2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

Status
Not open for further replies.
I bet you believe in fairy tales and God too. You might replace the system with a dictatorship and a single party system or just maybe turn this into a parliamentary system. But even that isn't accomplished from the fringes.

I assume you're just being abusive there. No, I do not believe in God. I believe fairy tales exist, but I don't believe in their contents. As to 'from the fringes', if enough people occupy the fringes that makes the fringes the mainstream. Which is how things get changed in (representative) democracies like ours.
 
History class, not poliitical science. What were the Founding Fathers if not oligarchs ennacting ideals? At least as best they practically could. The results speak for themselves: no monarchs. Which is what a republic is.

A democracy isn't incompatible with a republic. The US is both: a republic because we don't have a monarch, and a representative democracy because the populace elects representatives to office. Perhaps you confused the general term 'democracy' for the specific subset 'pure or direct democracy' where every voter votes on every action directly, and not via representatives. But that would be silly to infer that from context of a modern political discussion, as that subset of democracy is rare indeed in national governance.

As for historical examples I concede the US hasn't any, although we have seen parties dissolve when they lost voter support. The Whigs were supplanted by the Republicans. The mechanics of our electoral process make third parties very difficult; if we didn't do first-past-the-post voting and electoral colleges we might be more like other countries with several parties. Then the voters, having more choice, would be better able to pick a candidate they actually prefer, and political change result.

A representative democracy IS a republic. Have you forgot your pledge of allegiance? "and to the republic for which it stands,". Ben Franklin responding to a lady's question about what form of government the Constitutional Convention had wrought. "A republic if you can keep it".

Now, I grant you that a republic doesn't have to be based on democratic principles.

My college degree was in political science. Presidential systems don't lend themselves very well to a dynamic multi-party system. Hell, while parliamentary systems is a little bit more likely to produce a third party supplanting one of the two major parties, it doesn't happen very often.
 
I thought I did answer your question. It was a yes. How to deal with the 'interim'? Same way we deal with the present and the past: live our lives and endure. I'm not a Democrat. In my lifetime we've never had a president or a legislature that actually worked for what I want. For much of my life the government (under both parties) was actively hostile to me. I endured. Things change over time. I don't imagine voting for third party candidates will fix everything quickly and forever. I also know that voting for mainstream candidates won't fix things quickly and forever. We make do with what happens, just like every other human who's ever lived.

The current state of things is not hostile towards you, however. If you vote for candidates that sap votes away from the Democrats, you might find that a number of freedoms you and other minority groups now enjoy might be taken away.
 
I assume you're just being abusive there. No, I do not believe in God. I believe fairy tales exist, but I don't believe in their contents. As to 'from the fringes', if enough people occupy the fringes that makes the fringes the mainstream. Which is how things get changed in (representative) democracies like ours.

Nope. Fringes stay fringe.
 
A representative democracy IS a republic. Have you forgot your pledge of allegiance? "and to the republic for which it stands,". Ben Franklin responding to a lady's question about what form of government the Constitutional Convention had wrought. "A republic if you can keep it".

Now, I grant you that a republic doesn't have to be based on democratic principles.

My college degree was in political science. Presidential systems don't lend themselves very well to a dynamic multi-party system. Hell, while parliamentary systems is a little bit more likely to produce a third party supplanting one of the two major parties, it doesn't happen very often.

Monarchy's clearly the solution, here.
 
Actually, that is the idiotic position: That's exactly how you wind up with the greater of two evils.

Like Trump.

And I don't care if you take offense or not.
And GW who incompetently started the Iraq war.

We've heard it every election cycle since Nader. Blah blah blah, break away, vote a third party or the system will never change.

Lot of good that did.

Right now, Biden has not won the primary. So work to support someone else.
 
A representative democracy IS a republic. Have you forgot your pledge of allegiance? "and to the republic for which it stands,". Ben Franklin responding to a lady's question about what form of government the Constitutional Convention had wrought. "A republic if you can keep it".

Now, I grant you that a republic doesn't have to be based on democratic principles.

