So it's like vote for Gary to send a message, or vote Hillary to stop Trump

I wish it wasn't like this, but it's the truth isn't it? Decisions.

The only message you're sending is that it's still cool that people forcefully take things from you and you "agreed" to it virtue of existence.

But I'll just annoy you OTPT, so that's the last of it from me.

Edit: DISCLAIMER* Just my opinion of course. Doesn't make it right or better or more profound or construed in any way better than the opinions of others, including yourself. If you got someone you want to vote for, I encourage you to do so.

I'm not sure how going from Bernie Sanders to Gary Johnson makes any sense to you.... But that's cool.

If people from either party start doing that, it will put the other party in power.   But from talking to friends it seems that both sides are willing to do this.  

I'm really wondering if this will be the biggest turnout of voters ever in a presidential election, or the smallest. Weird election cycle.

I thought the DNC did a good job of putting on a show last night.   Probably the best night of the six I've seen.  But still, not motivated to vote either way.  Not yet.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I'm not sure how going from Bernie Sanders to Gary Johnson makes any sense to you.... But that's cool.

Been over this Travis. The way you guys look at politics isn't the one way you're supposed to. They are actually very similar re social issues which I put a lot of importance in.

How is Bernie against the establishment to... The establishment in Hillary any less weird to you?

The Trump Train now looks unstoppable.

Allahpundit ‏@allahpundit 22m22 minutes ago
Old CW: Trump can’t get out of the low 40s
New CW: Hillary can’t get out of the low 40s http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-usc-daybreak-poll-methodology-20160714-snap-story.html …

Byron Tau ‏@ByronTau 32m32 minutes ago Philadelphia, PA
LA Times poll:
Trump: 47%
Clinton: 40%
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-usc-daybreak-poll-methodology-20160714-snap-story.html …

xsanguine wrote:The only message you're sending is that it's still cool that people forcefully take things from you and you "agreed" to it virtue of existence.

But I'll just annoy you OTPT, so that's the last of it from me.

Edit: DISCLAIMER* Just my opinion of course. Doesn't make it right or better or more profound or construed in any way better than the opinions of others, including yourself. If you got someone you want to vote for, I encourage you to do so.

Yeah I'm talking realistic things like the vote that is going to happen.

Vote your conscience. Anything else is a lie you tell yourself. If you believe in Johnson vote for him. Don't do it to "prove a point." Bernie got a lot of concessions in the platform specifically to satiate his supporters, the more progressive left of the party. Those concessions will drive policy for the first term of a Clinton presidency. If that means nothing to you, I don't know what to tell you. Vote your conscience.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I'm not sure how going from Bernie Sanders to Gary Johnson makes any sense to you.... But that's cool.

Been over this Travis. The way you guys look at politics isn't the one way you're supposed to. They are actually very similar re social issues which I put a lot of importance in.

How is Bernie against the establishment to... The establishment in Hillary any less weird to you?

Have we? Oh.

When you say social issues you pretty much just mean weed, right? Just be patient otpt. Those things don't change overnight. That's the problem with you Bernie bros. you don't recognize that you made strides this year, but real lasting change takes time. It doesn't happen in one year. The whining about that then makes you look like petulant babies and undoes some of what you have tried to accomplish.

Also, tip for you.... Bernie isn't against the establishment. Not in the sense you're thinking. Why? Because he's smarter than you. He recognizes that the way to effect true change is not to "fight against the establishment" but to work with it and ultimately become the establishment yourself.

So, make some protest vote if you like. But you'd be risking a much bigger downside to support a candidate that, a) doesn't have a chance and b) doesn't help you politically beyond your wanting weed. Which is inevitable anyway.

I'm writing in Bernie. Gary Johnson is a wack job.

Rocinante wrote:Vote your conscience. Anything else is a lie you tell yourself. If you believe in Johnson vote for him. Don't do it to "prove a point." Bernie got a lot of concessions in the platform specifically to satiate his supporters, the more progressive left of the party. Those concessions will drive policy for the first term of a Clinton presidency. If that means nothing to you, I don't know what to tell you. Vote your conscience.

The platform will be toilet paper the day after the election - applies to both parties.

LooseGoose wrote:

Rocinante wrote:Vote your conscience. Anything else is a lie you tell yourself. If you believe in Johnson vote for him. Don't do it to "prove a point." Bernie got a lot of concessions in the platform specifically to satiate his supporters, the more progressive left of the party. Those concessions will drive policy for the first term of a Clinton presidency. If that means nothing to you, I don't know what to tell you. Vote your conscience.

