Politics Turning GA, NC, NV, and/or PA into victory (Biden vs Trump, 2020 election!)

[Lanny]

What's funny is that Trump and Biden have already both questioned the legitimacy of the election. So... I guess we know they're both planning to cheat lol.

And just how is Biden able to cheat?

 

[Lanny]

Politics

Do you really think Obama is the conniving sort?

 

[Orion Bailey]

How has nobody brought up this one specific word? LOBBYISTS

Goes hand in hand with campaign finance reform. The unspoken issue in DC. NO politician wants to touch it because its a death sentence. Why?

Because no matter how much politicians try to BS us that they are different, they aren't. Their hand is out and they want it filled just the same as every other politician. And if someone breaks that line, the rest of them take that person down with a quickness.

Get the money out of politics and then we might see more honest politicians start surfacing. Until then, its simple a system to enable the selfish and greedy.

If we want to fix anything politically, we must first remove the money.

 

[Lanny]

Goes hand in hand with campaign finance reform. The unspoken issue in DC. NO politician wants to touch it because its a death sentence. Why?

Because no matter how much politicians try to BS us that they are different, they aren't. Their hand is out and they want it filled just the same as every other politician. And if someone breaks that line, the rest of them take that person down with a quickness.

Get the money out of politics and then we might see more honest politicians start surfacing. Until then, its simple a system to enable the selfish and greedy.

If we want to fix anything politically, we must first remove the money.

Okay, which party is for eliminating excess money and which is for allowing unlimited donations?

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Do you really think Obama is the conniving sort?

Yes.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

How does a 3rd, 4th or 5th party change anything. You are under the belief that all politicians are corrupt so wouldn't these people switching to run under some new party be corrupt as well or do they all of a sudden become non corrupt because they run under the new party that you support? I will say that I am a bit shocked how hard you are going in on defending trump though.

Never defended Trump but I know how hard it is to take the partisan blinders off so I understand why you can't see that.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Okay, which party is for eliminating excess money and which is for allowing unlimited donations?

Does it matter? They both are allowed contributions that are used to jockey for votes regarding legislature. This alone makes it easily corruptable.


https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate-taking-receipts/contribution-limits/


This is what most Americans want.....

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...-big-donors-have-greater-political-influence/

Yet Neither party will address it or the majority of this countries concern.

This isn't about party preference Lanny, It's about getting the corruption out of politics, regardless of the party.

 

[CupWizier]

Never defended Trump but I know how hard it is to take the partisan blinders off so I understand why you can't see that.

What's funny, it is you that must not realize that you are indeed defending trump. What else are you going to call it? It's always someone says something negative about trump and you often come back pushing the narrative that Biden and/or the democrats are corrupt to. That's essentially defending trump.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

So, what you oppose to are a bunch of people coming together and working together in a compromise because they did not believe in Bernie's vision - and you mask it as 'back room dealing' - that's actually democracy in action. I am sorry, but if a bunch of candidates believe that they would lose individually, but can cause change to work closer to their beliefs and congregate around a single candidate working together - that's what the system is supposed to do - find a compromise that most people can work with.



This is a fantasy world you want to create - people will talk about the candidates, always have and always will - because it is important to them - which is why the media exists and why it will continue to be consumed and why it will continue to be influenced. The correct answer is to adjust to system to work fairly by limiting campaign finance and creating a completely separate authority to oversee that - as long as the free for all exists - people will bend the rules as much as they can to gain an advantage. That's all living creatures trait - and this is an election for living beings.



Every two parties will morph into something of that nature - it's not these 2 specific parties, it is the rules and human nature. People just want to be, and power always wants to retain it's power. So, the correct answers are term limits, better campaign finance rules and independent overseeing authority. Changing the 2 parties to 3, or 2 different parties will eventually end with the same kind of influence, only it will be among x number of parties instead of y, and the people at these parties will try to concentrate their power like the current parties.

There also have to have some kind of rules about being lobbyists after the term limits are reached - maybe you can only work as a government employee for a term before you can become a lobbyist or something smarter - but like all systems, you want to retain as much institutional knowledge while allow new forces to come through the system to invigorate it - so that's not going to be an obvious solution and it will have to be some kind of a compromise (like everything else in life).

I believe that you are upset at the symptoms, instead of looking for a solution.

