The Democratic Presidential Debates
Comments
-
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:0 -
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com0 -
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.0 -
We are getting pretty far afield from the thread's main topic, though.ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.0 -
The best for the LBTQ community, the communists, the women who are about to have a baby, the animals, pearl jam fans and everyone in between, is Bernie Sanders."Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0
-
This is one of the starangest posts I've ever read on this board (and that's saying something). First off, as the 2016 election showed, it's not about majoritarian because Trump didn't get a majority of the votes. Secondly, what the hell type of system would you prefer if you think voting is a form of violence? Dictatorships? Monarchies?ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.
2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com0 -
That's why we have the Electoral College!ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.
(Kidding...that makes it worse)1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley0 -
I don't think you're totally off base here but isn't there a difference between democratically electing leaders and employing a democratic vote on individual laws? Is there a primer on how you make decisions from an anarcho-communist perspective in a country set up like the US? Or does it require stripping down the idea of state govt, federal govt, etc.?ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.0 -
See above: anarcho-communism.Ledbetterman10 said:
This is one of the starangest posts I've ever read on this board (and that's saying something). First off, as the 2016 election showed, it's not about majoritarian because Trump didn't get a majority of the votes. Secondly, what the hell type of system would you prefer if you think voting is a form of violence? Dictatorships? Monarchies?ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.0 -
This did make me lolOnWis97 said:
That's why we have the Electoral College!ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.
(Kidding...that makes it worse)0 -
I can understand voting as violence in some circumstances. For example, "Should we take every dollar away from billionaires?" put to a popular vote. It passes and the federal government drains every billionaire and dumps that money into their coffers. That is violence.0
-
Da fuck is anarcho communism? Is that like lord of the flies?ecdanc said:
See above: anarcho-communism.Ledbetterman10 said:
This is one of the starangest posts I've ever read on this board (and that's saying something). First off, as the 2016 election showed, it's not about majoritarian because Trump didn't get a majority of the votes. Secondly, what the hell type of system would you prefer if you think voting is a form of violence? Dictatorships? Monarchies?ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
mcgruff10 said:
Da fuck is anarcho communism? Is that like lord of the flies? Or did you just combine two random words? Quick: democratic monarchy! Communistic capitalism! Monarchalicly demotismanarchy!ecdanc said:
See above: anarcho-communism.Ledbetterman10 said:
This is one of the starangest posts I've ever read on this board (and that's saying something). First off, as the 2016 election showed, it's not about majoritarian because Trump didn't get a majority of the votes. Secondly, what the hell type of system would you prefer if you think voting is a form of violence? Dictatorships? Monarchies?ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
Oh please. There’s get shot and killed in school as a second grader violence that equals I got screwed on my taxes because Team Trump Treason got elected violence? Voting = violence, this country is really fucked.09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, 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; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, 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; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
Halifax2TheMax said:Oh please. There’s get shot and killed in school as a second grader violence that equals I got screwed on my taxes because Team Trump Treason got elected violence? Voting = violence, this country is really fucked.
"The anarcho-communists you will always have with you".
But in pretty small numbers.
I don't think that alone is any indication of what level of fucked the country is
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
ecdanc said:
I question your last assertion.Lerxst1992 said:ecdanc said:
I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you think all people who disagree with you are the same. Don’t be dense.Lerxst1992 said:ecdanc said:
"Other people are awful!! You should be awful too!!"Lerxst1992 said:ecdanc said:
The end of your post is what gets me. I'm not a Bernie supporter, but I abhor Biden and the "centrist" (center right from where I'm standing) wing of the DNC. I'm a minority amongst even my own circle, but I simply cannot vote for someone like Biden, or even Buttigieg. Saying that gets me accused of stamping my feet (or of being a Bernie bro). Yet I don't hear the same complaints (or at least they aren't at the same volume) about centrists who would refuse to vote for Sanders.benjs said:
My concern is that these attacks don't just weaken the candidates, but they also weaken the ideologies or themes they're aspiring to represent (which transcend the specifics of a nominee) - sometimes creating rifts that can extend beyond the absurdly long primary season. Whether Bernie criticizes the powers that be today and it loses Democrats voters in the general election if a centrist turns out to be the nominee, or whether Biden or Buttigieg do the same towards the left, either way, the potential exists to dissuade Democrat general election voters.mrussel1 said:
I don't like negative campaigning in general, but I agree that's a tough stance. However, I definitely do not like negative campaigning intra-party. You damage the party candidate and it's hard to walk that back. But if you're going to do it, at least be transparent. This is both negative and lacks transparency IF (and I say if which is the basis of my critique) it came from a group of people/person specifically aligned with Sanders.ecdanc said:
Are you against all "negative" campaigning? I put the word "negative" in quotes, because I don't mean it in the traditional sense. Rather, I mean are you against all forms of politics that say "I'm against X" (with X either being a political position or a candidate)? And thus the only form of acceptable statement is "I'm for X" (with X being either a political position or a candidate)? If that's so, I don't necessarily disagree; I just think it would be a tough stance to uphold.mrussel1 said:
No, it's that the positions look so perfectly aligned, they appear to be Sanders supporters who are running what is essentially a negative ad against Pete. I don't find it unusual that queer leftists support Sandes, nor would I expect homogeneous support of Pete just because he's gay. At the same time, when the pattern of 'complaints' against Pete so perfectly tie into Sanders campaign promises, then I think it's dirty pool. If you want to advocate for Bernie, that's great. I love it. But don't do it in this way, designed to specifically damage Pete's support in the community, without making it clear that you're really pro-Bernie.ecdanc said:
Now THIS is some bullshit. You draw a false (convenient, for you) dichotomy between "grassroots" concerns and "Sanders....supporters." Do you people find it somehow surprising that queer leftists agree with the farthest left candidate?mrussel1 said:
Based on the loss last time, I still don't believe that either the left 'branch' of Democrat voters or the centrist 'branch' of Democrat voters can win the election on their own, so they sort of have to cross this new inner aisle which has formed. I think Bernie has opposed this notion and chosen a 'no compromises' approach and believes the left 'branch' is larger than typically believed, Biden isn't quite as ornery about centrist ideals but isn't believed by the left 'branch', and Buttigieg attempts to toe the line to appeal to the pragmatism in either cohort.
Abhor?
4 years ago we had tapes of trump bragging about walking into a roomful of naked 15 year old girls and bragging he likes to grab women by the genitals so he can f*ck them.
And what did Rs and right leaning moderates do? They showed up and voted for him. And to this day support him more than ever before.
Compare that bragging with your use of Abhor and you'll likely understand why the Supreme Court will be conservative for the next 40 years.
I'm sorry, I didnt realize you were a conservative.
I was joking and I could claim denseness on your comment as well.
Abhor Biden? I was hoping for a defense of that, unless you are looking forward to 4 more years.
And that is why Rs win more often. They step in line and support their party no matter what.
They dont?0 -
Don’t you teach history?mcgruff10 said:
Da fuck is anarcho communism? Is that like lord of the flies?ecdanc said:
See above: anarcho-communism.Ledbetterman10 said:
This is one of the starangest posts I've ever read on this board (and that's saying something). First off, as the 2016 election showed, it's not about majoritarian because Trump didn't get a majority of the votes. Secondly, what the hell type of system would you prefer if you think voting is a form of violence? Dictatorships? Monarchies?ecdanc said:
It's a hit at parties!Ledbetterman10 said:
I don't think that statement would go over well anywhere. How is voting a form of violence?ecdanc said:
Generally speaking, I do not vote. I consider voting a form of violence (that statement should go over well here). After much soul-searching, I did vote in the 2016 presidential election, however.OnWis97 said:
Not sure who is a leading US personality in that area. How far outside of that philosophy can you vote? Because I don't see one getting elected to, well, anything in the enforceable future.ecdanc said:
Majoritarian rule is a form of violence; ergo, voting is a form of violence.0 -
As were the votes that allow billionaires to exist, eh?pjl44 said:I can understand voting as violence in some circumstances. For example, "Should we take every dollar away from billionaires?" put to a popular vote. It passes and the federal government drains every billionaire and dumps that money into their coffers. That is violence.0 -
Perhaps that’s not why they win.Lerxst1992 said:ecdanc said:
I question your last assertion.Lerxst1992 said:ecdanc said:
I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you think all people who disagree with you are the same. Don’t be dense.Lerxst1992 said:ecdanc said:
"Other people are awful!! You should be awful too!!"Lerxst1992 said:ecdanc said:
The end of your post is what gets me. I'm not a Bernie supporter, but I abhor Biden and the "centrist" (center right from where I'm standing) wing of the DNC. I'm a minority amongst even my own circle, but I simply cannot vote for someone like Biden, or even Buttigieg. Saying that gets me accused of stamping my feet (or of being a Bernie bro). Yet I don't hear the same complaints (or at least they aren't at the same volume) about centrists who would refuse to vote for Sanders.benjs said:
My concern is that these attacks don't just weaken the candidates, but they also weaken the ideologies or themes they're aspiring to represent (which transcend the specifics of a nominee) - sometimes creating rifts that can extend beyond the absurdly long primary season. Whether Bernie criticizes the powers that be today and it loses Democrats voters in the general election if a centrist turns out to be the nominee, or whether Biden or Buttigieg do the same towards the left, either way, the potential exists to dissuade Democrat general election voters.mrussel1 said:
I don't like negative campaigning in general, but I agree that's a tough stance. However, I definitely do not like negative campaigning intra-party. You damage the party candidate and it's hard to walk that back. But if you're going to do it, at least be transparent. This is both negative and lacks transparency IF (and I say if which is the basis of my critique) it came from a group of people/person specifically aligned with Sanders.ecdanc said:
Are you against all "negative" campaigning? I put the word "negative" in quotes, because I don't mean it in the traditional sense. Rather, I mean are you against all forms of politics that say "I'm against X" (with X either being a political position or a candidate)? And thus the only form of acceptable statement is "I'm for X" (with X being either a political position or a candidate)? If that's so, I don't necessarily disagree; I just think it would be a tough stance to uphold.mrussel1 said:
No, it's that the positions look so perfectly aligned, they appear to be Sanders supporters who are running what is essentially a negative ad against Pete. I don't find it unusual that queer leftists support Sandes, nor would I expect homogeneous support of Pete just because he's gay. At the same time, when the pattern of 'complaints' against Pete so perfectly tie into Sanders campaign promises, then I think it's dirty pool. If you want to advocate for Bernie, that's great. I love it. But don't do it in this way, designed to specifically damage Pete's support in the community, without making it clear that you're really pro-Bernie.ecdanc said:
Now THIS is some bullshit. You draw a false (convenient, for you) dichotomy between "grassroots" concerns and "Sanders....supporters." Do you people find it somehow surprising that queer leftists agree with the farthest left candidate?mrussel1 said:
Based on the loss last time, I still don't believe that either the left 'branch' of Democrat voters or the centrist 'branch' of Democrat voters can win the election on their own, so they sort of have to cross this new inner aisle which has formed. I think Bernie has opposed this notion and chosen a 'no compromises' approach and believes the left 'branch' is larger than typically believed, Biden isn't quite as ornery about centrist ideals but isn't believed by the left 'branch', and Buttigieg attempts to toe the line to appeal to the pragmatism in either cohort.
Abhor?
4 years ago we had tapes of trump bragging about walking into a roomful of naked 15 year old girls and bragging he likes to grab women by the genitals so he can f*ck them.
And what did Rs and right leaning moderates do? They showed up and voted for him. And to this day support him more than ever before.
Compare that bragging with your use of Abhor and you'll likely understand why the Supreme Court will be conservative for the next 40 years.
I'm sorry, I didnt realize you were a conservative.
I was joking and I could claim denseness on your comment as well.
Abhor Biden? I was hoping for a defense of that, unless you are looking forward to 4 more years.
And that is why Rs win more often. They step in line and support their party no matter what.
They dont?0 -
How about Jim Crow?Halifax2TheMax said:Oh please. There’s get shot and killed in school as a second grader violence that equals I got screwed on my taxes because Team Trump Treason got elected violence? Voting = violence, this country is really fucked.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help