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

Only voting matters.

Which is why I'm voting for a candidate that I believe in...or not voting at all.

 

Jill Stein wants to help Trump win.

She wants no such thing.

 

The Greens are people.

 

Bill

The Greens are indeed people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You work in medicine RR. How could you vote for a woman who caters to anti-vaxxers? And quack medicine?

 

She is a loon. Not a progressive. Not close.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You work in medicine RR. How could you vote for a woman who caters to anti-vaxxers? And quack medicine?

 

She is a loon. Not a progressive. Not close.

 

Bill

I work in medical insurance, coding and compliance. I analyze claims and determine if they're coded correctly and make sure our staff was compliant in delivering the service as well as billing the service. I don't deal with the medicine portion of it at all (other than to code it).

 

As far as vaccinations go, I believe parents should have a right to not vaccinate their children if they choose. Then again, I believe in the right for schools to refuse children who haven't been vaccinated for safety reasons. I'm big on personal choice. Forcing people (including kids) to have medical procedures they don't want is wrong.

 

Dr. Stein is a highly intelligent woman. I don't agree with her on homeopathic medicine. That said, insurances won't cover it, so no national insurance plan is going to take it on. Therefore, it's really a non-issue. I do like a lot of her other views. I'm not sold on her at this point. I don't feel good about anyone really. This could just be the first time in 40 years that I sit home (I've never even missed a midterm election).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work in medical insurance, coding and compliance. I analyze claims and determine if they're coded correctly and make sure our staff was compliant in delivering the service as well as billing the service. I don't deal with the medicine portion of it at all (other than to code it).

 

As far as vaccinations go, I believe parents should have a right to not vaccinate their children if they choose. Then again, I believe in the right for schools to refuse children who haven't been vaccinated for safety reasons. I'm big on personal choice. Forcing people (including kids) to have medical procedures they don't want is wrong.

 

Dr. Stein is a highly intelligent woman. I don't agree with her on homeopathic medicine. That said, insurances won't cover it, so no national insurance plan is going to take it on. Therefore, it's really a non-issue. I do like a lot of her other views. I'm not sold on her at this point. I don't feel good about anyone really. This could just be the first time in 40 years that I sit home (I've never even missed a midterm election).

The Green party platform (not that it will ever be impremented) calls for covering homeopathy for all. T'aint sane.

 

We'd deride a climate-change denier as anti-science, no?

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Green party platform (not that it will ever be impremented) calls for covering homeopathy for all. T'aint sane.

 

We'd deride a climate-change denier as anti-science, no?

 

Bill

The only mention of homeopathy in the Green Party platform is this:

 

We support the teaching, funding and practice of holistic health approaches and, as appropriate, the use of complementary and alternative therapies such as herbal medicines, homeopathy, naturopathy, traditional Chinese medicine and other healing approaches.

http://www.gp.org/social_justice/#sjHealthCare

 

Where did you see they wanted it "covered for all?" Speaking as someone who fights every day to get shit covered by insurance, it's not going to happen. "Alternative medicine" is something that has to be paid out of pocket (with very few exceptions).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only mention of homeopathy in the Green Party platform is this:

 

http://www.gp.org/social_justice/#sjHealthCare

 

Where did you see they wanted it "covered for all?" Speaking as someone who fights every day to get shit covered by insurance, it's not going to happen. "Alternative medicine" is something that has to be paid out of pocket (with very few exceptions).

What insurance? Full coverage for all paid by the State. Including (and this is their biggest vote getter) the government paying for the free medical marijuana.

 

Insurance companies are gone. Hopefully, they have a worker re-training program RR. Don't fret. They won't win.

 

Bill

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr Jill Stein discussing the "dangers" of WiFi on children. What difference does it make that it ain't so?

 

 

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Refusing to vaccinate children is superstition. It's on the order of praying to cure a child of appendicitis. Arguably, it's child abuse, given what we know about the kinds of diseases against which we vaccinate.

 

Also, it endangers other children too.

 

If that's what Stein is saying, she's pandering to the nutcase vote. Like nutcase Cynthia McKinney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply see things differently than you, Isabel. Is that allowed here?

Don't start climbing up on your cross simply because I am challenging you.

