Andrew Yang....keep an eye on him....I have a feeling about this guy

[j-mac]

If that's the case, he could find a home with republicans, they are very fond of communist.

March 3, 2018
U.S. President Donald Trump praised Chinese President Xi Jinping Saturday after the ruling Communist party announced it was eliminating the two-term limit for the presidency, paving the way for Xi to serve indefinitely.

“He’s now president for life, president for life. And he’s great,” Trump said, according to audio of excerpts of Trump’s remarks at a closed-door fundraiser in Florida.
“And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll have to give that a shot someday,” Trump said to cheers and applause from supporters.

Trump praises a communist.
Trump's cult praises communism.

Huff post…

 

[justoffal]

I don't expect this to be successful, but I sure as hell give him credit for trying. Forward Party | Not Left. Not Right. Forward.

He's clearly thinking ahead on a lot of things. Everyone else is mulching over the same old party shit.

Yep.... Fully 90% of all of their time energy and money is dedicated to the mechanically empty and mentally vacant process of simply being reelected for no goddamn reason at all.

The rest of the 10% is spent in the state of mental, emotional and physical exhaustion so we get extremely low job performance from them.

Jo

 

[Smokin' OP]

Huff post…

Reuters.

Republicans get so angry when anyone publishes their dear leaders quotes.

So, they attack the source.

 

[Mac1958]

Yep.... Fully 90% of all of their time energy and money is dedicated to the mechanically empty and mentally vacant process of simply being reelected for no goddamn reason at all.

The rest of the 10% is spent in the state of mental, emotional and physical exhaustion so we get extremely low job performance from them.

Jo

I've been saying for a long time that the root problem here is the political system under which these people operate.

He wants to revamp the whole fucking thing. I'm all in with that.

How many partisans really want to revamp the system? I'd guess it's the minority. They like these tribal wars.

 

[j-mac]

Reuters.

Republicans get so angry when anyone publishes their dear leaders quotes.

So, they attack the source.

Shall we look up the vast examples of lefties in here attacking sources?

 

[j-mac]

I've been saying for a long time that the root problem here is the political system under which these people operate.

He wants to revamp the whole fucking thing. I'm all in with that.

How many partisans really want to revamp the system? I'd guess it's the minority. They like these wars.

Yang is a goofball…a sideshow nothing more.

 

[justoffal]

I've been saying for a long time that the root problem here is the political system under which these people operate.

He wants to revamp the whole fucking thing. I'm all in with that.

How many partisans really want to revamp the system? I'd guess it's the minority. They like these tribal wars.

Yeah......they do.

Jo

 

[JoeB131]

I've been saying for a long time that the root problem here is the political system under which these people operate.

He wants to revamp the whole fucking thing. I'm all in with that.

How many partisans really want to revamp the system? I'd guess it's the minority. They like these tribal wars.

Most of his ideas are just stupid.

Let's take term limits. Oh, how we love us some term limits, for the OTHER guy's congressman.

Of course, we have term limits, every 2 years. They're called "ELECTIONS". The problem isn't that these guys keep getting re-elected, it's that we don't pay attention to them. Only35% of us know the name of our Congressman.

Turnout in midterms is awful. BUt man, we want us some term limits to take out the other guy's effective congressman because he's been there long enough to be effective, because we don't take the time to even find out our guys name.

 

[JoeB131]

Our Platform

The Forward Party supports ranked-choice voting, open primaries, and other reforms that will lay the foundation for a more representative multi-party democracy.

www.forwardparty.com

Wow, I'm reading through this list, and it's a list only a Wall Street Liberal would love.

Revive the Office of Technology Assessment and separately create a Department of Technology within the Executive Branch to better equip our elected officials with the expertise needed to regulate emerging technologies.

Seriously? The problem with the government is that largely, it doesn't understand technology and government technology is about 20 years behind what is available to the civilian market.



Support a constitutional amendment that would limit individuals to a maximum of 18 years in each chamber of Congress.

We have those. They are called "Elections". Maybe you've heard of them. If someone is in Congress for 20 years, it's because the people who voted them in like the job they are doing.

Let's take the district I grew up in. Illinois 3rd Congressional district. From 1983 to 2005, it was represented by William Lipinski, and from 2005 to 2021, his son, Daniel. A bit of skullduggery Bill won renomination in 2004, and then announced he was retiring, letting the party nominate his son. People were so outraged by this that... they still re-elected Danny Boy 8 more times.