The platform will be toilet paper the day after the election - applies to both parties.

Yeah agreed. I have zero faith that Hillary drives home any of the Bernie additions to the DNC platform.

AnomanderRake wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

The platform will be toilet paper the day after the election - applies to both parties.

Yeah agreed. I have zero faith that Hillary drives home any of the Bernie additions to the DNC platform.

But it doesn't matter. You guys really do think of this stuff like its 4 years and that's it, there's nothing beyond that. It's all or nothing right now.

That's foolish. It's a process. You work the process over the course of years, not in a few months to get what you want. And that is by design to help people not implement some insane idea because everyone gets super emotional for a few minutes and votes for something crazy.

Anyway, maybe Hillary won't give the baby their bottle overnight. But she's not going to set you back 3 decades like trump would. So, do what you want, but I think you guys are just being silly and shortsighted instead of looking at your longer term goals.

Travis I live in Colorado guy, it's not just about weed. Who's whining, by the way? Because I supported Bern I must be whining about something? That's some pretty assumption language.

Good luck getting young people to vote for another political elite family. Ya know - who a lot of young people probably blame for not having better opportunities after paying 50k to go to school.

AnomanderRake wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

The platform will be toilet paper the day after the election - applies to both parties.

Yeah agreed. I have zero faith that Hillary drives home any of the Bernie additions to the DNC platform.

It's not just the president that agrees to the platform.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I'm not sure how going from Bernie Sanders to Gary Johnson makes any sense to you.... But that's cool.

It makes a lot of sense to me.... and I'm "fucking too stupid to get it" on a lot of subjects.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Travis I live in Colorado guy, it's not just about weed. Who's whining, by the way? Because I supported Bern I must be whining about something? That's some pretty assumption language.

Good luck getting young people to vote for another political elite family. Ya know - who a lot of young people probably blame for not having better opportunities after paying 50k to go to school.

Most bernie people are presently in some state of whining about not getting their way instead of working on a way forward to eventually get their way. So, yeah, a lot of you are whining. It's not an assumption otpt. It's an observation.

Bernies answer to college debt was asinine and, if you plan on being successful in the long run, would have been significantly more expensive for you than the debt you (and I otpt. Remember that I'm not that much older than you in the grand scheme) already have. That's specifically what I was referring to when I said that these things take time by design. The first step isn't to make it free. The first step is to find out why MSU feels it needs to take in a billion dollars a year and see if that's necessary at thousands of schools across the country. After we address the costs we can talk about if the country can pay for it. If you skip that first step then the costs issue will spiral even more out of control. Anyway. That's not what we're taking about here...

The problem with your current way of thinking still is that you only see what's right in front of you. As if otpt is going to be a young 20s guy raging every weekend forever. That's not the case. Bernie didn't win. Could the next progressive in four or eight years? Maybe. And how are the going to get what you want implemented? If trump wins will they just spend their entire term undoing damage or can they really work forward from when they get elected? This election isn't the end all be all otpt. There is more that comes after.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:

Yeah agreed. I have zero faith that Hillary drives home any of the Bernie additions to the DNC platform.

But it doesn't matter. You guys really do think of this stuff like its 4 years and that's it, there's nothing beyond that. It's all or nothing right now.

That's foolish. It's a process. You work the process over the course of years, not in a few months to get what you want. And that is by design to help people not implement some insane idea because everyone gets super emotional for a few minutes and votes for something crazy.

Anyway, maybe Hillary won't give the baby their bottle overnight. But she's not going to set you back 3 decades like trump would. So, do what you want, but I think you guys are just being silly and shortsighted instead of looking at your longer term goals.

I think voting for Hillary, encouraging political corruption and cronyism in hopes that we get a smidge of incremental progressive improvements is silly and short sighted. Electing Hillary Clinton does absolutely nothing long term to defeat the establishment, in fact it further entrenches them as our corporate overlords.

Maybe the Democratic Party needs to receive a message that their constituents aren't going to tolerate their bullshit. Maybe the Democratic Party needs to suffer the most humiliating defeat in election history in order to clean up their act. The fact is, the Democratic Party deserves to lose this election. The only reason they might not lose is because the Republicans somehow managed to nominate a complete moron.

I honestly believe that a complete and utter failure of the Democratic Party in this election could invigorate the base and could strengthen the progressive movement for future elections. It might not, but the alternative isn't acceptable to me and I can't support the party in its current form. You can all it foolish all you want but I think it's more foolish to continue to play the 2 party lesser of 2 evils game every 4 years, which is exactly what they want us to do because it perpetuates the status quo.

Rocinante wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:

Yeah agreed. I have zero faith that Hillary drives home any of the Bernie additions to the DNC platform.

It's not just the president that agrees to the platform.

I have even less faith in the morons in congress.

"Defeat the eatablishment" is right where I stopped. What a silly way of thinking.

I'm sorry dude, but you don't "defeat" an establishment. It's not a physical being or even an established group. You mold and change it to your whim. You take it over. You become the establishment. You get what you want by thinking long term. Not sitting in your room crying "I didn't get it now I hate that establishment so much why won't they let me have my ice cream cone! wah."

So, anyway, otpt asked for advice. My advice to both of you is to think if you want to set yourself further back from your goals or if you want to work toward what you eventually want. Your call. I'll leave now.

If people who want more options never vote third party then it will never gain traction.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:"Defeat the eatablishment" is right where I stopped. What a silly way of thinking.

I'm sorry dude, but you don't "defeat" an establishment. It's not a physical being or even an established group. You mold and change it to your whim. You take it over. You become the establishment. You get what you want by thinking long term. Not sitting in your room crying "I didn't get it now I hate that establishment so much why won't they let me have my ice cream cone! wah."

So, anyway, otpt asked for advice. My advice to both of you is to think if you want to set yourself further back from your goals or if you want to work toward what you eventually want. Your call. I'll leave now.

What's the difference between defeating it and taking it over/becoming it? That's purely semantics. For Progressives, defeating the establishment quite literally means removing the current politicians from office and replacing them with people that share the progressive movement's ideologies. It's the same thing.

Also nobody here is crying or whining, projecting that and including fake quotes doesn't strengthen your argument. The main difference in our opinions is that you believe in incremental change over time within the current system. I want to see the system completely rebuilt from the ground up. Incremental politics will never achieve that goal.

AnomanderRake wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:"Defeat the eatablishment" is right where I stopped. What a silly way of thinking.

I'm sorry dude, but you don't "defeat" an establishment. It's not a physical being or even an established group. You mold and change it to your whim. You take it over. You become the establishment. You get what you want by thinking long term. Not sitting in your room crying "I didn't get it now I hate that establishment so much why won't they let me have my ice cream cone! wah."

So, anyway, otpt asked for advice. My advice to both of you is to think if you want to set yourself further back from your goals or if you want to work toward what you eventually want. Your call. I'll leave now.

What's the difference between defeating it and taking it over/becoming it? That's purely semantics. For Progressives, defeating the establishment quite literally means removing the current politicians from office and replacing them with people that share the progressive movement's ideologies. It's the same thing.

Also nobody here is crying or whining, projecting that and including fake quotes doesn't strengthen your argument. The main difference in our opinions is that you believe in incremental change over time within the current system. I want to see the system completely rebuilt from the ground up. Incremental politics will never achieve that goal.

And that takes time. And it takes working with said establishment to further your own objectives. That's ultimately what I'm getting at. It does work. But it doesn't work tomorrow. Weed is a great example. 20 years ago not a chance it would be legalized... Now it's inevitable. Same story with gay marriage.

I'd ask you the same question that I ask a trump person and never get an answer to... What is sooooooo wrong that it requires a complete rebuild? Is your life really that bad? Is it worth the downside risks if you're wrong? I personally think things are fairly great. Sure, it could be better. But that's why I'd rather see tweaks then some grand rebuild that at best would put me in the same position I'm in now with a different set of problems.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
And that takes time. And it takes working with said establishment to further your own objectives. That's ultimately what I'm getting at. It does work. But it doesn't work tomorrow. Weed is a great example. 20 years ago not a chance it would be legalized... Now it's inevitable. Same story with gay marriage.

It can take a long time and certainly has in the past. I refuse to believe that radical and rapid progression isn't possible though. In fact I think that Bernie's campaign proved that it is possible. Bernie had a real chance at winning the Democratic nomination, many would argue that he was robbed in the primary but that's not my point. If Bernie had won, he could have rallied the base for mid-term elections to get more progressives in congress and implement many of his policies. His campaign showed that the thirst for radical change resonates with voters, and that gives me hope that maybe we don't have to wait decades for real progress.

But, he didn't win....

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:But, he didn't win....

Right and a true progressive will never win if we keep supporting a party that rigs their own primaries against them. Maybe if they lose this election the DNC will allow a progressive to win the nomination in the future because they fear a conservative presidency more than a progressive one.

AnomanderRake wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:But, he didn't win....