I am upset that people know how crappy these two parties are, that they know how corrupt they are. They don't even really hide it that much anymore. Yet people STILL vote for the same old group. Cause the democrats and republicans tell them to. It doesn't just happen with the presidential candidates. It happens every election cycle for most local and up elections. Almost everyone knows these two groups have no one's best interest in mind other than own, and yet the tribalistic nature is like well, still gonna vote for the democrat, or still going to vote for the republican. Then on the rare occasion they leave, they immediately jump to well I guess I'm on the other team now.

Sorry, your version of the media is the fantasy. They talk about the candidates they get told to talk about, not because it's important to them but because of clicks, views, donors. The mainstream media in the US (and probably everywhere too at this point), exists to propagandize.

I have given a lot of answers as to a way that I think could lead to at least a change. I never said it was a broad stroke solution that will fix it all.
It's funny though that you think that I'm not looking for a solution when most of the people here seem to think that continuing to just do the same all vote for D's or R's is the solution. Cause solutions always come when you just keep doing the same things that haven't worked. I'm at least saying try something new. What's your solution? Vote for a 40ish year politician that's had 40 years to get us here?

 

[Orion Bailey]

Trying to talk politics with most Trump haters is futile.....

No matter what you say., its all "defending Trump"

When in reality all the other person does is put Trump down even when asked about topical discussions that don't have anything to do with Trump.


Wish I could just put all the blame of all my problems on the leader I don't like.

@SlyPokerDog I Blame you for ALL of S2's issues(kidding sly)

Because based on the logic of some, you are our leader here, so you are responsible for ALL issues here, regardless of whether you created, were involved or even knew nothing about it.

Its all your fault, because.. well the S2 logic says its so.


I get it. Its much easier to say to someone else. He fucked it up, he should fix it.

Instead of just working hard to try to fix it.

Hypcritical2020 here we are!!!!!

 

[wizenheimer]

OB, you might not realize this, but Cup, Wiz, Road Ratt, and I are all different people?

pirates aren't people...neither are ratts

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

What's funny, is it is you that must not realize that you are indeed defending trump. What else are you going to call it? It's always someone says something negative about trump and you often come back pushing the narrative that Biden and/or the democrats are corrupt to. That's essentially defending trump.

It's essentially not defending Trump, to say Biden is a bad candidate, that has a bad history as to saying racist things, that his track record on actions that have done bad things for Black people is pretty bad too. Which is where this started. I say both of these candidates are pretty bad. You say, "You're defending Trump!" Cause that makes sense.

 

[andalusian]

I am upset that people know how crappy these two parties are, that they know how corrupt they are. They don't even really hide it that much anymore. Yet people STILL vote for the same old group. Cause the democrats and republicans tell them to. It doesn't just happen with the presidential candidates. It happens every election cycle for most local and up elections. Almost everyone knows these two groups have no one's best interest in mind other than own, and yet the tribalistic nature is like well, still gonna vote for the democrat, or still going to vote for the republican. Then on the rare occasion they leave, they immediately jump to well I guess I'm on the other team now.

Sorry, your version of the media is the fantasy. They talk about the candidates they get told to talk about, not because it's important to them but because of clicks, views, donors. The mainstream media in the US (and probably everywhere too at this point), exists to propagandize.

I have given a lot of answers as to a way that I think could lead to at least a change. I never said it was a broad stroke solution that will fix it all.
It's funny though that you think that I'm not looking for a solution when most of the people here seem to think that continuing to just do the same all vote for D's or R's is the solution. Cause solutions always come when you just keep doing the same things that haven't worked. I'm at least saying try something new. What's your solution? Vote for a 40ish year politician that's had 40 years to get us here?

I wrote to you exactly what I think the solution should be (term limits, finance rules, independent oversight), but this is a long-term solution, not a short term solution.

The short term solution is that we need to save the country from people that do not want to even work within the limited confines that the law already provides, and that's unfortunately, voting for the best compromise candidate - yelling that neither one is good will not help anything. Voting for Biden is at the very least, damage limitation - voting for a 3rd party that have no chance of winning at this point is at best a net zero solution, at worst - enabling the worst candidate to inflict irreparable damage.

One candidate seems willing to work within the law, the other tries to ignore it for his benefit - so the solution would certainly be to go with the one that is willing to work within the law and then work hard to change the law for the things that need to be fixed.