The only reason why Danny got voted out to a Bernie Socialist was because due to Covid, his base of old Polish People on the Southwest side didn't show up for the primary, while all these suburban women who didn't like the fact he was an anti-choice zealot did.

(Incidentally, the reason I call him "Danny" is that we all grew up in the same neighborhood and went to the same Catholic School. His sister Laura was in my class.)

Adopt ranked-choice voting systems for all elections that better captures the will of the majority of voters.

Um, yeah, they did that in New York, and it was kind of a cluster fuck. Given Yang came in fourth place after spending lots of money, he probably shouldn't think that's a good idea.

 

[JoeB131]

Initiate the American Exchange Program as part of our public education system to foster civic engagement while introducing young Americans to fellow peers they would otherwise never have the opportunity to meet.

Um, didn't we try that with busing in the 1970s and everyone hated it?

Convene “civic juries” made up of representative groups of Americans to deliberate on key issues and legislation.

Wow... seriously, this sounds like the kind of thing that you'd hear in the old USSR.

Adopt open primary systems so that more people can participate in selecting the eventual general election candidates and thus have a voice in our country's leadership.

Yes, why should the voters in a party have a say in who their party nominates?

Here's the real problem.... most of us don't care about politics. Not people on USMB. We live and breathe this stuff. The rest of America doesn't vote half the time and doesn't really engage until the weeks before an election, where they ask, "Where did we get these two twits?".

As much as Vichy Mac whines about partisans, the reason why partisans have so much say is THEY ACTUALLY PUT IN THE WORK.

They donate
They volunteer for political events
they show up for primaries
They walk the neighborhood in GOTV efforts
They drive 75 year old Mrs. Smith to the polling place, who is happy to vote for the person the nice young man told her to because she's lonely and her kids don't call her.

The problem with the Emo Posers who voted for Yang is that they don't want to put in the work.

 

[JoeB131]

I've been saying for a long time that the root problem here is the political system under which these people operate.

He wants to revamp the whole fucking thing. I'm all in with that.

How many partisans really want to revamp the system? I'd guess it's the minority. They like these tribal wars.

The problem is, as stated above. The "Partisan" puts in the work...

You want to change something, be ready to put in the work.

The system isn't the problem, it's our indifference to it.

Since I'm great at real life examples, I belong to a Condo Association. Every year, we have a Condo Board election, and every year, most people just give their proxies to the Condo Board and don't even bother to vote. Most of the residents couldn't name the condo board on a bet.

Well, this year, the Condo board voted to accept a buy-out offer from a developer. It still had to be approved by 75% of the owners. (It passed by 77% after the developer sweetened the pot by offering more money)

Well, the same folks who never bothered to vote in Condo Association meetings are now all upset the Condo Board took an action they didn't like.

 

[justoffal]

Most of his ideas are just stupid.

Let's take term limits. Oh, how we love us some term limits, for the OTHER guy's congressman.

Of course, we have term limits, every 2 years. They're called "ELECTIONS". The problem isn't that these guys keep getting re-elected, it's that we don't pay attention to them. Only35% of us know the name of our Congressman.

Turnout in midterms is awful. BUt man, we want us some term limits to take out the other guy's effective congressman because he's been there long enough to be effective, because we don't take the time to even find out our guys name.

I disagree.... However I want to Pat you on the back for well presented argument that I do have a great deal of sympathy for. No the 2-year elections do not equate to term limits. If you look at places like California where Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi are automatically re-elected year after year after year you can immediately see the problem with depending on election cycles to be the term limits. After several reelections they entrench themselves in the machinery of the district that they are in effectively rendering all competition neutral. After that they don't have to try anymore as is evidenced by the extreme poverty levels in Maxine Water's district. No... Term limits is a good idea in fact it's the only idea.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

The problem is, as stated above. The "Partisan" puts in the work...

You want to change something, be ready to put in the work.

The system isn't the problem, it's our indifference to it.

Since I'm great at real life examples, I belong to a Condo Association. Every year, we have a Condo Board election, and every year, most people just give their proxies to the Condo Board and don't even bother to vote. Most of the residents couldn't name the condo board on a bet.

Well, this year, the Condo board voted to accept a buy-out offer from a developer. It still had to be approved by 75% of the owners. (It passed by 77% after the developer sweetened the pot by offering more money)

Well, the same folks who never bothered to vote in Condo Association meetings are now all upset the Condo Board took an action they didn't like.

