the Green Party, or Guelph, On Green Party, most of where I live is represented by a 3rd party...we survive just fine, and truthfully our democracy is far better than yours ever will be...

It's a waste because of the construction of our amendments.  You must not understand the amendments and our history.  That's not an insult,  I'm sure you know more about the US than I do about Canada.  What you think is impatience is actually a deep understanding of our system and history.  I actually have a bachelor's in history, focused on the Age of Jackson.  That period is instructive in understanding how multiple viable candidates play out in our system.  That's why I said earlier that the viable solution is the removal of the electoral college, through the amendment process.  Third parties have collapsed or merged back into an existing party, creating factions within the party,  multiple times in our history. 

oftenreading

Meltdown99 said:

mrussel1 said:

Three parties can be corrupt as two.  Liberal parties can be as corrupt as conservative.  Socialist and communist governments are certainly as corrupt as any capitalistic one,  historically.  The common denominator is people.  The solution, as an easy and material start,  is McCain-Feingold.   I don't see how the number of parties is relevant at all.  

Also,  what generation am I product of?

The want it now generation.  You have no use for 3rd parties because they can not enact change in the now.  I am saying that it may take generations for a 3rd to begin to make a difference, but they will never make a difference with your attitude because to you it's a wasted vote.  Ask the folks on Victoria Island if they wasted their vote on the Green Party, or Guelph, On Green Party, most of where I live is represented by a 3rd party...we survive just fine, and truthfully our democracy is far better than yours ever will be...

Absolutely our range of parties is valuable and valued, but it’s a very different system in the US so a direct comparison can’t be made. 

Also, it’s Vancouver Island  

Spiritual_Chaos

Playing Creedence after the speech.

Meltdown99

oftenreading said:

Meltdown99 said:

mrussel1 said:

Three parties can be corrupt as two.  Liberal parties can be as corrupt as conservative.  Socialist and communist governments are certainly as corrupt as any capitalistic one,  historically.  The common denominator is people.  The solution, as an easy and material start,  is McCain-Feingold.   I don't see how the number of parties is relevant at all.  

Also,  what generation am I product of?

The want it now generation.  You have no use for 3rd parties because they can not enact change in the now.  I am saying that it may take generations for a 3rd to begin to make a difference, but they will never make a difference with your attitude because to you it's a wasted vote.  Ask the folks on Victoria Island if they wasted their vote on the Green Party, or Guelph, On Green Party, most of where I live is represented by a 3rd party...we survive just fine, and truthfully our democracy is far better than yours ever will be...

Absolutely our range of parties is valuable and valued, but it’s a very different system in the US so a direct comparison can’t be made. 

Also, it’s Vancouver Island  

Sorry about calling Vancouver Island, Victoria Island...I know better.

I think eventually the US has to adapt or fall behind.  I am under no illusion, 3rd parties have played a major role in our single-payer health care...which we should all be thankful.

brianlux

mrussel1 said:

Three parties can be corrupt as two.  Liberal parties can be as corrupt as conservative.  Socialist and communist governments are certainly as corrupt as any capitalistic one,  historically.  The common denominator is people.  The solution, as an easy and material start,  is McCain-Feingold.   I don't see how the number of parties is relevant at all.  

Also,  what generation am I product of?

mrussel1 , all power is prone to corruption, yes.  My point about third party is that I believe it should be a viable option and that when people who vote third party are ostracized and criticized, that kind of thinking might actually be counterproductive.   And here's why I say that:

In the US, we are at a place in time where the extreme right is having its day in the sun.  At this point, a movement toward moderation would be a step in the right direction.  But it's important to understand that you need a strong progressive left to help balance the equation.  To flat out dismiss radical left thinking might not be in a moderates best interest.  I

For example, in his book Confessions of an Eco-Warrior, Dave Foreman talks about how monkeywrenching is useful to the environmental movement:

"Monkeywrenching can also be seen as a sophisticated political tactic that dramatizes ecological issues and places them before the public when they  otherwise would be ignored in the media... and broadens the spectrum of environmental activism so that lobbying y mainstream groups is not considered "extremest". "  (page 144)

Before dismissing the idea of voting outside the confines of the limited two-party system, perhaps consider that those who work outside the parameters and think outside the box may actually be useful to your moderate viewpoint.

