American Politics Discussion Thread

[GeneralKilCavalry]

I still believe that primary election was illegitimate

Gotta get outside your bubble some. Maybe you'll understand why people disagree with you. (I say this as someone who voted the same way I think you did in the primary.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/upsho...sults.html

It was a systematic effort. Obviously, the NYT attributes the hundreds of inconsistencies to error, but the iowa caucuses were nothing if sabotaged. And this time around it was nothing like 2016 - the issues back then were limited to the demoratic party supporting the clintons through financial coercion, but nothing like direct election interference. In super tuesday, the election was riddled with counts of voter suppression - the same tactics the republicans use, only used on their own.

Again, it is plain as day that the democrats would rather collaborate with the republicans than their own left wing.

[GeneralKilCavalry]

If the 2 parties didnt have such a stranglehold on this country, a wealthy moderate faction could easily sweep thru.

As always, a SevenSpirits post is thought provoking .

Are there enough moderates disillusioned with where Trump took the Republican Party and where Millennials seem to be taking the Democratic Party to form a significant, centrist third party?

Darrell

The two-party system won't go away without going away from FPTP elections, and even then it is unlikely it would be displaced. The D/R parties are codified into law, whether campaign finance law, or in how elections are run. It's extremely embedded in the legal machinery of the country and cannot be supplanted even if there were a majority for a third party. It is unlikely that even if someone like Ross Perot had won, that he would've been able to organize a third party - much of his appeal was form the fact that he was an independent in '92.

[Charriu]

I still believe that primary election was illegitimate

Gotta get outside your bubble some. Maybe you'll understand why people disagree with you. (I say this as someone who voted the same way I think you did in the primary.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/upsho...sults.html

It was a systematic effort. Obviously, the NYT attributes the hundreds of inconsistencies to error, but the iowa caucuses were nothing if sabotaged. And this time around it was nothing like 2016 - the issues back then were limited to the demoratic party supporting the clintons through financial coercion, but nothing like direct election interference. In super tuesday, the election was riddled with counts of voter suppression - the same tactics the republicans use, only used on their own.

Again, it is plain as day  that the democrats would rather collaborate with the republicans than their own left wing.

Also the iowa caucuses was another great reason why you should never ever run a election of any kind with voting machine, computers etc. Always do paper ballots. As a developer I can't stress this enough, but voting digital is highly unsecure. Everybody who tells different isn't honest with you or doesn't know better.

[Bobchillingworth]

Nonsense. The parties don't have different policy priorities, that's why it is fair to say both parties are similar. They are both profoundly anti-labor, with only a few democrats supportive of labor; both parties are pro-war (republicans hate china, democrats hate russia, both have different priorities over which middle eastern kids they want to kill so as to radicalize those who survive); both parties are in hock to the military industrial complex - the republicans are in bed with many of the contractors for DoD, democrats have become the military intelligence party (why do you think fairfax county votes democrat!). The Obama presidency was your standard investment-bank controlled gov't. Obamacare was a modified version of romneycare. Even bernie sanders' rAdIcAl healthcare program does not nearly go as far as the NHS in the UK. Barring social issues and other issues which the conservative-operated media shifts the narrative to, the parties operate in an identical fashion. The fact that most Americans vote on who best fits their political aesthetic is what got us into this hole in the first place. Oh and not voting on policy is just another "vote libertarian or republican because we have absolutely no policy". This prevailing narrative that ignorance is ok is exactly what has led to 50 years of republican-led austerity in the US, which has of course, been reinforced by two recent democratic presidents.

I don't mean to be critical, but I'm genuinely confused as to how you think people should vote in November, given the practical realities of the system we have to work within.


Also, do you actually live in Fairfax County, VA? I can assure you that Fairfax residents prefer Democrats for reasons which have nothing to do with the "military intelligence party", which sounds like something you'd hear from Tulsi Gabbard by way of RT.

