Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bludog

Is Voting Third Party Throwing Your Vote Away?

Recommended Posts

Cashing Goldman Sachs' and George Clooney's checks isn't "success."

 

Bernie raised $220 million in 8 million small donations averaging $27. Now THAT'S successful fundraising (versus pandering to big business/rich donors). He took NO SuperPAC money (unlike HRC).

 

Bernie raised money from people that he promised lots of free stuff (education, healthcare, a life on the dole) paid for with other peoples money. His vision wasn't to inspire young people to work hard in pursuit of their dreams, but to instead blame otheres and confiscate their wealth. What to expect from a guy who had a self-chosen parasitical lifestyle himself?

 

His was a very bad message. That people could have what every they want without hard work or sacrifice.

 

Fundraising from across the financial spectrum does not make one a plutocrat. Thinking otherwise is an example of the vulgar Marist theory of economic determinism.

 

HRC is a good liberal and would have made important leadership choices to help the lives of America's most vulnerable.

 

Instead we have Trump. Thanks a lot.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stupidity of Leftists tearing down a good liberal got us Trump.

 

Big fail.

 

Bill

 

Your "leftist vs liberal" silliness is a mirage.

 

Distrust of Hillary got us Trump. The electorate, as a whole, did not like her as a candidate. Stop blaming those who want a candidate who represents the working class (versus big corporations, wealthy donors, and greedy lobbyists).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your "leftist vs liberal" silliness is a mirage.

 

Distrust of Hillary got us Trump. The electorate, as a whole, did not like her as a candidate. Stop blaming those who want a candidate who represents the working class (versus big corporations, wealthy donors, and greedy lobbyists).

 

Distrust of HRC hurt her; but you don't seem to see the role you—and others like you—had in fueling that mistrust by propagating false narratives. You got it wrong.

 

As to liberals vs leftist there is a chasm between them.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Distrust of HRC hurt her; but you don't seem to see the role you—and others like you—had in fueling that mistrust by propagating false narratives. You got it wrong.

No, you got it wrong. :) The entire DNC got it wrong.

 

 

 

As to liberals vs leftist there is a chasm between them.

Aside from an apparent affinity for plutocrats, there's not much difference between us at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Distrust of HRC hurt her; but you don't seem to see the role you—and others like you—had in fueling that mistrust by propagating false narratives. You got it wrong.

 

No one will ever be able to convince me to be loyal, to a politician I don't trust. The founders meant the process to be adversarial. That's why The Founders put the First Amendment first.

 

Is it a false narrative that Hillary Rodham Clinton gave numerous speeches to Big Interest on Wall Street, and got paid large amounts of money? Is it a false narrative that Hillary's minimum fee for paid remarks is $200,000. Is it a false narrative that under her co-presidency with Bill Clinton that Glass-Spiegel was repealed, precipitating the financial crash of 2008; Bringing misery to millions?

 

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/wall-street-white-house-republicans-lament-of-the-plutocrats-101047

Beating up the finance industry isn’t going to improve the economy—it needs to stop. And indeed Goldman’s Tim O’Neill, who heads the bank’s asset management business, introduced Clinton by saying how courageous she was for speaking at the bank. (Brave, perhaps, but also well-compensated: Clinton’s minimum fee for paid remarks is $200,000).

 

 

Many of us could easily see through Hillary's populist facade. She hid her Plutocratic sympathies so poorly.

Surprise, surprise, the disconnected plutocrat lost - LA Times
www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hanson-why-hillary-lost-20161110-story.html

Nov 10, 2016 - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton concedes her defeat to Republican Donald Trump in New York on Nov. 9, 2016. (Andrew ...

NONE OF THIS MEANS I WOULDN'T PREFER HILLARY OVER TRUMP.

Hillary is merely deceptive and corrupt. Trump is evil.

 

 

As to liberals vs leftist there is a chasm between them.

 

Bill

 

Incessantly repeating this ridiculous dichotomy between "liberals vs leftists" just promotes the internecine warfare you claim to eschew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie raised money from people that he promised lots of free stuff (education, healthcare, a life on the dole) paid for with other peoples money. His vision wasn't to inspire young people to work hard in pursuit of their dreams, but to instead blame otheres and confiscate their wealth. What to expect from a guy who had a self-chosen parasitical lifestyle himself?

 

His was a very bad message. That people could have what every they want without hard work or sacrifice.

 

It's pretty clear that you missed his message entirely. Bernie's message was that the financial deck is totally stacked against the poor and middle class. Bernie advocates leveling the playing field so that the rich don't continue to get richer.....and, in turn, the poor can actually stay afloat and (in many cases) thrive. Novel concept, I realize.

 

You apparently like things the way they are with millionaires becoming billionaires.....and the plebes ending up buried in student loan debt and medical bills until they kick. That is not the country I want. Your disdain for people who aren't wealthy is more than telling. It's little wonder you adore HRC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's pretty clear that you missed his message entirely. Bernie's message was that the financial deck is totally stacked against the poor and middle class. Bernie advocates leveling the playing field so that the rich don't continue to get richer.....and, in turn, the poor can actually stay afloat and (in many cases) thrive. Novel concept, I realize.

 

You apparently like things the way they are with millionaires becoming billionaires.....and the plebes ending up buried in student loan debt and medical bills until they kick. That is not the country I want. Your disdain for people who aren't wealthy is more than telling. It's little wonder you adore HRC.

 

It's become painfully obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's become painfully obvious.

 

A lie.

 

Bill

 

Incessantly repeating this ridiculous dichotomy between "liberals vs leftists" just promotes the internecine warfare you claim to eschew.

 

The attacks on liberals have been non-stop all election season. I don't want a war, you all think ripping a good liberal is "constructive criticism" and a duty of citizenship, but threaten, censor, and make personal attacks when other candidates are put to the same test.

 

That is called hypocrisy BD. This is the historical characteristic of the left.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A lie.

 

Bill

 

The attacks on liberals have been non-stop all election season. I don't want a war, you all think ripping a good liberal is "constructive criticism" and a duty of citizenship, but threaten, censor, and make personal attacks when other candidates are put to the same test.

 

That is called hypocrisy BD. This is the historical characteristic of the left.

 

Bill

 

Not a lie at all. You seem to be under the delusion that people just need to "work hard" and they can afford to pay off massive student loan debt, 5-6 digit hospital bills, and rake in enough money for their bills. Such is not reality in middle class America. Most people are drowning financially.

 

Of course the "good liberal" Hillary wouldn't know the difference as she has no clue what it's like to have to struggle to get the bills paid. She makes more for a 20-minute Goldman Sachs speech than a dozen Americans make in a year. She's out of touch with average America and the election results reflected that.

 

She is the epitome of the word 'plutocrat.' Sorry. Just is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not a lie at all. You seem to be under the delusion that people just need to "work hard" and they can afford to pay off massive student loan debt, 5-6 digit hospital bills, and rake in enough money for their bills. Such is not reality in middle class America. Most people are drowning with every passing day.

 

Of course the "good liberal" Hillary wouldn't know the difference as she has no clue what it's like to have to juggle money in order to get the bills paid. She makes more for a 20-minute Goldman Sachs speech than a dozen Americans make in a year. She's out of touch with average America and the election results reflected that.

 

She is the epitome of the word 'plutocrat.' Sorry.

 

Bull roar. Clinton and most Democrats favor lowering student debt burdens and expanding health care for all. She has done more to expand health insurance than Bernie Sanders ever has. People who are about such issues should support HRC instead of weaving lies.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bull roar. Clinton and most Democrats favor lowering student debt burdens and expanding health care for all. She has done more to expand health insurance than Bernie Sanders ever has. People who are about such issues should support HRC instead of weaving lies.

 

Bill

 

No, most Democrats favor leaving big insurance companies in the healthcare mix, ensuring that healthcare will NEVER be "affordable." Insurance lobbyists have doled out lots of money to make sure big insurance remains relevant. Same goes with student debt. As long as student loans remain in the greedy hands of large banks, students will leave college buried in massive debut until they're 50 (or older). It's too much.

 

In the wealthiest country on the planet, education and healthcare should not be sending Americans into bankruptcy. It's a travesty....one a good many plutocrats (in both parties) enthusiastically support. They'll throw out small decreases in interest rates and call it good. That way, the CEO's can still cash in on their $50 million dollar bonuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some don't seem to realize that the whole DNC leadership/membership Should be erased,

Put out of business forever.