I would say the same for those who show concern or even disdain for "outrage culture".  Yes, some of that is over the top.  But it can also serve create a greater balance.

my2hands

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

dignin said:

Naive is too kind a word to describe someone who would vote third party when Trump is on the ballot.

I had no problem voting for Stein in 2016.  Hillary was a shoe in for the electoral college votes in California and although I obviously thought she was better than Trump, I didn't like either.  I was very fortunate to be able to vote 3rd party with a clear conscience. 

I wish enough others had done the same so as to start a trend toward the acceptance of third (or more) parties.  Why are we so locked into a two party system,?  Why are we so afraid of change?  Even if this is seen as "dreaming", when did people stop having dreams for a better world?  Do we really want to keep going down the same road that we know damn well is leading us further and further into a place that is bad for us (not to mention, bad for the planet)?  Do we really want to be cattle moseying along in a stupor headed for our own self-imposed slaughter?  Not me.

Well there's the real irony right? You could vote Stein knowing it didn't matter.  Ergo you could have stayed home too. 

The question is,  what would you have done if you lived in Pennsylvania?

Voted for whatever candidate he felt best lined up with his political beliefs and values? 

mrussel1

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

dignin said:

Naive is too kind a word to describe someone who would vote third party when Trump is on the ballot.

I had no problem voting for Stein in 2016.  Hillary was a shoe in for the electoral college votes in California and although I obviously thought she was better than Trump, I didn't like either.  I was very fortunate to be able to vote 3rd party with a clear conscience. 

I wish enough others had done the same so as to start a trend toward the acceptance of third (or more) parties.  Why are we so locked into a two party system,?  Why are we so afraid of change?  Even if this is seen as "dreaming", when did people stop having dreams for a better world?  Do we really want to keep going down the same road that we know damn well is leading us further and further into a place that is bad for us (not to mention, bad for the planet)?  Do we really want to be cattle moseying along in a stupor headed for our own self-imposed slaughter?  Not me.

Well there's the real irony right? You could vote Stein knowing it didn't matter.  Ergo you could have stayed home too. 

The question is,  what would you have done if you lived in Pennsylvania?

Voted for whatever candidate he felt best lined up with his political beliefs and values? 

So Hillary,  as he stated.  Because he clearly understood the ramifications and political reality of our system. 

dignin

cincybearcat said:

This place is fucking nuts.


3) naive - no wait that is too kind... what word would you use then tough guy? Say it and don’t be a pansy.

Haha. Too funny.

my2hands

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

dignin said:

Naive is too kind a word to describe someone who would vote third party when Trump is on the ballot.

I had no problem voting for Stein in 2016.  Hillary was a shoe in for the electoral college votes in California and although I obviously thought she was better than Trump, I didn't like either.  I was very fortunate to be able to vote 3rd party with a clear conscience. 

I wish enough others had done the same so as to start a trend toward the acceptance of third (or more) parties.  Why are we so locked into a two party system,?  Why are we so afraid of change?  Even if this is seen as "dreaming", when did people stop having dreams for a better world?  Do we really want to keep going down the same road that we know damn well is leading us further and further into a place that is bad for us (not to mention, bad for the planet)?  Do we really want to be cattle moseying along in a stupor headed for our own self-imposed slaughter?  Not me.

Well there's the real irony right? You could vote Stein knowing it didn't matter.  Ergo you could have stayed home too. 

The question is,  what would you have done if you lived in Pennsylvania?

Voted for whatever candidate he felt best lined up with his political beliefs and values? 

So Hillary,  as he stated.  Because he clearly understood the ramifications and political reality of our system. 

Have no problem with that, at all, whichis my point... just like i would have no problem if he voted Stein, Gary, Trump, or Mickey Mouse. I might disagree with someones choice, but don't have a problem with it,  it's their vote

The doomsday "you must vote Democrat, or die" routine is silly and shortsighted to me, that's all. 

brianlux

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

dignin said:

Naive is too kind a word to describe someone who would vote third party when Trump is on the ballot.