I'm going to upvote this post because it's not about politics it's about common sense and personal responsibility. Anyone should be able to understand the concept that involvement is penultimate. Doesn't matter what your political viewpoints are. Yes you are absolutely correct... If you don't put in any effort you should not be surprised if you don't get any results.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

Initiate the American Exchange Program as part of our public education system to foster civic engagement while introducing young Americans to fellow peers they would otherwise never have the opportunity to meet.

Um, didn't we try that with busing in the 1970s and everyone hated it?

Convene “civic juries” made up of representative groups of Americans to deliberate on key issues and legislation.

Wow... seriously, this sounds like the kind of thing that you'd hear in the old USSR.

Adopt open primary systems so that more people can participate in selecting the eventual general election candidates and thus have a voice in our country's leadership.

Yes, why should the voters in a party have a say in who their party nominates?

Here's the real problem.... most of us don't care about politics. Not people on USMB. We live and breathe this stuff. The rest of America doesn't vote half the time and doesn't really engage until the weeks before an election, where they ask, "Where did we get these two twits?".

As much as Vichy Mac whines about partisans, the reason why partisans have so much say is THEY ACTUALLY PUT IN THE WORK.

They donate
They volunteer for political events
they show up for primaries
They walk the neighborhood in GOTV efforts
They drive 75 year old Mrs. Smith to the polling place, who is happy to vote for the person the nice young man told her to because she's lonely and her kids don't call her.

The problem with the Emo Posers who voted for Yang is that they don't want to put in the work.

Yang may not be offering any transitional ideas yet but I think it's too soon for him to be offering since he's not in a position to do anything. However I think he's pointing in exactly the correct direction. Moreover I do believe that he's more concerned with getting things done then he is about bolstering the election process itself.
The kind of change he's talking about is a fundamental transformation far beyond anything Obama ever dreamed of.

 

[j-mac]

Initiate the American Exchange Program as part of our public education system to foster civic engagement while introducing young Americans to fellow peers they would otherwise never have the opportunity to meet.

Um, didn't we try that with busing in the 1970s and everyone hated it?

Convene “civic juries” made up of representative groups of Americans to deliberate on key issues and legislation.

Wow... seriously, this sounds like the kind of thing that you'd hear in the old USSR.

Adopt open primary systems so that more people can participate in selecting the eventual general election candidates and thus have a voice in our country's leadership.

Yes, why should the voters in a party have a say in who their party nominates?

Here's the real problem.... most of us don't care about politics. Not people on USMB. We live and breathe this stuff. The rest of America doesn't vote half the time and doesn't really engage until the weeks before an election, where they ask, "Where did we get these two twits?".

As much as Vichy Mac whines about partisans, the reason why partisans have so much say is THEY ACTUALLY PUT IN THE WORK.

They donate
They volunteer for political events
they show up for primaries
They walk the neighborhood in GOTV efforts
They drive 75 year old Mrs. Smith to the polling place, who is happy to vote for the person the nice young man told her to because she's lonely and her kids don't call her.

The problem with the Emo Posers who voted for Yang is that they don't want to put in the work.

You hit the nail on the head here Joe….good post.

 

[lds0568]

Initiate the American Exchange Program as part of our public education system to foster civic engagement while introducing young Americans to fellow peers they would otherwise never have the opportunity to meet.

Um, didn't we try that with busing in the 1970s and everyone hated it?

Convene “civic juries” made up of representative groups of Americans to deliberate on key issues and legislation.

Wow... seriously, this sounds like the kind of thing that you'd hear in the old USSR.

Adopt open primary systems so that more people can participate in selecting the eventual general election candidates and thus have a voice in our country's leadership.

Yes, why should the voters in a party have a say in who their party nominates?

Here's the real problem.... most of us don't care about politics. Not people on USMB. We live and breathe this stuff. The rest of America doesn't vote half the time and doesn't really engage until the weeks before an election, where they ask, "Where did we get these two twits?".

As much as Vichy Mac whines about partisans, the reason why partisans have so much say is THEY ACTUALLY PUT IN THE WORK.

They donate
They volunteer for political events
they show up for primaries
They walk the neighborhood in GOTV efforts
They drive 75 year old Mrs. Smith to the polling place, who is happy to vote for the person the nice young man told her to because she's lonely and her kids don't call her.