 

The DNC and RNC are the problems, not the solution.

 

They both represent the ownership elite, the 1%,

 

Dems control about 30%, R's control about 30%.

 

As soon s the other 40% realize they should have a Majority voice in our elections,

 

Then we can start solving problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No, most Democrats favor leaving big insurance companies in the healthcare mix, ensuring that healthcare will NEVER be "affordable." Insurance lobbyists have doled out lots of money to make sure big insurance remains relevant. Same goes with student debt. As long as student loans remain in the greedy hands of large banks, students will leave college buried in massive debut until they're 50 (or older). It's too much.

 

In the wealthiest country on the planet, education and healthcare should not be sending Americans into bankruptcy. It's a travesty....one a good many plutocrats (in both parties) enthusiastically support. They'll throw out small decreases in interest rates and call it good. That way, the CEO's can still cash in on their $50 million dollar bonuses.

That's all true. But not a reason it would make a difference in a country where still today a lot of folks believe that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, that Iraq had WMD, climate change is a hoax and that they have a personal relationship with Jeezus. If the economic downtrodden would vote economics somebody like Bernie wouldn't be almost alone in congress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For some fucking reason America IS capitalism/freeeeeeedom for too many people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Bludog was right, voting third party to some extent is throwing your vote away. It doesn't have to be that way. With ranked choice, votes would not be thrown away if not for the candidates of one of two private organizations. Why do we allow two private organizations decide who the candidates should be? They paid for it, that's why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Bludog was right, voting third party to some extent is throwing your vote away. It doesn't have to be that way. With ranked choice, votes would not be thrown away if not for the candidates of one of two private organizations. Why do we allow two private organizations decide who the candidates should be? They paid for it, that's why.

 

BD is right on so many things,

 

But

 

I disagree with the premise that 3rd party is throwing away your vote.

The two main parties Will Not change if the Independents(40%) don't force the change.

The parties members only listen and vote for what is best for them, not the people, imo of course.

 

This year the Bernie supporters are forcing the change on the D side and probably on the R side as well.

 

Looked like the angry populace did force some changes this year, unfortunately neither Trump Or Hillary are the leaders we need

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BD is right on so many things,

 

But

 

I disagree with the premise that 3rd party is throwing away your vote.

The two main parties Will Not change if the Independents(40%) don't force the change.

The parties members only listen and vote for what is best for them, not the people, imo of course.

 

This year the Bernie supporters are forcing the change on the D side and probably on the R side as well.

 

Looked like the angry populace did force some changes this year, unfortunately neither Trump Or Hillary are the leaders we need

I understand your point and there is merit to it. However, I am trying to make the point that the voting method should be changed so that third parties have a legitimate chance at winning the election. Further, we already know how to do it. Ranked choice voting, if allowed, would give opportunity to the people to select the people they want, rather than the least bad candidate.

 

But alas, there is much to clean up in our election process to make it valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point and there is merit to it. However, I am trying to make the point that the voting method should be changed so that third parties have a legitimate chance at winning the election. Further, we already know how to do it. Ranked choice voting, if allowed, would give opportunity to the people to select the people they want, rather than the least bad candidate.

 

But alas, there is much to clean up in our election process to make it valid.

 

Colorado just passed a law that everyone can vote in primaries, no more just for D's and R's.

That is a good start

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Colorado just passed a law that everyone can vote in primaries, no more just for D's and R's.

That is a good start

 

That's excellent, Hex! :D As it should be. Primaries shouldn't be big insiders clubs. We each have one vote to use as we see fit.

 

I wish all states would follow suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you wholeheartedly in that a third political party has little chance of winning nationally. It is between the two major parties the Democratic and the Republican. Those who cast their votes for a third party candidate, while it is entirely their right to do, have to know if they're smart enough that is, that they are just casting their vote to the wind. BUT it could also possibly help one of the major political parties win and become elected. Therefore, they need to consider the ramifications of their vote well before casting it.

 

And since you mentioned Gary Johnson, here is something you and others might want to look at.

 

Gary Johnson sticks tongue out while talking during interview 0 WARNING: SUPER CRINGY


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...