 

I don't want to fight with you. From all I've seen, we agree on most issues. It's only Hillary that we disagree on.

 

Your claims that voting for a no-win candidate instead of Clinton have no negative effect on the country are false.

 

Let me try to clarify: I need to make sure that Hillary is going to do what she claims she's going to do. Campaign promises don't sway me much, if ever. I need to make sure a candidate I'm supporting is going to 'walk the walk' regarding her campaign promises (many of which she hasn't supported in the past).

 

That's great. However, in THIS election, voting for a no-win candidate instead of Clinton HELPS TRUMP WIN.

 

No, I speak out against Trump as much as I can. I think the guy would be a terrible president. Trump's already proven himself to an idiot. I won't be assisting him or voting for him. But my vote is my own. I've considered my options for a long time.

 

Yes, yes, it's your own, and you can choose to help Trump be elected by refusing to vote for Clinton. You can certainly vote however you like, that is your right. Just don't try to dodge responsibility by pretending that your choice of throwing your vote away doesn't help Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't start climbing up on your cross simply because I am challenging you.

I'm not climbing on any cross. I come to this area of the forum (LO) because I don't want contentious, challenging discussion (I got to NHB for that). I come here solely to voice my opinion. I'm not telling people not to vote for Hillary or encouraging them to vote for someone else. I'm simply stating what I'm doing, then explaining why I'm doing it.

 

I usually put people who become contentious in this LO area on my ignore list. However because you're a mod/admin, I am unable to do that with you. My intent is not to "help Trump." However I won't vote for Hillary either. I'm very likely to stay home this year for the first time in my life. I feel badly enough about it without being treated like some kind of traitor by posters here I otherwise like and enjoy reading. I think (at least I hope) my posts show that I'm not some moron who sits around listening to Limbaugh, getting taken in by right wing talking points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a little boy my parents would take me with them to gather with like-minded progressives for hootenanny nights, where one of the songs we often sang was a 30's union song called "Which Side Are On?" I had the recording by Peete Seegar was well.

That song always stuck with me. Which Side Are You On? Salient phrase: there are no neutrals

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After being rebuffed by Nina Turner—who is going to remain a Democrat—Jill Stein has apparently found a running mate even more extreme than she is (and you thought it wasn't possible?)

Ajamu Baraka believes that both corporate parties share a commitment to the principle of “by any means necessary” for maintaining and advancing the interests of the White supremacist, patriarchal, colonial/capitalist order.

 

Sounds like a fun guy :P

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a little boy my parents would take me with them to gather with like-minded progressives for hootenanny nights, where one of the songs we often sang was a 30's union song called "Which Side Are On?" I had the recording by Peete Seegar was well.

 

That song always stuck with me. Which Side Are You On? Salient phrase: there are no neutrals

 

 

Bill

 

The young Pete Seeger! Film of which you don't see much of nowadays. The Labor Union movement, so suppressed now, still lives in the hearts of progressives. Hillary recently endorsed it in some of her speeches. The hope of a revival burns strong, If not with Hillary, then with another, yearning for equality. A progressive idea once started, cannot be suppressed for long. In the long run, history is moving toward equality ..... The young Pete Seeger's main dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The young Pete Seeger! Film of which you don't see much of nowadays. The Labor Union movement, so suppressed now, still lives in the hearts of progressives. Hillary recently endorsed it in some of her speeches. The hope of a revival burns strong, If not with Hillary, then with another, yearning for equality. An idea once started, cannot b suppressed.

 

Common ground. Solidarity forever, and all that.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not climbing on any cross. I come to this area of the forum (LO) because I don't want contentious, challenging discussion (I got to NHB for that). I come here solely to voice my opinion. I'm not telling people not to vote for Hillary or encouraging them to vote for someone else. I'm simply stating what I'm doing, then explaining why I'm doing it.

 

I usually put people who become contentious in this LO area on my ignore list. However because you're a mod/admin, I am unable to do that with you. My intent is not to "help Trump." However I won't vote for Hillary either. I'm very likely to stay home this year for the first time in my life. I feel badly enough about it without being treated like some kind of traitor by posters here I otherwise like and enjoy reading. I think (at least I hope) my posts show that I'm not some moron who sits around listening to Limbaugh, getting taken in by right wing talking points.

