Poll: Should Sanders keep up the good fight?
Yes (keep it up!)
No (It's over, bud.)
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Should Sanders back out?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-06-2016, 11:52 PM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(09-06-2016 11:44 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 11:08 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  I think you're gonna have a much longer wait, then. No man steps into the Oval Office looking to reduce its power.

Sad but true.

I know, but it has to start some where. Hillary will hold that progress back. If there is a time to vote third party it is now.

The time to vote third party is after the electoral system has been fixed. So long as we retain a first-past-the-post system with winner takes all, strategic voting and a two party system is the inevitable outcome. If we had a preferential voting system, then voting third, fourth, fifth, or even sixth party would be viable; because even if your favorite didn't get the win, your vote would be counted for your second, third, fourth, or fifth choice depending on elimination. But until that happens, strategic voting is the most effective voting. I'd prefer Elizabeth Warren was running, but I'm not getting that. However I can vote to stop Trump from picking the next few candidates for the Supreme Court (with ramifications for decades to come), and so I will vote Hillary if it comes to that.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
10-06-2016, 12:19 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(09-06-2016 11:52 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 11:44 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  I know, but it has to start some where. Hillary will hold that progress back. If there is a time to vote third party it is now.

The time to vote third party is after the electoral system has been fixed. So long as we retain a first-past-the-post system with winner takes all, strategic voting and a two party system is the inevitable outcome. If we had a preferential voting system, then voting third, fourth, fifth, or even sixth party would be viable; because even if your favorite didn't get the win, your vote would be counted for your second, third, fourth, or fifth choice depending on elimination. But until that happens, strategic voting is the most effective voting. I'd prefer Elizabeth Warren was running, but I'm not getting that. However I can vote to stop Trump from picking the next few candidates for the Supreme Court (with ramifications for decades to come), and so I will vote Hillary if it comes to that.

I think it is a shame that it has to be this way. I could also never vote for hillary, I ain't for trump, but I would rather die than go against what I stand for.

Also who is elizabeth warren?

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 12:24 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(09-06-2016 11:44 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  I know, but it has to start some where. Hillary will hold that progress back. If there is a time to vote third party it is now.
The third parties unfortunately aren't much better than the Big D and R. The Green party with Jill Stein are anti-science lunatics (pro-homeopathy, anti-vaccines, anti-nuclear, etc.), the Libertarians with Gary Johnson are, well, Libertarian. Laugh out load

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Vosur's post
10-06-2016, 12:25 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(10-06-2016 12:24 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 11:44 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  I know, but it has to start some where. Hillary will hold that progress back. If there is a time to vote third party it is now.
The third parties unfortunately aren't much better than the Big D and R. The Green party with Jill Stein are anti-science lunatics (pro-homeopathy, anti-vaccines, anti-nuclear, etc.), the Libertarians with Gary Johnson are, well, Libertarian. Laugh out load

Well then at this point, I just hope japan votes right(and I mean correctly)

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 01:57 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(09-06-2016 11:44 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  I know, but it has to start some where. Hillary will hold that progress back. If there is a time to vote third party it is now.

Except for 2008, I have voted third-party since 1992. You're preaching to choir, bud.

Nothing will change until the bipartisan chokehold is broken.

The only candidate who even wants to achieve the progress you envision is Sanders, but he's dead in the water.

America will not change until the people get off the party-line voting mentality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 02:20 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(09-06-2016 11:52 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 11:44 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  I know, but it has to start some where. Hillary will hold that progress back. If there is a time to vote third party it is now.

The time to vote third party is after the electoral system has been fixed. So long as we retain a first-past-the-post system with winner takes all, strategic voting and a two party system is the inevitable outcome. If we had a preferential voting system, then voting third, fourth, fifth, or even sixth party would be viable; because even if your favorite didn't get the win, your vote would be counted for your second, third, fourth, or fifth choice depending on elimination. But until that happens, strategic voting is the most effective voting. I'd prefer Elizabeth Warren was running, but I'm not getting that. However I can vote to stop Trump from picking the next few candidates for the Supreme Court (with ramifications for decades to come), and so I will vote Hillary if it comes to that.

So long as the polity holds this view, nothing at all will change. There's no reason at all to hope that the two parties sitting in power will open up the process.

In this case, change can only come from below, at the level of the voter.

Unfortunately, most Americans cast their vote as if they're betting on a horse; they take pride in voting for the winner. If more Americans voted their conscience, a multiparty system would evolve naturally.

Also, get rid of the Electoral College. There's no such thing as "one man, one vote" when delegates elected by slim majorities vote en banc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 02:23 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(10-06-2016 12:19 AM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  I would rather die than go against what I stand for.

Really? Seems a bit extreme. What about going against what you stand for just a little bit? Or what about not dying but standing for it anyway?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 02:39 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(09-06-2016 03:20 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 03:08 PM)morondog Wrote:  Any successful?
The romanian hacker Guccifer who was recently extradited to the US claims that he hacked her server successfully.

But there is exactly no evidence that his claim has any merit.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 02:41 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(10-06-2016 02:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  But there is exactly no evidence that his claim has any merit.
Would you expect there to be evidence at this point in time? I mean, it's not like the FBI just releases evidence that could be used for possible future prosecutions to the public while their investigations are still on-going.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2016, 04:03 AM
RE: Should Sanders back out?
(10-06-2016 02:41 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 02:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  But there is exactly no evidence that his claim has any merit.
Would you expect there to be evidence at this point in time? I mean, it's not like the FBI just releases evidence that could be used for possible future prosecutions to the public while their investigations are still on-going.

Until such time as it's proven there's no point in accepting his claim either. And even if he had hacked her server, I don't see how you can hold her entirely liable. What of the peons who set it up. No one had a problem with it for a fuck-long time let's not forget, so if it really was such a terrible thing to do why didn't her underlings alert her or someone else if she failed to act on their concerns.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: