Big shock, another crooked politician
Comments
-
3rd party voters didn't put Trump in office. Lower educated middle American voters helped to do that. And so did the DNC. Put up 2 shitty candidates as the major party choices, and you'll end up with 1 of those shitty candidates as the winner. Unfortunately the shittier of the 2 won. It isn't funny. And there isn't a moral victory. Maybe the DNC can put up Nancy Pelosi this time. She's really exerting influence and energizing the voters these days. She'll only be 80 in 2020. Or maybe the DNC can pull their heads out of their asses and get busy putting up candidates that can energize the base, have some fresh ideas, and get people out to the polls.rgambs said:
Yeah, that all sounds good for a pat on the back at the end of the day.HesCalledDyer said:
They'll never get to that level if... wait for it... YOU DON'T VOTE FOR THEM. I'm not so sure why that's so hard to understand. That's exactly why I vote third party - so they have representation.CM189191 said:
Sure I'll double down on thatbrianlux said:
Nice inflammatory statement there. You don't know what I do or do not know about how government works. Oh, and by the way, I've worked in government. Federal government.CM189191 said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. No mention of the other 2 branches that are supposed to keep the Executive in check. Now we are stuck with Gorsuch.brianlux said:
As long as there is an electoral college, I disagree. I voted for Stein not because I thought she had a chance in hell of getting elected but because I knew Clinton had the California delegates in the bag and I was able to vote third party with a clear conscience and make a little statement- only the ever so tiniest of statements to be sure, but a statement nonetheless. If enough others had done the same, the message would have rung clear: some of us are sick and tired of the status quo... or worse. Clinton is status quo (strong ties to corporations that make huge amounts of money without producing anything useful) and Trump is, well, we all know that one.CM189191 said:People who vote 3rd party have a fundamental misunderstanding of how our 2 party system works. 3rd party always has been, and always will be the shit sandwich of any US election.
When you vote 3rd party, the only statement that gets delivered is : " I don't understand how US government works ".
But carry on with your personal attacks. Keep us divide. Right-o!
When 3rd parties start winning seats at the state level, then they maybe they can have a seat at the big boys table. Right now they hold less than 1% of elected positions. How does one justify running for President when they can't get representation on their local Parks & Rec Board? 3rd party politics is about dividing the 2 major parties. It's an election strategy akin to voter suppression or gerrymandering.When you vote a candidate runs 3rd party, the only statement that gets delivered is : " I don't understand how US government works ".
Personally, I think if you continue voting for either of the two major parties, you're a bigger part of the problem than any third party voter in this day and age. You send a message of complacency that both Republicans and Democrats can continue to make us argue over stupid shit that doesn't matter (or at least shouldn't matter) while they ALL turn their backs and fuck each and every one of us over.
I'm sorry but if anyone in here thinks ANY democrat or republican running for Congress or President has the interest of the People in mind, you're sadly mistaken.
And then we end up with a Bush Presidency and the fun and games are over.
And then some don't learn the lesson and we up with a damn Trump Presidency.
It's not cute, it's not funny, it's not a moral victory, it's Trump as POTUS."I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
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".jeffbr said:
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 '."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.
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 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.0 -
unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487There have been Presidents from six parties, including independent, so it has happened.
Or do you mean that the system is so corrupt that going forward there will not be an option to Dem or Rep?0 -
Sure. But you seem to think Duverger's "law" is some sort of absolute law of nature. But somehow, in this country, under this system, the progressive Republican party kicked the establishment Whig party to the curb. It can and has happened here. You are welcome to think it will never happen again because a french dude named Duverger said so. And whether or not is happens again, your premise that 3rd party voters don't understand how government works is still false. It is possible to understand very clearly how government works, and still find motivation to make it better. I'm sure the 2 major parties appreciate your enthusiastic support, though.CM189191 said:
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".jeffbr said:
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 '."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.
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 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."I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
Yes, and each time they were representative of the 2 major parties at the time. One party might replace another, but we will always trend towards a 2 party system.unsung said:There have been Presidents from six parties, including independent, so it has happened.
Or do you mean that the system is so corrupt that going forward there will not be an option to Dem or Rep?
0 -
so if you have two apples, you give me one, and I give you a different apple in return, how many apples do you have?jeffbr said:
Sure. But you seem to think Duverger's "law" is some sort of absolute law of nature. But somehow, in this country, under this system, the progressive Republican party kicked the establishment Whig party to the curb. It can and has happened here. You are welcome to think it will never happen again because a french dude named Duverger said so. And whether or not is happens again, your premise that 3rd party voters don't understand how government works is still false. It is possible to understand very clearly how government works, and still find motivation to make it better. I'm sure the 2 major parties appreciate your enthusiastic support, though.CM189191 said:
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".jeffbr said:
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 '."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.
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 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.0 -
I guess I'd have two. But is sounds like there are more than 2 apples in play.CM189191 said:
so if you have two apples, you give me one, and I give you a different apple in return, how many apples do you have?jeffbr said:
Sure. But you seem to think Duverger's "law" is some sort of absolute law of nature. But somehow, in this country, under this system, the progressive Republican party kicked the establishment Whig party to the curb. It can and has happened here. You are welcome to think it will never happen again because a french dude named Duverger said so. And whether or not is happens again, your premise that 3rd party voters don't understand how government works is still false. It is possible to understand very clearly how government works, and still find motivation to make it better. I'm sure the 2 major parties appreciate your enthusiastic support, though.CM189191 said:
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".jeffbr said:
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 '."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.
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 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."I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate. I bet other options would emerge.0
-
Then the headliners steal the cool ideas from the third party folks and we're back where we started.unsung said:Eliminate the level of support for entry for a Presidential debate. I bet other options would emerge.0 -
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.0 -
And we know how sacred some hold the Constitution.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.
Well, certain parts of it, anyway.my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
Maybe we need more brazen disregard for the parts that aren't working.CM189191 said:
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".jeffbr said:
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 '."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.
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 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.
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
What? Like casting a 3rd party/protest vote? What has that ever got anyone?brianlux said:
Maybe we need more brazen disregard for the parts that aren't working.CM189191 said:
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".jeffbr said:
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 '."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.
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 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.
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.
0 -
And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution? The current administration?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.0 -
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?CM189191 said:
What? Like casting a 3rd party/protest vote? What has that ever got anyone?brianlux said:
Maybe we need more brazen disregard for the parts that aren't working.CM189191 said:
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".jeffbr said:
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 '."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.
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 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.
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.
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.
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
...not unless you are referring to the constitutional law scholar who is currently running the deep state administration...PJPOWER said:
And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution? The current administration?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.0 -
Hahaha, now that's a funny one! Didn't know you were a jokester! You do know that Batman is make-believe, right?CM189191 said:
...not unless you are referring to the constitutional law scholar who is currently running the deep state administration...PJPOWER said:
And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution? The current administration?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.Post edited by PJPOWER on0 -
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.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."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
whomever wins the civil war.PJPOWER said:
And who would you put in charge of re-writing the constitution? The current administration?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."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
Got a link? Or are you adding 2008 primary campaign and her 2016 run?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.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; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 278 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K 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
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help