 

[CupWizier]

It's essentially not defending Trump, to say Biden is a bad candidate, that has a bad history as to saying racist things, that his track record on actions that have done bad things for Black people is pretty bad too. Which is where this started. I say both of these candidates are pretty bad. You say, "You're defending Trump!" Cause that makes sense.

What makes sense is that I am not just assessing my opinion from this thread as it goes back much further. How do you know this 3rd party person you are voting for isn't corrupt? Because she has a limited history in politics? Isn't that what happened in 2016 and how has that worked out? No biggie, but I will do whatever I can on my part to make sure we get a different president and you just keep preaching both sides bad.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I wrote to you exactly what I think the solution should be (term limits, finance rules, independent oversight), but this is a long-term solution, not a short term solution.

The short term solution is that we need to save the country from people that do not want to even work within the limited confines that the law already provides, and that's unfortunately, voting for the best compromise candidate - yelling that neither one is good will not help anything. Voting for Biden is at the very least, damage limitation - voting for a 3rd party that have no chance of winning at this point is at best a net zero solution, at worst - enabling the worst candidate to inflict irreparable damage.

One candidate seems willing to work within the law, the other tries to ignore it for his benefit - so the solution would certainly be to go with the one that is willing to work within the law and then work hard to change the law for the things that need to be fixed.

Do you think Joe Biden will work on any of those solutions? Cause I sure don't and that means your vote is essentially a net-zero too. Just because your candidate 'might win' does not mean that your vote is more valuable.

 

[andalusian]

Do you think Joe Biden will work on any of those solutions? Cause I sure don't and that means your vote is essentially a net-zero too. Just because your candidate 'might win' does not mean that your vote is more valuable.

Do I think that Joe Biden will work within the law? Yes.
Do I think that he has shown he is willing to change his views as people from his party or others present them to him? Yes.

Do I know that Biden has a campaign finance reform plan? Yes: https://joebiden.com/governmentreform/
Do I know that Biden has a term limits reform plan? No. He has said before that he believes in term limits for the president and not for congress, I think this is a mistake - his argument (circa 2019) was that there is value to gained knowledge, which I agree with, but there is also danger in concentration of power - so I hope that there are enough people that will work on this - but I do not believe that a Joe Biden administration will really take on this.

But, the real reason I think Biden is a good candidate - because there are always priorities in an administration that need to be solved and I believe he is a candidate I trust to prioritize these. At the moment - it is an efficient, coherent, science based solution to the pandemic and it's effects - I believe Biden will work hard to create this - something that Trump clearly is not capable of (and actually actively works against).

So, I am certain that a Biden administration will not solve everything, but I am certain it will prioritize the current crisis properly (which the other candidate does not) - and if he has time to deal with other stuff, at least one item for politics he seems to want to address (campaign reform).

I am not upset that Obama did not bring us closer to better health care, Obamacare is a very small start - but that administration had a financial crisis it had to concentrate on - and because it succeeded in that hard job - I believe too many people gloss over it and point that he did not do other stuff he talked about - he tried, but he prioritized properly, and I believe Biden will too.

Obama was a popular president despite the fact that a lot of the stuff he talked about was moved very slightly - people recognized that his administration took the hard choices and got America out of a very bad financial crisis - likewise, people do not like Trump because they recognize that he fumbles his (very big part) in handling this crisis.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Do I think that Joe Biden will work within the law? Yes.
Do I think that he has shown he is willing to change his views as people from his party or others present them to him? Yes.

Do I know that Biden has a campaign finance reform plan? Yes: https://joebiden.com/governmentreform/
Do I know that Biden has a term limits reform plan? No. He has said before that he believes in term limits for the president and not for congress, I think this is a mistake - his argument (circa 2019) was that there is value to gained knowledge, which I agree with, but there is also danger in concentration of power - so I hope that there are enough people that will work on this - but I do not believe that a Joe Biden administration will really take on this.

But, the real reason I think Biden is a good candidate - because there are always priorities in an administration that need to be solved and I believe he is a candidate I trust to prioritize these. At the moment - it is an efficient, coherent, science based solution to the pandemic and it's effects - I believe Biden will work hard to create this - something that Trump clearly is not capable of (and actually actively works against).