I had no problem voting for Stein in 2016.  Hillary was a shoe in for the electoral college votes in California and although I obviously thought she was better than Trump, I didn't like either.  I was very fortunate to be able to vote 3rd party with a clear conscience. 

I wish enough others had done the same so as to start a trend toward the acceptance of third (or more) parties.  Why are we so locked into a two party system,?  Why are we so afraid of change?  Even if this is seen as "dreaming", when did people stop having dreams for a better world?  Do we really want to keep going down the same road that we know damn well is leading us further and further into a place that is bad for us (not to mention, bad for the planet)?  Do we really want to be cattle moseying along in a stupor headed for our own self-imposed slaughter?  Not me.

Well there's the real irony right? You could vote Stein knowing it didn't matter.  Ergo you could have stayed home too. 

The question is,  what would you have done if you lived in Pennsylvania?

Voted for whatever candidate he felt best lined up with his political beliefs and values? 

So Hillary,  as he stated.  Because he clearly understood the ramifications and political reality of our system. 

Have no problem with that, at all, whichis my point... just like i would have no problem if he voted Stein, Gary, Trump, or Mickey Mouse. I might disagree with someones choice, but don't have a problem with it,  it's their vote

The doomsday "you must vote Democrat, or die" routine is silly and shortsighted to me, that's all. 

I agree and yet I understand why so many feel that way.  It's easy to see why some would say, a vote for Mickey Mouse is a vote for Trump. 

But then we need to stop and ask ourselves if we are willing to take risks to be true to our belief in democracy.  In the next election, if one of the candidates on the ballot is someone I truly believe in, I will ask myself "How much do I believe in democracy?" and what risk am I willing to take to stand by what I believe? 

The fact is, I didn't vote in Pennsylvania.  If I had, would I have voted for Stein?  Maybe, but but it's hard to say.  In retrospect, I'm not as much a fan as I was at the time.  Lesson learned- when I think I know enough about a candidate, I need to say, "No, you don't.  Keep studying."  If, in 2020, if I do that and still feel very strongly about someone running that may not have a great chance of winning, I will probably vote for them... and then get roasted here.  It's better to be true to oneself than worry about the criticism.

Besides, those who want a democrat to win, any democrat, just needs to make sure the vote gets out.   In 2016, 4.4 million 2012 Obama voters stayed home.

cincybearcat

CM189191 said:

cincybearcat said:

This place is fucking nuts.

Because there is actually a Democrat or 2/3 that I won’t vote for I’m:

1) Horseshoed...what a stupid label but I’m not surprised people around here like to pretend they hate labels and then that’s all they fucking do.
2) I do not understand the election system
3) naive - no wait that is too kind... what word would you use then tough guy? Say it and don’t be a pansy.

How about this, nominate an electable democrat. I’ll be voting in the dem primary...hoping for a candidate to come out that I can vote for. I can probably vote for 90% of them. But if they want to take the party to the crazy left I can’t vote it. And I won’t. And I can’t nor will I vote for trump.

The crazy left? 

Like providing education, healthcare and not putting kids in cages?

You have a strange definition of crazy....

Yeah cause that’s what I said. You have a strange definition of reading comprehension.

Nd if this is your tactic to change people’s minds, it isn’t working. 

cincybearcat

dignin said:

cincybearcat said:

This place is fucking nuts.


3) naive - no wait that is too kind... what word would you use then tough guy? Say it and don’t be a pansy.

Haha. Too funny.

Too scared to say it? 

oftenreading

This is the lamest tough guy routine I’ve ever seen. 

cincybearcat

oftenreading said:

This is the lamest tough guy routine I’ve ever seen. 

I know right. Saying naive is too weak a word and unwilling to say what he means? 

mrussel1

cincybearcat said:

dignin said:

cincybearcat said:

This place is fucking nuts.


3) naive - no wait that is too kind... what word would you use then tough guy? Say it and don’t be a pansy.

Haha. Too funny.

Too scared to say it? 