Right and a true progressive will never win if we keep supporting a party that rigs their own primaries against them. Maybe if they lose this election the DNC will allow a progressive to win the nomination in the future because they fear a conservative presidency more than a progressive one.

I mean, it wasn't really rigged... But, you can keep barking up the tree that holds you back like that if you want. Claim that you unfairly lost instead of figuring out how to win next time...

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:

Right and a true progressive will never win if we keep supporting a party that rigs their own primaries against them. Maybe if they lose this election the DNC will allow a progressive to win the nomination in the future because they fear a conservative presidency more than a progressive one.

I mean, it wasn't really rigged... But, you can keep barking up the tree that holds you back like that if you want. Claim that you unfairly lost instead of figuring out how to win next time...

If not rigged, it was heavily influenced by the DNC for Hillary's benefit, that's the root of the dissatisfaction with that party. Either the Republicans were worse at it or maybe didn't try as much to influence the outcome of their primary, hence Trump.
Neither party has a lot of fans, but you do have a rebellion (against the party) candidate in Trump and you have the status quo party candidate in Hillary that a lot of the party hates, easily could have been Bernie if the party didn't tamper (and Superdelegates ).
Don't see Johnson getting enough traction to be taken seriously. It will come down to how many are willing to hold their nose and vote their parties candidate, right now seems to be tilting a bit Trumps way, but there's a lot of time left.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:

Right and a true progressive will never win if we keep supporting a party that rigs their own primaries against them. Maybe if they lose this election the DNC will allow a progressive to win the nomination in the future because they fear a conservative presidency more than a progressive one.

I mean, it wasn't really rigged... But, you can keep barking up the tree that holds you back like that if you want. Claim that you unfairly lost instead of figuring out how to win next time...

I take it you're not keeping up with the recent DNC e-mail leak? There's plenty of proof regarding a coordinated effort by the DNC to sabotage Bernie's campaign.

Also I'm not ignoring your previous question about why I think the system needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. First, no my life is not bad at all, but that doesn't mean our current system is acceptable.

A few critical things that must happen to start the process:

1) Overturn citizens united to get unlimited private money out of politics
2) Shorten the campaign cycle and make it publically funded, our current election process is a circus show.
3) Outlaw gerrymandering of districts that allow bad politicians to maintain their positions(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/01/this-is-the-best-explanation-of-gerrymandering-you-will-ever-see/)
4) Election days must either become state and national holidays or something that people can do without waiting several hours.

These changes have no party affiliation whatsoever and are common sense improvements to our political system and electoral process, yet for some reason Bernie was the only candidate proposing any of these ideas. Bernie understands that to achieve progress we have to address the root cause of the problem.

I.B. Fine wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

I mean, it wasn't really rigged... But, you can keep barking up the tree that holds you back like that if you want. Claim that you unfairly lost instead of figuring out how to win next time...

If not rigged, it was heavily influenced by the DNC for Hillary's benefit, that's the root of the dissatisfaction with that party. Either the Republicans were worse at it or maybe didn't try as much to influence the outcome of their primary, hence Trump.
Neither party has a lot of fans, but you do have a rebellion (against the party) candidate in Trump and you have the status quo party candidate in Hillary that a lot of the party hates, easily could have been Bernie if the party didn't tamper (and Superdelegates ).
Don't see Johnson getting enough traction to be taken seriously. It will come down to how many are willing to hold their nose and vote their parties candidate, right now seems to be tilting a bit Trumps way, but there's a lot of time left.

See, I don't know if I really buy that all that much. Definitely not rigged... Definitely trying to position Hillary, but it's important to remember that until March, when Bernie won in Michigan, no sane person really believed he had much of a chance to actually win. And it was probably already too late at that point. I remember when they first started talking about how it was super close between Hillary and Bernie and it felt like it was the Dnc trying to stay in the news while all anyone talked about how insane trump and the rest of the republicans were acting.

In fact, I sort of wonder if that's still the case sometimes....

AnomanderRake wrote:
2) Shorten the campaign cycle and make it publically funded, our current election process is a circus show.
3) Outlaw gerrymandering

How do you decide who gets public funds? If I declare for President do I get $100K? Make it a polling issue? So then you have to be rich enough to be well known to get those funds? You want to outlaw gerrymandering and at the same time allow politicians to pick who gets public campaigning $$. LOLOLOL

Gerrymandering would be somewhat cured IF we got rid of the REQUIRED by law majority minority districts. That's not going to happen.