Sorry you feel so disenchanted RR.. I am not happy that Hillary is my choice.. but it is the best choice (from my perspective) this country has right now.

 

Don't stay home... vote for who you think the best person is. And there are other issues on your ballot that need your input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a short while, I gave consideration to the Green Party. There is a lot of good, progressive material in their platform, but also, some questionable ideas and policies.

 

Unlike Bernie, they are doing very little to expand into a major force for change. I am voting for Hillary to prevent the catastrophe of a Trump presidency, but I will stick with the ideas and philosophy of Bernie Sanders.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/07/15/bernie-sanders-progressive-message/87073052/

Bernie Sanders will launch organizations to spread progressive message
Nicole Gaudiano, USA TODAY 9:25 a.m. EDT July 15, 2016

WASHINGTON — His presidential aspirations behind him, Bernie Sanders is looking ahead to a busy future in which he continues to focus on nothing less than transforming the Democratic Party and the country.

In an exclusive interview with USA TODAY, the Vermont senator detailed plans to launch educational and political organizations within the next few weeks to keep his progressive movement alive. The Sanders Institute will help raise awareness of "enormous crises” facing Americans. The Our Revolution political organization will help recruit, train and fund progressive candidates' campaigns. And a third political organization may play a more direct role in campaign advertising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the cons who designed them, who BRAGGED about "delivering" the election to Bush, who argued AGAINST a paper trail and who argued AGAINST anyone being allowed to examine the code, have certainly rigged our elections in a most shocking way.

 

They have been indicated in a great many fraudulent elections. Further, there is fraud in the nominating process, selecting candidates who clearly don't represent the public.

 

I disagree. You can easily google the problems with the ballot boxes, there are many many thousands of issues. I even remember an interview with the designer who designed one of the ballot boxes, and he complained about the requirement to leave open a back door so that fraud could be committed in any election. Perhaps you are disagreeing with the concept of fraud in the nominating process. My real issue is that those with power have the final say in who gets selected, not the public. You can say that there is no problem, but it is just like in Communist China where those in power select their successors, or any med-evil kingdom where the king selects his children to rule after he is gone. Not my idea of democracy.

 

Third, as in 2000, if those in charge don't like the results, they can always have the USSC void the election and appoint the guy they want.

 

Precisely - although the remaining con whores on the SC have seen the writing on the wall. Their decades of shitting on the Constitution to service their owners are over. I hope you are correct. However, I am seeing democratic support for Merrick Garland, who appears to me to support most of the GOP agenda. I seriously doubt he would be in favor of overturning Citizen's United, or stopping the GOP agenda of removing women's health care access. I don't have confidence Hillary will nominate progressives to the court, particularly as she doesn't seem to be progressive.

 

Unless these issues are at least addressed, asking people to vote is a waste of time. It doesn't matter who they vote for, the winner is selected by someone else.

 

This hasn't been mentioned, but early on, Clinton made a few telling comments about reforming the election system. I have high hopes that she intends to make a few critical changes, and with con criminal election fraud significantly decreased, the true liberal nature of this country will be revealed.

 

If Hillary were really interested in winning against Trump she could easily move a bit to the left, and pick up a great many million voters, yet she refuses to budge.

 

Where on earth did you get that idea? That is my opinion. Bernie had good support particularly among independents in the millions. While the democrats who supported Bernie are supporting Hillary, I suggest many of the Bernie supporters are not. I want Hillary to move to the left to pick up those supporters as well as to help the nation.

 

Why not come out in favor of support for the middle class, or support for education, or universal single payer health care, or come out against war? or any of a great many issues?

 

You didn't even watch her speech, did you. Nope. OK you caught me on that one. After her selection of Kain, I was so turned off that I could not bear to hear her. I couldn't watch any of the DNC simply because they are not responding to any pressure from the left. However, I did look at her web site to see her stated positions on various issues. As I recall, she supports Obama Care, perhaps making a few improvements. I don't want the insurance companies deciding how much profit to take out of health care, and who can have what procedures. There is no reason except greed that keeps them in the loop. Obama went so far as to arrest the doctors who tried to push for single payer, and I suspect Hillary will have commitments to insurance company executives to allow them to keep charging the public, while removing benefits to increase profits.