My college degree was in political science. Presidential systems don't lend themselves very well to a dynamic multi-party system. Hell, while parliamentary systems is a little bit more likely to produce a third party supplanting one of the two major parties, it doesn't happen very often.

I question the worth of your education if you imagine The Pledge of Allegiance is a document to cite to define political institutions. Or a single Franklin quote which mentions 'republic' but does not address the mechanics of its operation. If you can find anything Franklin wrote where he explains why the new nation isn't a democracy that would be rather more useful. And a representative democracy isn't necessarily a republic: a monarch could be elected, for one thing, or simply exist alongside a representative democracy. The UK, for example, is not a republic but it does have democratically elected representatives in at least part of the legislature.

I fear you are too rigid in desire to cling to absolute definitions here. It's not exactly relevant in any case: the US government is what it is regardless of what terminology we employ to describe it.
 
The current state of things is not hostile towards you, however. If you vote for candidates that sap votes away from the Democrats, you might find that a number of freedoms you and other minority groups now enjoy might be taken away.

I disagree with your assessment. The status quo is hostile still, although not as much as it was in the single arena you appear to assume I was referencing.

Specifically the government under both parties is hostile to the economic interests of the middle class. A less exciting matter than anything to do with sexy sex, but far more damaging and of much greater consequence.
 
The primaries provide people with the opportunity to choose a specific candidate. But if you think voting for a candidate that is polling at 2 or 5 percent while the leaders are at 35 percent will make a difference you're living in la la land.

You respect though how much easier of a pill that is to swallow when it's not your morals you're having to compromise to play the numbers.

If easy for someone who supports a popular candidate to tell people who don't to just suck it up and not make it harder on them.
 
Alright I'm going to talk to independent, 3rd party, and other people not within the two big party's wheelhouse AND to the people in the two major parties who have strong opinions about what they should or shouldn't do.

Alright I'll be 100% honest about everything. I'm gonna talk to the people in the major parties and get them mad at me first, because they are (more or less) going to be the one I'm going to be siding with overall when all is said and done.

First of all the whole "Sure you should be able to vote your conscious... but not this time it is too important" thing is B.S. It's not B.S. because it's not true, it is. It's B.S. because that is the excuse that is always used against non-mainstream voters. My entire lifetime the standard excuse against non-mainstream voters has been some version of that. It's not like Trump is the first time the "You'll ruin everything if you don't vote with us" excuse has ever been used. Stop pretending like there's ever going to be an election where your comfortable enough with it. Every election is the end of the world. The fact that this one very well might be doesn't change that. I firmly believe that if just some regular, run of the mill Republican had gotten the nomination and won the election the "All is lost! All is lost!" language would be about... 90% the same.

If your argument is against non-mainstream voters is some variation on "Oh you can vote your way... but not this time because it's too important." then just admit that there is never going to be an election where they actually get to vote their conscious. And that's NOT fair.

The system is setup so that every major election is going to be a game of inches and non-mainstream voters votes are always going to be useless at best, counterproductive at worst. It's not their vault. YOUR two mainstream parties made it that way to consolidate their power. You can't throw that back in their faces.

That all being said, now that I've gotten all my friends from the major parties ready to unfriend me, I must now speak to the non-mainstream supporters.

Because despite everything I said to the first group, they are right... this time. Yes, yes, yes they've been using the same excuse for years and they will be using the same excuse for years. But they are right... this time.
Trump is not "Just another Republican." Yes "Wolf" has been cried about this candidate or that candidate being the end of the world so many times I know the word has lost all meaning. But here's the thing... the moral of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" was never that wolves don't exist or that they do but we should just let the sheep be eaten to teach the little boy a lesson.

Do not let this country or this world be damaged in some real, very lasting way just to get back at the people who have been crying wolf and are now crying wolf at an actual wolf.

Right now the Left is the better choice. And here's the thing. First past the post voting, the electoral college, voter suppression... the very things that make the system so broken as to make your voices either useless or counterproductive... they are are LOT more open to fixing those things then the Right is.