So, I am certain that a Biden administration will not solve everything, but I am certain it will prioritize the current crisis properly (which the other candidate does not) - and if he has time to deal with other stuff, at least one item for politics he seems to want to address (campaign reform).

I am not upset that Obama did not bring us closer to better health care, Obamacare is a very small start - but that administration had a financial crisis it had to concentrate on - and because it succeeded in that hard job - I believe too many people gloss over it and point that he did not do other stuff he talked about - he tried, but he prioritized properly, and I believe Biden will too.

Obama was a popular president despite the fact that a lot of the stuff he talked about was moved very slightly - people recognized that his administration took the hard choices and got America out of a very bad financial crisis - likewise, people do not like Trump because they recognize that he fumbles his (very big part) in handling this crisis.

I cant say I agree with you 100% on what Biden will do, but this was a very good post nonetheless.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Do I think that Joe Biden will work within the law? Yes.
Do I think that he has shown he is willing to change his views as people from his party or others present them to him? Yes.

Do I know that Biden has a campaign finance reform plan? Yes: https://joebiden.com/governmentreform/
Do I know that Biden has a term limits reform plan? No. He has said before that he believes in term limits for the president and not for congress, I think this is a mistake - his argument (circa 2019) was that there is value to gained knowledge, which I agree with, but there is also danger in concentration of power - so I hope that there are enough people that will work on this - but I do not believe that a Joe Biden administration will really take on this.

But, the real reason I think Biden is a good candidate - because there are always priorities in an administration that need to be solved and I believe he is a candidate I trust to prioritize these. At the moment - it is an efficient, coherent, science based solution to the pandemic and it's effects - I believe Biden will work hard to create this - something that Trump clearly is not capable of (and actually actively works against).

So, I am certain that a Biden administration will not solve everything, but I am certain it will prioritize the current crisis properly (which the other candidate does not) - and if he has time to deal with other stuff, at least one item for politics he seems to want to address (campaign reform).

I am not upset that Obama did not bring us closer to better health care, Obamacare is a very small start - but that administration had a financial crisis it had to concentrate on - and because it succeeded in that hard job - I believe too many people gloss over it and point that he did not do other stuff he talked about - he tried, but he prioritized properly, and I believe Biden will too.

Obama was a popular president despite the fact that a lot of the stuff he talked about was moved very slightly - people recognized that his administration took the hard choices and got America out of a very bad financial crisis - likewise, people do not like Trump because they recognize that he fumbles his (very big part) in handling this crisis.

I tend to disagree with some of your assertions.
Except well I'd hope he can work within the law since he and his buddies have been writing it for half a century.

I don't think either political party has the high-ground with 'science' at this point. I could write like a 20-page thesis on how from a scientific point of view the democrats and republicans have failed during this pandemic. Like I'm not sure they remember the basic scientific process which is like 3rd-grade stuff... Everything from all of them is so knee-jerk, reactionary, 'feelings', every statement from Fauci is like well yes, but no, but maybe, it's why he's never really wrong, cause he's never really right, but to some extent that's fine because science is a discovery process and you learn new things all the time, but the whole ordeal has been one giant mess, and I'm sure there are real scientists/researchers working very hard, but confirmation bias for someone who is not a big government person, this process has been, like yeah I don't want the government in charge of "Science" and "Medicine" unless the government has the politicians very far away from the people doing the work. I think the best 'argument' for Biden is that we all know he won't really do anything, he's going to be the president in title only. He'll just get out of the way and let other people do all of it, so in that aspect maybe someone who remembers yesterday might be in charge of scientific endeavors.

In terms of Obama, he was well-spoken, and personality-wise I liked him. As a president though, I thought he was basically meh. I'm tired of the middle east, and he was in it way too much. I don't think he did all that much for Black people and/or race relations. I think like most presidents, including Trump he worked in an environment where there are/were a lot of people out to get him, who was going to fight everything he wanted to do. Which is why I push back on the authoritarian non-sense. Even if the massive ego's of these guys want to be, the US is set up to make that basically impossible.

 

[CupWizier]

Here is a timeline of how trump handled the corona virus. The videos are pretty funny as well.

https://www.vox.com/2020/6/8/21242003/trump-failed-coronavirus-response

 

[andalusian]

Everything from all of them is so knee-jerk, reactionary.

The existence of the pandemic response plan that Obama left and Trump abandoned is in direct contradiction with this claim. It is simply untrue.