 

I also looked at her education plan. Simply shifting the costs to states, hoping they can find cost savings somewhere is not much of a plan. She states she is trying to eliminate student debt, but doing it by lowering the interest rates for students. For claiming to be a detail wonk, she doesn't have the details I would like to see.

 

The bottom line is Hillary is pushing the left away, rejecting those who don't want the GOP policies to continue.

 

I remember Hillary speaking in a debate. The question was, what is the greatest threat to America. Since America has the world's greatest military by far, there is no external enemy that can conquer her. If America is to fall, just like ancient Rome, it will come from corruption from within. The infrastructure will crumble. That is exactly what we are seeing happen. The greatest threat to America is the GOP. Hillary's answer was Iran. That was the GOP answer. Be afraid of those people over there while we plunder the nation. Why would she make such an answer unless she was supporting that plunder?

For a short while, I gave consideration to the Green Party. There is a lot of good, progressive material in their platform, but also, some questionable ideas and policies.

 

Unlike Bernie, they are doing very little to expand into a major force for change. I am voting for Hillary to prevent the catastrophe of a Trump presidency, but I will stick with the ideas and philosophy of Bernie Sanders.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/07/15/bernie-sanders-progressive-message/87073052/

I get the point, but until I vote I will be trying to put pressure on Hillary to move to the left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did the use of alternative medicines such as herbalism, naturopathy, and homeopathy become a bad thing amongst liberals? Allowing funding for research of such practices will lend both credence and information to those who want to maintain a more natural lifestyle, while at the same time take power away from pharm companies - who are the ones preventing such research from being taken seriously and shared with the public. Many herbs have actually been shown to work through scientific, genuine research, and yet, the FDA refuses to allow them to be given any kind of approval because of the influence that big pharm and mansanto has on the government. As a budding scientist with a passion for herbs and nature, I am very disappointed in the discussion about alternative medicine on this board. The Green party platform of wanting to support holistic health is, in my opinion, a wonderful thing!

 

On a separate note, everyone knows that I am a big supporter of the Green party and Jill Stein. I believe in the green platform, and I believe in Jill Stein's ideas. Someone earlier stated that no-one is voting FOR Jill, but only AGAINST Hillary, and I would like to make a vociferous argument against that statement. Jill Stein represents a liberal, progressive agenda that I believe in, and, therefore, she will get my vote. If Hillary represented such an agenda, I would vote for her - but she does not. I will not go on a Hillary-bashing rant here, for sake of keeping the peace.

 

Furthermore, many people are claiming that voting third party is tantamount to voting for the candidate that one REALLY doesn't want (in this case, for most of us this is Trump). I have several arguments against this statement.

 

1. Voting for what you believe in is the point of democracy, and shouldn't be disparaged, fought, or discouraged.

 

2. If everyone who wanted to vote third party DID vote third party, we would stand a chance at making great changes to our nation.

 

3. The media is suppressing third party voices. This is because the media is under the thumb of corporations. The people who work in the media are in the 1% (or maybe the 5%), and they like the status quo. The media will suppress any voice that undermines their objective - we saw that with Bernie Sanders, and we see it with third parties.

 

4. Just a numbers game here, but if a voter does NOT live in a swing state, that voter can vote third party with all confidence that their vote won't change their state's delegates. I do not like it, but if your vote doesn't really count anyway, then you may as well vote for what you believe in.

 

5. Voting third party DOES actually send a message to the two party system, if enough people participate. Our voices are only heard if we speak them. (Not voting, on the other hand, does not send a message.)

 

6. A point that bears repeating again and again - voting with hope in your heart is far better than voting with fear.

 

Thanks for listening with an open mind, everyone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr Jill Stein discussing the "dangers" of WiFi on children. What difference does it make that it ain't so?

 

 

It has been proven that too much screen time affects brain development in children. It also affects cognitive and social function in adults. Here's one article about young children in particular.

 

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=486070

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homeopathy is in a class by itself as pure quackery.