AnomanderRake wrote:1) Overturn citizens united to get unlimited private money out of politics

I'd love to hear your understanding of CU without you having Internet access.

How much do you know about the case?

LooseGoose wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:
2) Shorten the campaign cycle and make it publically funded, our current election process is a circus show.
3) Outlaw gerrymandering

How do you decide who gets public funds? If I declare for President do I get $100K? Make it a polling issue? So then you have to be rich enough to be well known to get those funds? You want to outlaw gerrymandering and at the same time allow politicians to pick who gets public campaigning $$. LOLOLOL

Gerrymandering would be somewhat cured IF we got rid of the REQUIRED by law majority minority districts. That's not going to happen.

You would still have to make it through the primary process to receive public funding for the general election. The basic idea is to that the general election is not decided by $$$.

I agree with you regarding the majority-minority districts. I think that's an issue that would have to be resolved simultaneously with gerrymandering as they are indeed related.

This all sounds like a really fun game if it didn't involve people's lives, their children, etc

But I bet rich white people have a ball discussing this kind of shit inside rooms of oak with gold plated door knobs

LooseGoose wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:1) Overturn citizens united to get unlimited private money out of politics

I'd love to hear your understanding of CU without you having Internet access.

How much do you know about the case?

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. In what way is it relevant how I learned about the Citizen's United case? How is 90% of information acquired these days if not for the internet? Sorry I don't subscribe to the Supreme Court's weekly newsletter.

xsanguine wrote:This all sounds like a really fun game if it didn't involve people's lives, their children, etc

But I bet rich white people have a ball discussing this kind of shit inside rooms of oak with gold plated door knobs

I love my gold plated doorknobs.

AnomanderRake wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

I'd love to hear your understanding of CU without you having Internet access.

How much do you know about the case?

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. In what way is it relevant how I learned about the Citizen's United case? How is 90% of information acquired these days if not for the internet? Sorry I don't subscribe to the Supreme Court's weekly newsletter.

You do know it was about Hills trying to shut down a movie about her?

LooseGoose wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. In what way is it relevant how I learned about the Citizen's United case? How is 90% of information acquired these days if not for the internet? Sorry I don't subscribe to the Supreme Court's weekly newsletter.

You do know it was about Hills trying to shut down a movie about her?

Haha yes, rather ironic isn't it?

AnomanderRake wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

But it doesn't matter. You guys really do think of this stuff like its 4 years and that's it, there's nothing beyond that. It's all or nothing right now.

That's foolish. It's a process. You work the process over the course of years, not in a few months to get what you want. And that is by design to help people not implement some insane idea because everyone gets super emotional for a few minutes and votes for something crazy.

Anyway, maybe Hillary won't give the baby their bottle overnight. But she's not going to set you back 3 decades like trump would. So, do what you want, but I think you guys are just being silly and shortsighted instead of looking at your longer term goals.

I think voting for Hillary, encouraging political corruption and cronyism in hopes that we get a smidge of incremental progressive improvements is silly and short sighted. Electing Hillary Clinton does absolutely nothing long term to defeat the establishment, in fact it further entrenches them as our corporate overlords.

Maybe the Democratic Party needs to receive a message that their constituents aren't going to tolerate their bullshit. Maybe the Democratic Party needs to suffer the most humiliating defeat in election history in order to clean up their act. The fact is, the Democratic Party deserves to lose this election. The only reason they might not lose is because the Republicans somehow managed to nominate a complete moron.

I honestly believe that a complete and utter failure of the Democratic Party in this election could invigorate the base and could strengthen the progressive movement for future elections. It might not, but the alternative isn't acceptable to me and I can't support the party in its current form. You can all it foolish all you want but I think it's more foolish to continue to play the 2 party lesser of 2 evils game every 4 years, which is exactly what they want us to do because it perpetuates the status quo.

You still think Trump wasnt the best choice for the GOP? Hes the only one that can beat Hilary, and he's well on his way. Hilary runs circles around the GOP establishment, they dont know how to win a general anymore.

Trump finally 'gets it' as far as how to run in a general election. There is a ton of enthusiasm for Trump...and there was for Bernie too. Somehow, that dumbfuck Hilary, has pissed off the enthusiastic part of her base and they wont go out and support her in droves.

The DNC and Hilary have only themselves to blame when they lose to Trump. Those idiots have done everything to marginalize Bernie and the far left of their party, the people that are enthusiastic and want to vote but wont show up in force now. Hilary even gave the disgraed DNC chairwoman a job on her campaign lol playing right into the perception of her corruption and cronyism.