In terms of Obama, he was well-spoken, and personality-wise I liked him. As a president though, I thought he was basically meh. I'm tired of the middle east, and he was in it way too much. I don't think he did all that much for Black people and/or race relations. I think like most presidents, including Trump he worked in an environment where there are/were a lot of people out to get him, who was going to fight everything he wanted to do. Which is why I push back on the authoritarian non-sense. Even if the massive ego's of these guys want to be, the US is set up to make that basically impossible.

Again, I will repeat what I said before - you gloss over the huge hurdle has managed to overcome in the financial crisis - and concentrate on the things he could not get to work on because he prioritized properly.

The Job of a president is very complicated - it is basically living in the moment and managing whatever crap the world throws at you with some hope for small advances on the things you really want. Some presidents face a lot of small problems (Clinton with the recession he inherited in '92) and others have to deal with big crisis (Bush with 9/11, Obama with the financial crisis he inherited and Trump with the pandemic which he actively made worse by abandoning the playbook that was prepared for him and actively decided to wash his hands from it and not deal with coordination and leadership).

So, if Obama's ability to get the country out of the biggest economic mess it had since the depression (and the one that Trump is actively putting us into by failing to work on the pandemic with decisiveness) makes him a meh president - frankly, your expectations are unrealistic and you will never see a president that you like - no matter where he comes from.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

The existence of the pandemic response plan that Obama left and Trump abandoned is in direct contradiction with this claim. It is simply untrue.



Again, I will repeat what I said before - you gloss over the huge hurdle has managed to overcome in the financial crisis - and concentrate on the things he could not get to work on because he prioritized properly.

The Job of a president is very complicated - it is basically living in the moment and managing whatever crap the world throws at you with some hope for small advances on the things you really want. Some presidents face a lot of small problems (Clinton with the recession he inherited in '92) and others have to deal with big crisis (Bush with 9/11, Obama with the financial crisis he inherited and Trump with the pandemic which he actively made worse by abandoning the playbook that was prepared for him and actively decided to wash his hands from it and not deal with coordination and leadership).

So, if Obama's ability to get the country out of the biggest economic mess it had since the depression (and the one that Trump is actively putting us into by failing to work on the pandemic with decisiveness) makes him a meh president - frankly, your expectations are unrealistic and you will never see a president that you like - no matter where he comes from.

So what you're really saying here is Obama did things you liked, he had positions you liked. He gets credit for any good he might have done but is exonerated for not getting other things done because he did what Democrats wanted. Literally every one of the "Trump supporters" is probably thinking the same exact same as this. They're also using all the "things were thrown at Trump", such as Russia, Stormy Daniels, COVID, etc., etc., that kept him from doing more. So it all comes down to your personal preference and opinions on politics. Tribalism 101 right here.

 

[andalusian]

So what you're really saying here is Obama did things you liked, he had positions you liked. He gets credit for any good he might have done but is exonerated for not getting other things done because he did what Democrats wanted. Literally every one of the "Trump supporters" is probably thinking the same exact same as this. They're also using all the "things were thrown at Trump", such as Russia, Stormy Daniels, COVID, etc., etc., that kept him from doing more. So it all comes down to your personal preference and opinions on politics. Tribalism 101 right here.

Anyone didn't want the administration to work to get us out of the financial crisis?

I am not sure what you accuse me of - I did not like Bush's politics, but I liked that he did not minimize the 9/11 crisis and worked hard to create better air-traffic safety and he took measures to find the terrorists - even if he went overboard and I am not certain that he did it as efficiently as he could. There was a crisis - and he did not abandon it, if anything, you can accuse him of going overboard.

You are projecting things on me - sure, I like a lot of the politics that Obama pursued, I am disappointed that he did not pursue them as hard as I hoped for - but I understand why. I did not like Bush's politics, but I did appreciate that he rose to the challenge of a crisis and worked to unify everyone and find solutions.

I do not like Trump and I do not like that he is abandoning his job in the face of a crisis. If anything, I think I am very consistent with my opinions and how I see the presidents - you are just unfairly projecting something on me as a way to deflect from what I have said.

