2016 US Presidential Election Thread IX

[dazzledbylight]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Nader voters should continue to apologize to each and every one of us each and every day.

Amen. And I was a Nader supporter in his various issue campaigns through the years

But I think Gore could have fought back more, too

[dazzledbylight]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Or some of us could get over ourselves and vote like it matters. Because it does.

Minorities, women, and LGBT voters don't have the luxury of Jill Stein votes, or of inflating Sanders' ego whereby he, a soundly losing candidate, exacts petty demands lest he refuse to unite the party. Let's see if Sanders cares about defeating Trump, or if Sanders cares about Sanders. You want to splinter the left and erode Clinton support and then blame her? Was it what she was wearing? You want to mindlessly equivocate between Trump and Clinton as Jill Strin has done? Do you actually think the parties are the same? Would a President Gore have done what W did?

It only took 100,000 assholes in FL to give us the Bush nightmare.

This
. And don't forget the poor, the elderly and the disabled, too.

Is JS (know her name not listened to her speeches) saying Hillary and Trump are the same as ole ralphie did re Clinton v W?

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by DaveC

fuck this thread

Be the change you want to see (in this thread).

[dazzledbylight]

As a quick aside I see Austria's far-right candidate was defeated (not by much, but still ) Thank goodness. Not that that faction is going away.... still 'phew'.

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by dazzledbylight

As a quick aside I see Austria's far-right candidate was defeated (not by much, but still ) Thank goodness. Not that that faction is going away.... still 'phew'.

The sad part is that it should have been a blowout in the runoff if you add up the support for leftist and center-left alternatives...you wonder if there was significantly lower turnout for the runoff or if that idiot really was the second choice of a lot of otherwise reasonable people.

[Vlad n U 2]

Originally Posted by Axver

I hope you enjoy voting indirectly for President Trump.

Shorten: "If You Vote For The Greens Turnbull's Going To Win", Plus Assorted Zingers

Originally Posted by dazzledbylight

As a quick aside I see Austria's far-right candidate was defeated (not by much, but still ) Thank goodness. Not that that faction is going away.... still 'phew'.

Was something like a 1% difference, wasn't it? Bloody hell. That's the closest a European country has got to electing an actual fascist (and I'm not talking about the plethora of nationalist/conservative governments already in power).

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

The sad part is that it should have been a blowout in the runoff if you add up the support for leftist and center-left alternatives...you wonder if there was significantly lower turnout for the runoff or if that idiot really was the second choice of a lot of otherwise reasonable people.

There was a map that showing massive FPO support in rural areas/smaller towns, with the cities leaning heavily towards the Greens. I don't doubt the idiot had an awful lot of support, especially since the traditional conservative powers had caved in.

Don't think we'll see many more green v. fascist elections, to be honest.

[dazzledbylight]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

ou're speaking for everyone as though if you're a woman, or if you're a minority, or if you're gay, you'd never dream of voting for Jill Stein.

And your statement about whether or not Sanders cares about defeating Trump... and the only other logical side is that he cares about himself... why? Why can't you accept that Sanders is trying to genuinely run on principle, and trying to move the positions of the Democratic Party to the left?

It seems like you try to villainize Bernie Sanders as much as everyone calls out Clinton or Trump for being a supposed villain. And you're also coming off as rather insecure about Clinton. Do you think painting Sanders as a selfish enemy is in any way helpful dialogue? When he launches an independent bid, sure, call him selfish. Until then, I think you're just being insecure.

As one Afro American a uh, blogger said in in a radio interview "I have to vote for my survival not my ideals".
And I as a woman, and poor will do the same.
No Sanders person asked if I wanted to be a unwilling victim in a pursuit of their ideals if they decide to sit election out, vote for JS or a write in and Trump gets elected instead


If nothing else The Supreme Court and Trump with the Nuclear Codes should give thise people serious pause !

I'm glad Bernie has been there to help nudge Hillary leftward in some ways.