 

Herbal remedies are based on active ingredients, and many pharmaceutical medications (including aspirin) have been based on traditional medicines like willow bark.

 

In contrast, homeopathic "cures" are nothing but sugar tablets. 100% phony pseudo-science.

 

It is simply indefensible to defend a flat-out medical fraud.

 

Bill


 

It has been proven that too much screen time affects brain development in children. It also affects cognitive and social function in adults. Here's one article about young children in particular.

 

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=486070

 

Screen time? Yes. Exposure to WiFi (the point of my post)? No.

 

 

Jill Stein is a very scary person who panders to anti-scientific conspiracy theory thinking, including dangerous ideas on vaccinations.

 

She is a loon. Her VP choice is further out yet.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homeopathy is in a class by itself as pure quackery.

 

It is based on the same principles as immunizations. Drinking goat's milk, for instance, when said goat has been consuming poison oak, is an arguably valid homeopathic preventative measure against poison oak.

 

Herbal remedies are based on active ingredients, and many pharmaceutical medications (including aspirin) have been based on traditional medicines like willow bark.

 

Yes, they are! So they deserve merit and attention.

 

 

Screen time? Yes. Exposure to WiFi (the point of my post)? No.

 

I watched the video, and Jill was talking about over-exposure to screen time.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Homeopathy is in a class by itself as pure quackery.

 

It is based on the same principles as immunizations. Drinking goat's milk, for instance, when said goat has been consuming poison oak, is an arguably valid homeopathic preventative measure against poison oak.

 

Herbal remedies are based on active ingredients, and many pharmaceutical medications (including aspirin) have been based on traditional medicines like willow bark.

 

Yes, they are! So they deserve merit and attention.

 

 

Screen time? Yes. Exposure to WiFi (the point of my post)? No.

 

I watched the video, and Jill was talking about over-exposure to screen time.

 

 

 

 

 

You obviously quit watching mid-way. Watch the rest, she gets there.

 

Bill

Homeopathy is a scam. You should educate yourself.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aleia - Your vote is yours. I wouldn't attempt to coerce your behavior, but you will quickly notice you don't have much in common with those that are trying to do so here.

 

You are obviously too enlightened and intellectual to pay attention to manipulative people.

 

Once upon a time, this forum was filled with open minded intellectuals. We used to discuss Liberal ideas openly with only constructive criticism regarding misinterpretations. However, it has since deteriorated into people advocating for candidates.

 

Unfortunately, other than yourself and RollingRock, there is nobody left here that can engage an intellectual argument. So, they will call you names and dismiss your ideas with single line un-researched worthless junk opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Jah! :D

 

While I appreciate your reservations toward coercion immensely, you have piqued my interest as to your stance on the subject. How do you feel about the upcoming election? What policies are most important to you? Also, as a fellow Californian, what are your thoughts on the senate and assembly candidates? (Hopefully this is an appropriate thread for such a conversation; I am still new... :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Jah! :D

 

While I appreciate your reservations toward coercion immensely, you have piqued my interest as to your stance on the subject. How do you feel about the upcoming election? What policies are most important to you? Also, as a fellow Californian, what are your thoughts on the senate and assembly candidates? (Hopefully this is an appropriate thread for such a conversation; I am still new... :))

Aleia, I started a few threads here that express my feelings about this election.

 

In a nutshell - I want Hillary to win my vote by continuing her progressive direction and I want all on the political left to hold her accountable to the progressive policies she runs on.

 

On the state level, I generally support Democrats, but would prefer them to be more progressive. I live in Arcata, which is arguably the most progressive municipality in the nation. We are Green and I am locally as well. Any movement to the left by Hillary and I will vote for Jill. However, the Democratic Party flush with corporate cash implies little hope for actual change. So, I would like Progressives to be prepared to primary corporate Democrats and Hillary as well if she sells out the citizens for the corporations that sponsored her candidacy.

 

I, along with RollingRock, believe that money in politics is the single greatest dilemma we face. It destroys the potential that anything good can be done. Unfortunately, neither candidate is talking about it enough or is forwarding a plan to change things.

 

When it comes to other state issues and races, I haven't concerned myself too much about what goes on outside of Humboldt County.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...