 

[Minstrel]

I think "both are flawed so both are exactly the same in every way" to be a naive and defeatist philosophy, but defeatist in a very specific way: it speaks to giving up on paying attention and learning the differences. Because, like it or not, Republican control versus Democratic control changes the lives of many people in huge ways. Maybe not your life, which means you have the luxury of saying, "Both are the same because both accept donations" but there have been massive changes to a lot of people's lives in terms of health care, identity-based protections, taxes paid, police reform and many other things. Sure, both parties are influenced by lobbyists and, therefore, money--that's a bad thing that needs to be fixed (and the two parties also have divergent beliefs on that too)--but that fact that doesn't make them both the same, because they have extremely different views on a wide variety of issues that affect tons of people.

I purposely phrased this in a neutral way to avoid a "my party good, other party bad" way, because different world views lead to prioritizing different things. But there are a lot of consequential differences between the parties, which is why people vote for them. Things do change, a lot, depending on the party in power. If you want to stand on the sidelines and pretend both parties are identical because you don't care about those differences, that's fine...it's your choice. But as long as you keep deluding yourself that everyone else unthinkingly supports the major parties, you'll never really understand American politics.

I don't try to "bully" anyone into voting for one of the major parties--if you don't like either party, that's fine. I will say, as a matter of fact, the way the US system is currently set up, it's impossible for a viable third party to rise. Our system isn't parliamentary, which means that to the "winner" goes all the spoils--you can't realistically have a coalition government. The largest faction gets control. So people who do care about the differences between Republicans and Democrats aren't going to want to use their votes to split, say, "liberal" support between two parties ensuring that neither wins. That's why people like Sanders or AOC don't attempt to run as independents--they know that there are stark differences between the two major parties and the Democrats are far closer to their vision than the Republicans. Ensuring a Republican victory by splitting the left-of-center vote makes things worse for them and their causes, not better.

If you want to see other parties grow, advocate for a change to the system, notably changing our "first past the post" voting system to a run-off voting system. A run-off system creates a two-phase election...the first phase of voting reduces the field to the top two, and then the second phase is an election between those top two. This gives people who aren't sold on either of the two major parties the best of both worlds--they get to vote their consciences in the first phase. If their preferred candidate doesn't get enough votes to be in the top-two, then they get to have a say in their ultimate representation in the second stage. This means that anyone who would prefer someone other than the Republicans and Democrats can vote third party, which gives those third parties the chances to grow and maybe one day overtake one or both of the two major parties. There are other voting systems that could do this, too, like ranked-choice voting (which has been experimented with in some states).

All of that said, fixing the campaign finance laws is necessary ahead of any of that. Because everyone who's said that third parties that get big will simply fall under the same influence of money is correct. The way the system works now, you need massive influxes of cash to compete. You can't "get big" without huge amounts of money, and that money always (and obviously) comes with strings attached.

Establish some reasonable campaign finance laws that actually restrict the amount of money that can be donated to politicians and their campaigns, move to a voting system that allows people to express their actual preferences in politics without making them feel they're "throwing their vote away" (and that's not me engaging in bullying, that's how a lot of people feel and what prevents them from voting third party) and I think you'll see a more diverse and engaging American political life.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Anyone didn't want the administration to work to get us out of the financial crisis?

I am not sure what you accuse me of - I did not like Bush's politics, but I liked that he did not minimize the 9/11 crisis and worked hard to create better air-traffic safety and he took measures to find the terrorists - even if he went overboard and I am not certain that he did it as efficiently as he could. There was a crisis - and he did not abandon it, if anything, you can accuse him of going overboard.

You are projecting things on me - sure, I like a lot of the politics that Obama pursued, I am disappointed that he did not pursue them as hard as I hoped for - but I understand why. I did not like Bush's politics, but I did appreciate that he rose to the challenge of a crisis and worked to unify everyone and find solutions.

I do not like Trump and I do not like that he is abandoning his job in the face of a crisis. If anything, I think I am very consistent with my opinions and how I see the presidents - you are just unfairly projecting something on me as a way to deflect from what I have said.

I might be projecting, but I believe you have been as well, fair or not. People in the political parties generally have a lot of preconceived notions about both the other party and independents or those who belong to smaller parties. Those notions usually get projected. Just as my notions of people in those parties get projected too.
We all think we're very consistent in our opinions, and how we see things. If that is reality or not though, that's probably not something you'll glean from a conversation on the internet.