[Axver]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

Shorten: "If You Vote For The Greens Turnbull's Going To Win", Plus Assorted Zingers

You know my politics more than well enough (actually maybe you don't; perhaps I should do the political compass again to reconfirm my leftist credentials) to know that I would only ever make such a comment about a two-party first past the post system.

The point has no validity in a preferential system or even in a first past the post system that has somehow retained more than two major parties. But in the US presidential race, it's not even worth the waste of ink to print names other than the Democratic and Republican candidates on the ballot papers. Voting for a third candidate is, at best, akin to not voting at all.

[Kieran McConville]

I used to think the way many do here about the 2000 Nader candidacy. Still do to some extent... but Gore had already lost that thing. For it come down to a petty bunch of shenanigans in Florida the way it did (for him to lose his own state!), he'd already lost that thing. The Democrats should have run a better ticket than Gore-Lieberman in 2000. For the world's sake, they really should have.

My overriding memory of the media during that period however, was not that it was an election with much at stake. It was still the tail end of the fat-and-happy post Berlin-Wall era of triumphalism. The mood as I remember it was one of boredom. They sure showed us all!

[Vlad n U 2]

Originally Posted by Axver

You know my politics more than well enough (actually maybe you don't; perhaps I should do the political compass again to reconfirm my leftist credentials) to know that I would only ever make such a comment about a two-party first past the post system.

The point has no validity in a preferential system or even in a first past the post system that has somehow retained more than two major parties. But in the US presidential race, it's not even worth the waste of ink to print names other than the Democratic and Republican candidates on the ballot papers. Voting for a third candidate is, at best, akin to not voting at all.

It was an attempt at humour. I did not make a comment about your views, just imagining if Shorten decided to crack the shits at Greens voters.

[Vlad n U 2]

Originally Posted by Kieran McConville

I used to think the way many do here about the 2000 Nader candidacy. Still do to some extent... but Gore had already lost that thing. For it come down to a petty bunch of shenanigans in Florida the way it did (for him to lose his own state!), he'd already lost that thing. The Democrats should have run a better ticket than Gore-Lieberman in 2000. For the world's sake, they really should have.

My overriding memory of the media during that period however, was not that it was an election with much at stake. It was still the tail end of the fat-and-happy post Berlin-Wall era of triumphalism. The mood as I remember it was one of boredom. They sure showed us all!

My media knowledge of that election coverage starts and stops at the RATM video for Testify.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by dazzledbylight

As one Afro American a uh, blogger said in in a radio interview "I have to vote for my survival not my ideals".
And I as a woman, and poor will do the same.
No Sanders person asked if I wanted to be a unwilling victim in a pursuit of their ideals if they decide to sit election out, vote for JS or a write in and Trump gets elected instead


If nothing else The Supreme Court and Trump with the Nuclear Codes should give thise people serious pause !

I'm glad Bernie has been there to help nudge Hillary leftward in some ways.

Okay, so what I'm getting at is that you're just doing the same thing. You're trying to make a case that if you don't support Clinton you therefore support Trump.

That's not true.

[Axver]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

It was an attempt at humour. I did not make a comment about your views, just imagining if Shorten decided to crack the shits at Greens voters.

Ahh my mistake. I'd start the countdown to Shorten cracking it, but the ALP Right already seems to be doing a good enough job for him.

[Kieran McConville]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

My media knowledge of that election coverage starts and stops at the RATM video for Testify.

I thought they'd been and gone by then, wasn't that around the time of their funk covers album just before they went splitsville?

[Vlad n U 2]

Originally Posted by Kieran McConville

I thought they'd been and gone by then, wasn't that around the time of their funk covers album just before they went splitsville?

Off the album Battle of Los Angeles which was released in late '99 I think.

[Kieran McConville]

Fuck you i wont do what you tell me
fuck you i wont do what you tell me
fuck you i wont do what you tell me
fuck you i wont do what you tell me

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

This is already a settled issue given the major concessions that the Democratic party just gave Sanders. He is going to have his people on the board writing the damn platform. He will fall in line and the worries around here are ultimately for nought.

