Risking Drumpf getting elected is a big problem with the independent vote, but another big problem is they both seem like feckwits.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Yep, especially Johnson. What the hell is going on there?
In essence, you've got two choices in this election however you want to frame it: Democrat or Republican. Johnson will put in a respectable performance but he's not winning anything significant.
If you're committed to electoral reform, then you'd much rather have the candidate with Sanders, Warren, Biden and Obama on their side than the one who's coming across more and more like a fascist each day, what with his clampdown on anyone who disagrees with him in the press.
Innnnnnnnnnnnteresting...
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/trump-is-running-some-really-insecure-email-servers
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/trump-is-running-some-really-insecure-email-servers
President Father Pence it is then, while Emperor Trump spends four years going through the courts to win the right to gold leaf the White House while having an all out Twitter war with Denald Trump from his penthouse hotel lobby in trump tower. I hope his family are ridiculed for the rich Palins they are after this election.
True. Johnson's clueless on foreign policy which is unforgivable, and Stein's been over the top by the looks of her Twitter posts. Johnson will get an alright portion of the vote all things considered, but Stein's gotten so little traction to the point where she might manage to come 5th in a four-horse race.
Feckin hell 
How many more stories can come out before tomorrow night? The race is on, as the earlier ones get corroborated...
Stab in back part 24
The more informed people should try to inform the less informed. Its the only way.
You need to rise above the river of shit that twitter and the media is feeding you though, and as you can see judging by this thread, is quite difficult.
He asked for plausible.
Sooooo... how do we do that? Have you listened to his supporters? And how are the tweets not informative that are being posted here?
This is plausible. How many people do you have on your facebook? start there... give your informed opinion and invite people (its mainly people you know) to vote independent. A good debate can result from that.
Of course its not a change that can happen instantly, but in 8 years who knows.
Now, asking to vote for Hillary because of Trump, is the most stupid thing ever. Auto dick in the eye.
Wasting your vote on someone who has zero chance of winning sounds like a highly intelligent idea. That's slicing off your dick and throwing it to the dogs.
So I think dick in the eye is the better option than dick in a dog.
So I think dick in the eye is the better option than dick in a dog.
Which one do you suggest?
Nothing wrong with voting independent -- although I echo the points made about Johnson (he's an idiot, to start with). Stein is OK, better than either mainstream candidate at least.
It depends on how pragmatic/cynical you want to be about the whole thing. Personally, I wouldn't bother voting in this election unless I lived in a swing state -- in that instance I'd opt for Clinton.
It depends on how pragmatic/cynical you want to be about the whole thing. Personally, I wouldn't bother voting in this election unless I lived in a swing state -- in that instance I'd opt for Clinton.
That's not how it works. Voting independent just gives the other of the two parties the job.
Minority groups should certainly go for Clinton though. It's not even close.
We have a first past the post, winner take all system. The way it was designed was for a lack of parties, but when parties came into the mix it led to a 2 party system, and it will always lead to a 2 party system.
Also, the cognitive dissonance among the people on social media in South Carolina is truly something to behold. I'm in the middle of "the south will rise again!" and "we need a revolution to stop the Socialists!" country. Unless you're Alex Jones or the friendly neighborhood preacher/conspiracy theorist, you're not making any headway with them.
wrong in so many levels.
If you keep voting establishment (dems and reps), you acknowledged they are doing a good job, and that's why they earned their vote.
Get this. Democrats and Republicans are the same bullshit, different names. They just play a role in front of TV, and a different one behind cameras. They are financed by the same big corporations.
When you vote for one because you don't like the other, the result to the establishment is exactly the same. One or the other, its what they want.
The green party lady.
The green party lady has no chance of winning, so voting for her is just a way to elect someone like Trump. You are tacity supporting the other fringe by believing this.
Why do you like Jill Stein? I think it's a bit rich to say 'Why should I vote for Hillary to stop Trump' and then eventually voting for another candidate to stop voting for both Hillary and Trump. It's another thing if you like the Green Party platform.
well, its quite obvious.
I want a planet my grandchildren gonna enjoy some day. Of course i share the values the greenparty brings to the table.
Hillary is the evil political face of Wallstreet, and Trump, well... clueless.
This election of all elections, they're really, really not though.
Edit: Just in case you ask why I say this, for one example, this reason: voter suppression of minorities.
Voting for her is not a wasted vote ffs.Voting for her means you are tired and sick of the establishment. Means you want change.
the more people vote independent, the more people gonna follow the next time around.
I'm tired of repeating myself...
If the democrats and Republicans keep getting all the votes, it means (for them), that they are doing a good job. it means they are being rectified as the political forces chosen by the American people to bring them forward (or backwards). Its such a dangerous thing.
All that people voting for Trump or Hillary, just to prevent the other to win, are doing a huge damage to democracy in the USA. Such a wrong reason to vote.
This is only true to a certain extent.
There's a big difference in social issues and policy that would be enacted depending on which party gained control (of the presidency, house, senate, SC). You might not be voting for a workers' revolution, but you'll get something different with each party. For instance, the Democrats are inherently more progressive than the Republicans on pretty much every social issue. Gun laws, racial issues, healthcare, religious separation, military spending, Roe vs Wade, affirmative action (in the sense of sex, not race), death penalty, etc. There are party differences here which can make their way into actual policy. Even Obama's end of the Cuban blockade, deal with Iran. These things would not have happened under a Republican president.
Also, the Democrats tend to acknowledge things like climate change and evolution. That to me is a big difference.
How does Green Party make this possible? Do you think you have scrutinized your party's policies that they stand up for test? For instance, how does a Federal green party push through the measures in Red States etc?
That's setting the bar so low that it's below sea level.
I'm not sure that it is. Pretty much every social issue you care to think of is at stake in those themes. It's not utopian, but it never is, and never will be.
Again that's simply not how it works, at least not in the States. You have two parties that are in competition - no one else has a chance to win. If you're a left wing Green Party fan, you are better off joining the Dems and creating a sub-party power structure / voting block that advances your policy positions. Bernie Sanders, a lifelong Socialist/Social Democrat joined the party and nearly became its nominee for President, so its quite obvious that this is a more powerful approach than what Stein is doing. Even though Sanders didn't win the nomination, he came damn close and in the process managed to more or less get Hillary to adopt his position on free education at State Universities and acquiesce on his minimum wage policy. So obviously this is a better way than what Stein and her fans are getting - namely feck all.
The stoner Facebook rant equivalancy of "theyre both as bad as each other, man" is pretty vacuous IMO.
It's the kind of thing people with no actual knowledge of politics say to excuse having no actual knowledge of politics...But in a weirdly superior way.
feck that noise.
It's the kind of thing people with no actual knowledge of politics say to excuse having no actual knowledge of politics...But in a weirdly superior way.
feck that noise.
False equivalency is rampant nowadays
Probably because political apathy is too.
It's one thing to idealistically say "everyone vote independent", but in reality, if Jill Stein won the presidency, how many of her policies would be passed by Congress?
The Green Party is running 5 Senate candidates and 26 House candidates, which is down from by 7 and 64 in 2012.
If every Green candidate running were elected, what Green platform positions would actually come to fruition?
The Green Party is running 5 Senate candidates and 26 House candidates, which is down from by 7 and 64 in 2012.
If every Green candidate running were elected, what Green platform positions would actually come to fruition?
Not just in politics. It's everywhere. Flat earthers, Infowars, 9/11 truthers and almost every other conspiracy theory gets considerable airtime and listeners due to false equivalency bullshit of 'hearing out the other side'.
- Status