 

[wizenheimer]

Jerry Falwell Jr. being moral, like trump:

 

[riverman]

So it all comes down to your personal preference and opinions on politics. Tribalism 101 right here.

You seem to want to define convictions and values as tribalism and close mindedness yet you can't seem to form convictions about the Biden and Trump election....you don't have to vote for either but you are clearly anti Biden to the point of placing him in the same mold as Trump.....since you can't separate the two candidates as more or less trustworthy or capable...your fence straddling is derailing the discussion about Biden vs Trump in my view. I see a lot of conservatives who voted for Trump struggling with the current political climate to the point of trotting out Obama criticisms..If someone says Biden is more of a team builder than Trump you keep going back to ....both parties are the same....they are not the same. Not remotely...lobbyists are the same...this election has two very different options representing the major parties...to try to say they are equally incompetent is just not based in reality....it's based on some...Trump isn't getting a fair shake in your opinion spin. You don't have to vote for either but this thread is about voting for either.....I've yet to see you make a case or hold a conviction about this upcoming vote other than disdain for this vote....I didn't want to choose between two old white men this time but reality is....that's the choice I have and it's an easy one to make given the circumstance...you saying it's not easy for you makes me think you have not formed your own reasoning behind your vote...and that is not Tribalism 101....it's citizenship 101.....and I don't expect you to engage my opinion here as you haven't yet.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I think "both are flawed so both are exactly the same in every way" to be a naive and defeatist philosophy, but defeatist in a very specific way: it speaks to giving up on paying attention and learning the differences. Because, like it or not, Republican control versus Democratic control changes the lives of many people in huge ways. Maybe not your life, which means you have the luxury of saying, "Both are the same because both accept donations" but there have been massive changes to a lot of people's lives in terms of health care, identity-based protections, taxes paid, police reform and many other things. Sure, both parties are influenced by lobbyists and, therefore, money--that's a bad thing that needs to be fixed (and the two parties also have divergent beliefs on that too)--but that fact that doesn't make them both the same, because they have extremely different views on a wide variety of issues that affect tons of people.

I purposely phrased this in a neutral way to avoid a "my party good, other party bad" way, because different world views lead to prioritizing different things. But there are a lot of consequential differences between the parties, which is why people vote for them. Things do change, a lot, depending on the party in power. If you want to stand on the sidelines and pretend both parties are identical because you don't care about those differences, that's fine...it's your choice. But as long as you keep deluding yourself that everyone else unthinkingly supports the major parties, you'll never really understand American politics.

I don't try to "bully" anyone into voting for one of the major parties--if you don't like either party, that's fine. I will say, as a matter of fact, the way the US system is currently set up, it's impossible for a viable third party to rise. Our system isn't parliamentary, which means that to the "winner" goes all the spoils--you can't realistically have a coalition government. The largest faction gets control. So people who do care about the differences between Republicans and Democrats aren't going to want to use their votes to split, say, "liberal" support between two parties ensuring that neither wins. That's why people like Sanders or AOC don't attempt to run as independents--they know that there are stark differences between the two major parties and the Democrats are far closer to their vision than the Republicans. Ensuring a Republican victory by splitting the left-of-center vote makes things worse for them and their causes, not better.

If you want to see other parties grow, advocate for a change to the system, notably changing our "first past the post" voting system to a run-off voting system. A run-off system creates a two-phase election...the first phase of voting reduces the field to the top two, and then the second phase is an election between those top two. This gives people who aren't sold on either of the two major parties the best of both worlds--they get to vote their consciences in the first phase. If their preferred candidate doesn't get enough votes to be in the top-two, then they get to have a say in their ultimate representation in the second stage. This means that anyone who would prefer someone other than the Republicans and Democrats can vote third party, which gives those third parties the chances to grow and maybe one day overtake one or both of the two major parties. There are other voting systems that could do this, too, like ranked-choice voting (which has been experimented with in some states).

All of that said, fixing the campaign finance laws is necessary ahead of any of that. Because everyone who's said that third parties that get big will simply fall under the same influence of money is correct. The way the system works now, you need massive influxes of cash to compete. You can't "get big" without huge amounts of money, and that money always (and obviously) comes with strings attached.