I sure hope you're right. And that he does half the job HRC did in 08. And that he helps out other Dems so we can take back the Senate.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

I'm certainly thankful every day for John Kerry losing the Presidency at least. I think both the left and Democrats benefited long-term from that and what would have been the point of a Kerry Presidency if he wasn't going to withdraw from Iraq in the first place? Bush got blamed for the economic meltdown that would have happened regardless giving everything that was in place before the 2004 election and Democrats will benefit from that and the ongoing Iraq quagmire for years to come.

And the key problem when it came to Gore/Kerry is that neither even had any real ideas of where they wanted to take the country. Gore's argument was basically "uh, more of the same" while Kerry's was "doesn't this guy suck?"...I mean, say what you will about a lot of Clinton's lip service, but at least she has some ideas to keep things drifting towards the left.

The point of a Gore presidency is that we wouldn't have ever invaded Iraq. The point of a Kerry presidency is that it wouldn't have been another Bush presidency.

You can pretend the parties are the same, but they aren't. Your characterizations of the Gore and Kerry campaign are silly.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

You're speaking for everyone as though if you're a woman, or if you're a minority, or if you're gay, you'd never dream of voting for Jill Stein.

And your statement about whether or not Sanders cares about defeating Trump... and the only other logical side is that he cares about himself... why? Why can't you accept that Sanders is trying to genuinely run on principle, and trying to move the positions of the Democratic Party to the left?

It seems like you try to villainize Bernie Sanders as much as everyone calls out Clinton or Trump for being a supposed villain. And you're also coming off as rather insecure about Clinton. Do you think painting Sanders as a selfish enemy is in any way helpful dialogue? When he launches an independent bid, sure, call him selfish. Until then, I think you're just being insecure.

1. If this election is as close as the polls in May (!!!) as some have breathlessly reported then every vote would count. Gore lost Florida by 537 votes. 100,000 voted for Nader. The progressive movement was harmed that day. We've had no worse president in my lifetime, maybe ever. It's not likely history will repeat itself, but voting for someone who thinks Hillary and Trump are the same doesn't seem like it's going to do much for progressive movements at all. It will make it harder to take seriously.

2. I know, I do have concerns about Clinton. I have to express them every time I post lest the OH MY GOD WHY CAN'T YOU ADMIT THAT SHE'S UNLIKEABKE remarks follow. We've so established her weaknesses as a candidate, and not to say so each and every time invites invective.

Up until recent weeks, I've been glad Sanders has been in the campaign. I've said so. He's made her better. He's given voice to good issues. I would vote for Sanders in a heartbeat against any Republican.

But recent reports of his willingness to damage Clinton in order to advance Bernie, and not the party (see the NYT article -- dismissed as "an anti-Bernie rag" -- I posted earlier), makes me suspicious about the sincerity of his agenda. Or at least it's now significant complicated by ego.

It does seem, however, in the past 24 hours that he will fall in line, since she's going to clinch after NJ. He's done well, he should get some consessions. But. He became a Democrat out of convenience a year or so ago. How kind should they be to this guy who has run against the party he used to make his campaign credible? This is where claims of Bernie's purity -- so central to his brand -- start to fall apart. He's as much a savvy, shrewd politician as any of them. He might advance an agenda that you and I prefer, but he's presenting a brand as consciously as anyone else.

I'm critical of Sanders worship, and I'm terrified of a Trump presidency. She will be the nominee. The sooner the party rallies and units around her the better off we will be.

Unless something cataclysmic happens, she should easily win.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

Okay, so what I'm getting at is that you're just doing the same thing. You're trying to make a case that if you don't support Clinton you therefore support Trump.

That's not true.

Change it to "if you don't vote for Clinton you therefore vote for Trump" and it is true.

A vote is a tool. That's all.