The problem with the Emo Posers who voted for Yang is that they don't want to put in the work.

You're absolutely right. That's the whole reason Yang is doing this. To actually engage all the people who don't get involved because they thing nothing they do will matter. He's actually trying to solve one of the problems you mention here. As for Civic Juries, we are a democracy. Why is it that anytime some idea that involves citizens in a process gets called communist? Isn't our Democracy supposed to be about serving the people? What's wrong with connecting them more firmly to the government? Besides, don't you think it would make more people think their civic engagement actually matters?

 

[Mac1958]

You're absolutely right. That's the whole reason Yang is doing this. To actually engage all the people who don't get involved because they thing nothing they do will matter. He's actually trying to solve one of the problems you mention here. As for Civic Juries, we are a democracy. Why is it that anytime some idea that involves citizens in a process gets called communist? Isn't our Democracy supposed to be about serving the people? What's wrong with connecting them more firmly to the government? Besides, don't you think it would make more people think their civic engagement actually matters?

The last thing the tribes want is to change the system and open it up. They want (1) all the power and influence and (2) to "beat" the other tribe. That's it. What's best for everyone isn't a priority.

Changing the system would take that all away.

 

[JoeB131]

I disagree.... However I want to Pat you on the back for well presented argument that I do have a great deal of sympathy for. No the 2-year elections do not equate to term limits. If you look at places like California where Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi are automatically re-elected year after year after year you can immediately see the problem with depending on election cycles to be the term limits. After several reelections they entrench themselves in the machinery of the district that they are in effectively rendering all competition neutral. After that they don't have to try anymore as is evidenced by the extreme poverty levels in Maxine Water's district. No... Term limits is a good idea in fact it's the only idea.

I would argue that these people get re-elected is that the represent the districts. Water's district was poor when she got there and it'll still be poor long after she leaves.

Taking the Lipinskis as an example, for 38 years, father and son represented a district that was largely white, catholic, working class people, mostly Polish from Chicago's South West Side. Socially conservative and fiscally liberal. Old Man Lipinski was praised as the mythical "Reagan Democrat".

Then as demographics shifted, the third district became more and more a suburban district. (That little section on the Northwest was what was left of the Chicago part of the district.

Yes, the Chicago Machine helped Danny out through most of his career, but at the end of the day, he really didn't represent the district. Especially with his views on Abortion. (He was one of the last anti-Abortion Democrats).

Yang may not be offering any transitional ideas yet but I think it's too soon for him to be offering since he's not in a position to do anything. However I think he's pointing in exactly the correct direction. Moreover I do believe that he's more concerned with getting things done then he is about bolstering the election process itself.
The kind of change he's talking about is a fundamental transformation far beyond anything Obama ever dreamed of.

But looking at his list, most of the things on his list are geared towards changing elections. Not really a policy.

The biggest problem with politicians is they give us exactly what we want. We want government to do all this stuff and we don't want to pay for it.

 

[JoeB131]

You're absolutely right. That's the whole reason Yang is doing this. To actually engage all the people who don't get involved because they thing nothing they do will matter. He's actually trying to solve one of the problems you mention here. As for Civic Juries, we are a democracy. Why is it that anytime some idea that involves citizens in a process gets called communist? Isn't our Democracy supposed to be about serving the people? What's wrong with connecting them more firmly to the government? Besides, don't you think it would make more people think their civic engagement actually matters?

Citizens have plenty of opportunities to get involved... They are called "Elections".

Civic Jury sounds like something you would set up because you want to go around the system... again, sounds like People's Tribunals or some of the worst shit you had in the Communist regimes.

Who gets appointed to those "juries", that would be my first question.

 

[JoeB131]

The last thing the tribes want is to change the system and open it up. They want (1) all the power and influence and (2) to "beat" the other tribe. That's it. What's best for everyone isn't a priority.

Changing the system would take that all away.

No, it wouldn't. Changing the system would just mean that the people willing to do the work are going to have to work differently.

Now, I've been a Republican from 1980 to 2008, and a Democrat from 2008 to now... and the reason why "Partisans" control things is they put in the work.

Don't pop in at the last minute, supporting a fringe character like Yang, and then whine that no one voted for you.

We all complain about Trump, but Trump happened because he appealled to the people willing to do the work.

He knew exactly who he had to appeal to to win the primaries and the red states... even though a majority never wanted him.