Watch it now,  My2Hands doesn't like threats against White Nationalists... heaven knows what will be said about this discussion about a member. 

mrussel1

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

dignin said:

Naive is too kind a word to describe someone who would vote third party when Trump is on the ballot.

I had no problem voting for Stein in 2016.  Hillary was a shoe in for the electoral college votes in California and although I obviously thought she was better than Trump, I didn't like either.  I was very fortunate to be able to vote 3rd party with a clear conscience. 

I wish enough others had done the same so as to start a trend toward the acceptance of third (or more) parties.  Why are we so locked into a two party system,?  Why are we so afraid of change?  Even if this is seen as "dreaming", when did people stop having dreams for a better world?  Do we really want to keep going down the same road that we know damn well is leading us further and further into a place that is bad for us (not to mention, bad for the planet)?  Do we really want to be cattle moseying along in a stupor headed for our own self-imposed slaughter?  Not me.

Well there's the real irony right? You could vote Stein knowing it didn't matter.  Ergo you could have stayed home too. 

The question is,  what would you have done if you lived in Pennsylvania?

Voted for whatever candidate he felt best lined up with his political beliefs and values? 

So Hillary,  as he stated.  Because he clearly understood the ramifications and political reality of our system. 

Have no problem with that, at all, whichis my point... just like i would have no problem if he voted Stein, Gary, Trump, or Mickey Mouse. I might disagree with someones choice, but don't have a problem with it,  it's their vote

The doomsday "you must vote Democrat, or die" routine is silly and shortsighted to me, that's all. 

Stop applying stronger adjectives than were stated. No one said doomsday.. no one said vote this way or die. You exaggerate the words of others to make your point. Often Reading said (I believe it was that poster), that a vote for a liberal third candidate,  particularly on a swing state,  is a vote for Trump.  In 2020, that's 100% true.  Nothing more,  nothing less.  Do you think that's not the case? If so,  defend that reasoning,  how a liberal 3rd party candidate would not enhance Trump's chance for victory in that state. 

cincybearcat

You know what, I’m allowed to have my opinion. I need not just bow down to whoever the Dems nominate. And yet people here continuing call names and gang up.  Admin continues to ignore it.  A lot of you try to be funny and call out My2hands for @ the admin. I wouldn’t do it, but I understand why he did. So go ahead, call me names, gang up on me, I really don’t give a fuck about you and I’m certainly not going to let that bullshit tell me who to vote for.

Bernie Sanders is part of the problem. He and trump were running the same kind of campaigns. Finding a group to blame, rallying the populists behind them, creating supporters that would not compromise...wouldn’t even vote for their parties nominee. Not only do I disagree with many of his policies (that’s not unique to him and the dem party), but I disagree with him as a person and a leader. So I won’t be voting for him. It’s not a vote for trump, it’ll be a vote for whomever I like best on the ballot and unless there is no 3rd party, it won’t be trump or Bernie Sanders. He’s a no go for me.

Spiritual_Chaos

Pete announced he's running today, and you put all your energy into behaving like small children. 

Come on now people.

Spiritual_Chaos

cincybearcat said:

You know what, I’m allowed to have my opinion. I need not just bow down to whoever the Dems nominate. And yet people here continuing call names and gang up.  Admin continues to ignore it.  A lot of you try to be funny and call out My2hands for @ the admin. I wouldn’t do it, but I understand why he did. So go ahead, call me names, gang up on me, I really don’t give a fuck about you and I’m certainly not going to let that bullshit tell me who to vote for.

Bernie Sanders is part of the problem. He and trump were running the same kind of campaigns. Finding a group to blame, rallying the populists behind them, creating supporters that would not compromise...wouldn’t even vote for their parties nominee. Not only do I disagree with many of his policies (that’s not unique to him and the dem party), but I disagree with him as a person and a leader. So I won’t be voting for him. It’s not a vote for trump, it’ll be a vote for whomever I like best on the ballot and unless there is no 3rd party, it won’t be trump or Bernie Sanders. He’s a no go for me.

But he could help change your country's mindset a bit and nudging the US towards "The European way" and a more humane base to stand on. Couldn't that be swell? Be more like the nordic countries?