[GeneralKilCavalry]

Nonsense. The parties don't have different policy priorities, that's why it is fair to say both parties are similar. They are both profoundly anti-labor, with only a few democrats supportive of labor; both parties are pro-war (republicans hate china, democrats hate russia, both have different priorities over which middle eastern kids they want to kill so as to radicalize those who survive); both parties are in hock to the military industrial complex - the republicans are in bed with many of the contractors for DoD, democrats have become the military intelligence party (why do you think fairfax county votes democrat!). The Obama presidency was your standard investment-bank controlled gov't. Obamacare was a modified version of romneycare. Even bernie sanders' rAdIcAl healthcare program does not nearly go as far as the NHS in the UK. Barring social issues and other issues which the conservative-operated media shifts the narrative to, the parties operate in an identical fashion. The fact that most Americans vote on who best fits their political aesthetic is what got us into this hole in the first place. Oh and not voting on policy is just another "vote libertarian or republican because we have absolutely no policy". This prevailing narrative that ignorance is ok is exactly what has led to 50 years of republican-led austerity in the US, which has of course, been reinforced by two recent democratic presidents.

I don't mean to be critical, but I'm genuinely confused as to how you think people should vote in November, given the practical realities of the system we have to work within.  


Also, do you actually live in Fairfax County, VA? I can assure you that Fairfax residents prefer Democrats for reasons which have nothing to do with the "military intelligence party", which sounds like something you'd hear from Tulsi Gabbard by way of RT.

People should vote Biden. Voting for rainbow-coated austerity is better than voting for the brownshirts - no hesitation. If confronted with a choice like this, you vote for the lesser evil and then work to damage control. There’s no room for principled stances in FPTP voting systems. 

I’ve lived for 9 years right across the river from fairfax county, knew a lot of people who went to TJ high school. The perception of democrats in military circles has definitely improved. Republicans are no longer seen as necessary for job security, and it’s clear enough that there’s more than enough democrats who rubber stamp military budget increases. The pentagon was bustling under Obama, and the democrats didn’t curtail the patriot act even though they could have. Sounds to me like satisfying the desires of every part of the MIC. But this isn’t substantial evidence.

what is important is that democrats are running more military candidates than ever, look at 2018. This year for example, they plan to run Moe Davis aka “Guantanamo is a swell place” in NC-11. You can’t tell me they aren’t pandering to these kinds of voters. and when these people enter congress, they’re going to be generally pro-intervention and pro-military. Perhaps the way I phrased it was too conspiratorial or whatever, but the democrats are clearly following a certain path that I deeply wish they would not.

[Miguelito]

Also the iowa caucuses was another great reason why you should never ever run a election of any kind with voting machine, computers etc. Always do paper ballots. As a developer I can't stress this enough, but voting digital is highly unsecure. Everybody who tells different isn't honest with you or doesn't know better.

I've heard that before, somewhere

[Charriu]

Also the iowa caucuses was another great reason why you should never ever run a election of any kind with voting machine, computers etc. Always do paper ballots. As a developer I can't stress this enough, but voting digital is highly unsecure. Everybody who tells different isn't honest with you or doesn't know better.

I've heard that before, somewhere

And this

[Jowy]

The democrats might have wanted to nominate someone a little more charismatic. Biden doesn't seem like someone who's going to win any of the voters who could go one way or another. It's basically last election again where it's Trump vs Anyone But Trump

[superdeath]

The democrats might have wanted to nominate someone a little more charismatic. Biden doesn't seem like someone who's going to win any of the voters who could go one way or another. It's basically last election again where it's Trump vs Anyone But Trump

Sadly yeah. I feel the Democrats dont want to support a Trump president, but at the same time "huh lets have our candidate be the next/equal piece of trash!" Its lovely.

[Jowy]

Trump is off his rocker crazy and makes himself look terrible despite being the better speaker against a passive opponent. Biden speaks sense but he's not coherent enough and doesn't challenge Trump enough.