Establish some reasonable campaign finance laws that actually restrict the amount of money that can be donated to politicians and their campaigns, move to a voting system that allows people to express their actual preferences in politics without making them feel they're "throwing their vote away" (and that's not me engaging in bullying, that's how a lot of people feel and what prevents them from voting third party) and I think you'll see a more diverse and engaging American political life.

They'll both eat you.
That does not mean they are the same. That means that one way or another they will use you for power or money. One might sound nicer and make you feel good before they do it, one might not be so nice.

In republican ran states in the south, they tend to shoot minorities because they can ahmaud arbery for example... In democrat ran cities, they just lock all of them up or let them shoot each other, Chicago, New York, LA, for example... Either way, minorities end up dead way too young.
In war, well they all like bombing the middle east. One side seems to have Chosen the CCP as their buddies, the other side seems to have chosen Russia.
In economics, They all end up making CEOs and their friends extremely wealthy and making the gap between classes more prominent.
In education democrats and republicans alike, tend to enjoy holding kids and parents as a ransom for their pension plans, agendas, and such.
The list could go on. Yes, they have 'different' views, and different priorities, I did not say otherwise.
I am saying that the tactics they employ, and the results tend to be not pro-American citizens though.

Yeah, there are plenty of differences in how they do it, and sometimes it has good or bad effects on the every-day living. A bunch of dead people in the middle east, a bunch of homeless people in democrat led and republican led cities. Insurance companies getting filthy rich, big tech stealing everyone's data.

I would be in favor of the different voting styles. Just because I advocate for third parties or for people to stop voting R's and D's does not prohibit me from advocating for other things too.

 

[wizenheimer]

IMO, the both-side-do-it argument is hollow and lazy

* both sides don't suppress votes and disenfranchise voters as policy
* both sides are not working to destroy the postal service
* both sides don't give a safe harbor to racism
* both sides aren't actively resisting science
* both sides are not denying climate change
* both sides did not separate children from their parents at the border, putting all in detention centers, some never to be reunited
* both sides aren't fighting to preserve confederate monuments
* both sides haven't minimized Covid for months
* both sides don't fight belligerently against wearing masks
* both sides aren't forcing schools to re-open in highly infectious areas without adequate safeguards
* both sides don't bow down to Putin and Russia

yeah, sometimes both sides can be about equally guilty of some failures and corruption. But right now, the sins on the right dwarf the other side and trying to cast them as equivalent is loopy....IMO of course

I know there will be push-back on this view

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

You seem to want to define convictions and values as tribalism and close mindedness yet you can't seem to form convictions about the Biden and Trump election....you don't have to vote for either but you are clearly anti Biden to the point of placing him in the same mold as Trump.....since you can't separate the two candidates as more or less trustworthy or capable...your fence straddling is derailing the discussion about Biden vs Trump in my view. I see a lot of conservatives who voted for Trump struggling with the current political climate to the point of trotting out Obama criticisms..If someone says Biden is more of a team builder than Trump you keep going back to ....both parties are the same....they are not the same. Not remotely...lobbyists are the same...this election has two very different options representing the major parties...to try to say they are equally incompetent is just not based in reality....it's based on some...Trump isn't getting a fair shake in your opinion spin. You don't have to vote for either but this thread is about voting for either.....I've yet to see you make a case or hold a conviction about this upcoming vote other than disdain for this vote....I didn't want to choose between two old white men this time but reality is....that's the choice I have and it's an easy one to make given the circumstance...you saying it's not easy for you makes me think you have not formed your own reasoning behind your vote...and that is not Tribalism 101....it's citizenship 101.....and I don't expect you to engage my opinion here as you haven't yet.

Not voting for republicans and democrats is easy for me. I have explained my reasoning for that.

 

[riverman]

Not voting for republicans and democrats is easy for me. I have explained my reasoning for that.

I've yet to see you express your choice for a candidate.....I voted for Johnson last election for the same reasons you seem to express but this time around I'm not throwing the vote away to risk any chance of being saddled with an authoritarian anti constitutional president like Trump....which is easy for me...this thread is about Biden vs Trump......you've basically made many posts about neither Biden nor Trump yet you have sort of alluded to Trump not getting a fair shake in the comparisons....which I completely disagree with. Fair shakes are earned in political commentary and Trump hasn't earned trust and went into office starting a media war ....hasn't talked to the leaders of Congress since last year....I don't want a leader that is completely partisan and insulting to our elected representatives just for his own popularity survival