I get it. Mainstream politics DOES suck. That's not some try-hard, edge-lord position. And a lot of people are going to play the "We have to put aside YOUR morals to defeat Trump this time" are going to keep playing it in perpetuity. Sorry. That sucks and I can't make that not true.

But... people history has seen this story before. And it doesn't end well.

I can't tell anybody who to vote for. If you look deep into yourself and decide that you just have to vote a certain way... I won't hate you. I won't demonize you. But I am asking you to really, really think hard about it. Yes, I am asking you to participate in a broken system, to benefit one of the sides that broke it, for the sole reason that I want to see things get better and that's the only way I see it happening. That's a bitter pill. But please, swallow it, just this one time.

I get it. You really want "Show the system how rotten it is" moment. But this isn't it. Okay?

Do not give up your morals. Do no give up your passion. Do not give up your opinions. Get whoever it takes to get Trump out of office up there and once they have done that job make their lives a living hell. Swarm the polls at your local and state levels. When Trump is gone and the mainstreams play the "Oh you can't vote your way this time either, last time we mean it".. call them on it.

But none of that matters if the system falls down around our heads.

Trump isn't another crooked politician gaming the system. He's a dangerous, unhinged lunatic breaking it.

Too Long Didn't Read:

The Mainstream Voters - A lot of the excuses you use against the non-mainstream voters are hollow and self serving at best.

The non-Mainstream Voters - Those excuses are 100% valid, this one time.
 
I disagree with your assessment. The status quo is hostile still, although not as much as it was in the single arena you appear to assume I was referencing.

Well, assumption is the only thing I have to go on since you didn't specify.

In what way is it still hostile? And regardless, what you suggest is more likely to result in a more hostile environment since you're giving your vote away.

Specifically the government under both parties is hostile to the economic interests of the middle class.

In what way, specifically?
 
Well, assumption is the only thing I have to go on since you didn't specify.

In what way is it still hostile? And regardless, what you suggest is more likely to result in a more hostile environment since you're giving your vote away.



In what way, specifically?

I only said I wouldn't vote for Biden, not that I wouldn't vote for any Democrat. Warren, for one, I am open to voting for if she gets the nomination.

As for the economic hostility of the mainstream Democrats towards the middle class look at Pelosi on the subject of Medicare For All for one example.
 
But good luck where people made it past the 7th grade in school.

Why do you hold onto that fallacy?

It's a fact that 36% of college graduates voted Trump, and they can't all be related to Lori Loughlin.

Trump was just as sexist, abusive, racist and piece of filth in 2016 as he is now, and given the increased prosperity that group has shared since then, presuming no "clever" people will vote Trump is insane.

Maybe I read too much into it, but I noticed that news coverage of Mayor Pete uses some terminology I don't seem to be hearing about the other candidates:

straight shooter
whip smart
fastest rising
packing some punch

I'm almost surprised I haven't heard him described as an "up and coming" candidate yet.

I think he's almost past that stage, showing a fairly solid 4th, well in front of much better-known Harris & O'Rourke.

I'd rate him the only chance to stop Biden right now. Looks the part, and clearly not a Trump-lite, like Biden.
 
I only said I wouldn't vote for Biden, not that I wouldn't vote for any Democrat.

Were Biden to get the nomination, what would you do?

As for the economic hostility of the mainstream Democrats towards the middle class look at Pelosi on the subject of Medicare For All for one example.

But opposition to something you think would be beneficial to the middle-class doesn't imply hostility. You need more than just that. A consistent pattern, for instance.
 
I only said I wouldn't vote for Biden, not that I wouldn't vote for any Democrat. Warren, for one, I am open to voting for if she gets the nomination. .....
Why are you talking about who you won't vote for in the election instead of who you will vote for in the primary?
 
Were Biden to get the nomination, what would you do?

Not sure yet. Maybe if his VP candidate were someone I like I might bring myself to vote for him. But maybe not.

But opposition to something you think would be beneficial to the middle-class doesn't imply hostility. You need more than just that. A consistent pattern, for instance.

I don't need anything of the sort, I was explaining why I vote as I do, not trying to persuade anybody else of who to vote for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom