Holy crap - this has to stop!

[OldLady]

"It" won't stop. Pelosi did not last 24 hours. The radical anti-American board marxist are already leaking back to normal, despite pleading "this has to stop". They want violence in the streets. They will not stop until they get it. They will have to be obliged.

Who here wants violence?

Last civil war took 600,000 lives. It's unconscionable that we could go that route again. Besides, there's no Mason-Dixon line in the sand. What would happen? Instead of Sherman burning Atlanta we would have rednecks burning L.A.?

We won't have a civil war for one major reason: too many Americans are spineless shits more concerned about their iPhones and Beemers to pick up a weapon.

A few riots and a few mass shootings do not a Civil War make.

Well for starters, speech and expression are gonna get shut down. Town Halls??? Impossible.. Political figures giving graduation speeches? Not gonna happen. Folks are gonna turn off the annoying noise and make their own.

The NEW Social Media is gonna be "filtered" for news and hate speech. Creating further polarization and isolation. And with no 3rd estate having any credibility left --- the polarization is just gonna broach violence. There's nothing to moderate the anger and frustration over political POWER.

This ain't about policy. It ain't about solving problems. It's ALL about struggle to CONTROL the power that the Feds TAKEN from the Constitution to micromanage EVERY ASPECT of people's lives. Nothing to do with money. Because 1/2 the lobbyists in D.C. would pack up and leave tomorrow if every congress critter didn't TAKE the power to make SOME companies win and others lose. Lobbying is a defensive art. Not an offensive art. You take away the ability to favor ONE company over ANOTHER and the money and the power and the LOBBYISTS -- simply disappear.... Neither party Dem or Rep will do that. Because that's the PRIZE for "WINNING"...

I want to interject something...on social media. It's already filtered by algorithm's that what you what they think you want creating millions of safe spaces.

I'm doing a lot of thinking about the roll of media here.

We have laws that require products be what they are labeled. You can no longer adulterate flour with plaster of Paris. We laws against libel and slander. I have no problem with private entities trying to weed out fake news from their news feeds ...

I use Google as a search engine. I don't have an FB account or a news feed or anything else, just USMB and going to links from here. I occasionally google a topic raised here just to see if it's true. So would Google have an idea of what I want to hear? That's pretty messed up, but one day when I requested pics of a snarling dog, I was getting cute puppies, mostly. Do people not take pictures of snarling dogs (I wouldn't, I'd be running the other way) but it did seem weird. Does Google know (or think they know) I'm all sweetness and light and don't really want to see snarling dogs?

 

[eagle1462010]

By hosting Hamas, Qatar is whitewashing terror | Opinion

Qatar is also Hamas’s ATM. In 2012, the former Emir of Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani traveled to Gaza and pledged $400 million to the Hamas government. After the 2014 war, Qatar pledged $1 billion over several years to a reconstruction fund for Gaza (more than any other nation). Hamas has reportedly used those funds to rebuild its network of terror tunnels.

Less than half of Qatar’s billion-dollar pledge has been paid out. But earlier this year, Haniyeh announced that Qatar’s new emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani would pay out $100 million to Hamas-controlled Gaza in 2017 alone. And when a recent feud between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority created a massive energy crisis, and sparked protests against Hamas in the Gaza strip, Qatar stepped in and provided Hamas with $12 million for fuel.

The Taliban also benefits from Qatar’s whitewashing operations. In 2013, when the Taliban decided to open up its first “embassy,” it did so in Doha. It was a convenient location because many of the Taliban’s leaders lived there already. After the government of Afghanistan protested, the “embassy” was closed—in name only.

In 2015, senior Taliban officials traveled to Doha to negotiate the prisoner swap between American Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl and the notorious Taliban Five, high-level prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Today, the Taliban Five live luxuriously (but under a travel ban) in Doha. The Qataris reportedly paid for the lavish homes of Taliban leaders, and U.S. officials have even quietly met with Taliban leaders there as recently as October 2016.

 

[Pogo]

Next time, don't let a fat guy strip tease on the convention floor.

Sure.. We can have a 100 Image consultants and focus groups handle that. More balloons, more vetting, more control... Pretty soon, it'll be just as phony as the "niormal" conventions. There was TONS of more debate, more choices, and more solutions offered at THAT convention -- than any other that year.

We COULD I suppose go negative on the Brand Name tribes and make BIG HUGE headlines. But we decided (unfortunately) not to DO that. NEXT TIME --- all you're gonna hear from us is about the blood in the streets, the chaos, the phony news, the derilection of DUTY -- that is gonna be the "track record" for BOTH your corrupt and debased dynasty parties that need to die... Won't NEED money or a podium at the debates to make that case...

You guys are making it WAAAAAY too easy...

Thanks to you and TN, I started looking into this Libertarian Party prior to their convention. I looked at articles and write ups on the candidates, and I read your posts and I STILL got more and more confused about what it would look like. Then I watched the televised portion of the convention and it was obvious that the Party has not yet found its professional footing. I've seen town meetings a lot more together than that was. You folks don't have to be slick and shiny and bullshit driven but you do need to have your act together. I'd welcome it; at least knowing what a Libertarian government would look like would be a help. Be ready to answer those questions next time, is my advice. And if an attention whore gets on stage, don't let him strip for five minutes before anyone gets their finger out of their butt and does something about it.

There are a few problems with a third party.

One is that many of us vote to keep the opposing party out less than to get our person in. Trump was not my choice, but it was either vote for him or Hillary may get in. So yes, voting a third party (not that there is one I like) would have helped usher Bill and Hillary back into the White House, and there was just too much at stake given the Supreme Court vacancy.

But even if by some miracle a third party candidate would get in, he or she would not be able to accomplish anything. They would be a political outsider and the other two parties would never let them get their agendas passed. Trump is an outsider, but he at least belongs to the Republican party, and look how hard of a time his own party members are giving him!

Which is what happened with GHW Bush in 1992 and Gore in 2000. After this debacle (for Hillary!) maybe Congress will finally take a serious look at election reform. Specifically to all people to rank their choices versus only picking one and letting winner take all.

Still, I'm tired of voting for the lesser evil and will always vote my conscience from now on.

Maine voted in ranked choice voting in 2016. The powers that be are saying some piece of it violates the State Constitution. I don't think they like the idea much, which makes me like it even more.

Maine also splits its electoral vote by Congressional district, which makes it at least partially independent of the Electoral College's effect of paving over the voices of those in the state who vote outside of the majority. Unfortunately only one other state does that. In all other states the votes of those who vote outside of the majority are effectively cancelled --- which means there's no reason for anyone to vote in the first place because it's not going to make a damn bit of difference. With that going on it's a small miracle that even a shabby 55% of the electorate bothers to vote (that's what it was in 2016 -- 45% of us said, "what's the point?"

When we have millions upon millions of votes being cancelled simply because voters 400 miles away went another direction, that's state mob rule. And if the state in question is already known to tilt "red" or tilt "blue", the only reason to vote is to make a tiny tiny statement against the system by casting a third party vote --- which by definition of that state already being locked in means that 3P vote is going nowhere anyway.

Whether designed to or not the 'winner take all' aspect of the EC system ensures that no third party may ever challenge the Duopoly, which is why we've been stuck with it for a century and a half. I don't know why we all can't see that.

As someone described above a voter may detest candidate A but detest candidate B even more, leading them to vote for A solely to block B like a giant game of tic tac toe. That's not a good reason to vote for A but the Duopoly knows this and it completely removes their burden of running competent candidates and the whole thing becomes nothing more than a giant horse race the Duopoly wins every time.

And every four years we figure this out, and every four yeas we do nothing about it, and the next time around we do the same thing, expecting different results.

Fifty-five percent participation. That's atrocious. We shouldn't lie back and accept that.

 

[Coyote]

A comedian having the bad taste to use Trumps severed head as a skit rightfully provoked mass outrage and disgust.

But multiple instances of Obama effigies, of a lynched strung up negro man, something with powerful historic symbolism, did not.

This hate and and anger isn't new, it's been building. But as long as it gets justified nothing will change.

It used to be unthinkable to portray a president in these ways.


On the Trump play....I think it's only crime is bad timing. It was an attempt to portray the current political crisis as analogous to Julius Caesar. I have not seen it but that is the impression I get. A bit like Piss Christ, if you read what the artists INTENT was. I think this play is being used as a device now to stoke further outrage, and like the lefts demonstrations against Milo speaking at universities, the right has crashed, disrupted and protested productions.

 

[Coyote]

It's a damn shame that our president played such a big role in the hatred and isn't the leader we need to heal the wounds.

How would you know? You have yet to give him even at least chance. So for me your opinions are way too biased to take serious. You just want to blame. It's time to lay away the blame and try to heal a bit.

Since when we give a president that kind of tolerance? Like trial and error as we go along?
As you see this administration is very chaotic ALL by self inflicted wounds. It's not all about blaming-------- The divisive speech, him against us, the world is against him, world is falling apart ---------- attitude will only make this problem worse--Solutions are in Trump's hand.

Problem in this country no matter who is at fault the president is responsible. It's that simple.

His NEVER ending lies from campaign to his presidency to Climate Change speech to Cuba speech yesterday is full of distortion and lies. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
He has not denounce the hatred groups that are on the rise because of Trump. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
When Trump speak wrong or lies it doesn't matter it's all acceptable to his supporters. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
So people on the left should just shut up? Is that supposed to be acceptable?
Can you please answer those questions?



Let me give you an example ------------ Qatar crisis in Middle East right now is a serious problem. In Qatar we have a very large and impressive state of the art military base where US spy drones are launched with 10,000 soldiers stationed in that country. The other day Trump blasted Qatar as terrorist supporters just to make the Saudis happy-------- In his admission we are also a terrorist supporters. WHO IN THE WORLD WOULD SAY SOMETHING LIKE THAT? But Trump.
Day after we just seal the sale of 36 F15 fighter jets to Qatar worth $12B. Talking about hypocritism and amateurism in view of foreign government against us.
Instead of defusing the crisis ( contradicting Tillerson ) Trump sided with the Saudis adding fuel to the problem. Guarantee you that is 100% acceptable to Trump supporters.
Guarantee you that is NOT acceptable to the left.
So tell me------ Who is responsible for that kind of disagreement? Guarantee you its not the left or the right.

So tell me ------Where I'm wrong?

and their reaction

When this first came out, there was some analysis and an interview with a former SOS on how to respond. Both nations are allies and in essence this is a regional power struggle that we should stay out of. But no, Trump has to tweet without first examining the issue.

How the Hell do we stay out of it when it is our main forward Command and Control Base in the Region................................Are you suggesting removing our base from Quatar.................or our assets in the other countries instead............

This isn't just about Quatar............it is about Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, and Bahrain as well..................

They are pulling diplomats out and kicking their out as well.

They've all sponsored terrorist factions, Saudis for sure. We don't need to be involved in another conflict. Let THEM sort it out.

 

[Coyote]

Who here wants violence?

Last civil war took 600,000 lives. It's unconscionable that we could go that route again. Besides, there's no Mason-Dixon line in the sand. What would happen? Instead of Sherman burning Atlanta we would have rednecks burning L.A.?

We won't have a civil war for one major reason: too many Americans are spineless shits more concerned about their iPhones and Beemers to pick up a weapon.

A few riots and a few mass shootings do not a Civil War make.

Well for starters, speech and expression are gonna get shut down. Town Halls??? Impossible.. Political figures giving graduation speeches? Not gonna happen. Folks are gonna turn off the annoying noise and make their own.

The NEW Social Media is gonna be "filtered" for news and hate speech. Creating further polarization and isolation. And with no 3rd estate having any credibility left --- the polarization is just gonna broach violence. There's nothing to moderate the anger and frustration over political POWER.

This ain't about policy. It ain't about solving problems. It's ALL about struggle to CONTROL the power that the Feds TAKEN from the Constitution to micromanage EVERY ASPECT of people's lives. Nothing to do with money. Because 1/2 the lobbyists in D.C. would pack up and leave tomorrow if every congress critter didn't TAKE the power to make SOME companies win and others lose. Lobbying is a defensive art. Not an offensive art. You take away the ability to favor ONE company over ANOTHER and the money and the power and the LOBBYISTS -- simply disappear.... Neither party Dem or Rep will do that. Because that's the PRIZE for "WINNING"...

I want to interject something...on social media. It's already filtered by algorithm's that what you what they think you want creating millions of safe spaces.

I'm doing a lot of thinking about the roll of media here.

We have laws that require products be what they are labeled. You can no longer adulterate flour with plaster of Paris. We laws against libel and slander. I have no problem with private entities trying to weed out fake news from their news feeds ...

I use Google as a search engine. I don't have an FB account or a news feed or anything else, just USMB and going to links from here. I occasionally google a topic raised here just to see if it's true. So would Google have an idea of what I want to hear? That's pretty messed up, but one day when I requested pics of a snarling dog, I was getting cute puppies, mostly. Do people not take pictures of snarling dogs (I wouldn't, I'd be running the other way) but it did seem weird. Does Google know (or think they know) I'm all sweetness and light and don't really want to see snarling dogs?

I don't get news from social media but a lot of people apparently do.

 

[eagle1462010]

How would you know? You have yet to give him even at least chance. So for me your opinions are way too biased to take serious. You just want to blame. It's time to lay away the blame and try to heal a bit.

Since when we give a president that kind of tolerance? Like trial and error as we go along?
As you see this administration is very chaotic ALL by self inflicted wounds. It's not all about blaming-------- The divisive speech, him against us, the world is against him, world is falling apart ---------- attitude will only make this problem worse--Solutions are in Trump's hand.

Problem in this country no matter who is at fault the president is responsible. It's that simple.

His NEVER ending lies from campaign to his presidency to Climate Change speech to Cuba speech yesterday is full of distortion and lies. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
He has not denounce the hatred groups that are on the rise because of Trump. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
When Trump speak wrong or lies it doesn't matter it's all acceptable to his supporters. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
So people on the left should just shut up? Is that supposed to be acceptable?
Can you please answer those questions?



Let me give you an example ------------ Qatar crisis in Middle East right now is a serious problem. In Qatar we have a very large and impressive state of the art military base where US spy drones are launched with 10,000 soldiers stationed in that country. The other day Trump blasted Qatar as terrorist supporters just to make the Saudis happy-------- In his admission we are also a terrorist supporters. WHO IN THE WORLD WOULD SAY SOMETHING LIKE THAT? But Trump.
Day after we just seal the sale of 36 F15 fighter jets to Qatar worth $12B. Talking about hypocritism and amateurism in view of foreign government against us.
Instead of defusing the crisis ( contradicting Tillerson ) Trump sided with the Saudis adding fuel to the problem. Guarantee you that is 100% acceptable to Trump supporters.
Guarantee you that is NOT acceptable to the left.
So tell me------ Who is responsible for that kind of disagreement? Guarantee you its not the left or the right.

So tell me ------Where I'm wrong?

and their reaction

When this first came out, there was some analysis and an interview with a former SOS on how to respond. Both nations are allies and in essence this is a regional power struggle that we should stay out of. But no, Trump has to tweet without first examining the issue.

How the Hell do we stay out of it when it is our main forward Command and Control Base in the Region................................Are you suggesting removing our base from Quatar.................or our assets in the other countries instead............

This isn't just about Quatar............it is about Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, and Bahrain as well..................

They are pulling diplomats out and kicking their out as well.

They've all sponsored terrorist factions, Saudis for sure. We don't need to be involved in another conflict. Let THEM sort it out.

And Trump is calling them out for it, and the other Nations...................

WE HAVE A BASE THERE....................Tell me we can stay out of it when WE ARE ALREADY THERE................

What is your suggestion.................BE SPECIFIC.

 

[OldLady]

Sure.. We can have a 100 Image consultants and focus groups handle that. More balloons, more vetting, more control... Pretty soon, it'll be just as phony as the "niormal" conventions. There was TONS of more debate, more choices, and more solutions offered at THAT convention -- than any other that year.

We COULD I suppose go negative on the Brand Name tribes and make BIG HUGE headlines. But we decided (unfortunately) not to DO that. NEXT TIME --- all you're gonna hear from us is about the blood in the streets, the chaos, the phony news, the derilection of DUTY -- that is gonna be the "track record" for BOTH your corrupt and debased dynasty parties that need to die... Won't NEED money or a podium at the debates to make that case...

You guys are making it WAAAAAY too easy...

Thanks to you and TN, I started looking into this Libertarian Party prior to their convention. I looked at articles and write ups on the candidates, and I read your posts and I STILL got more and more confused about what it would look like. Then I watched the televised portion of the convention and it was obvious that the Party has not yet found its professional footing. I've seen town meetings a lot more together than that was. You folks don't have to be slick and shiny and bullshit driven but you do need to have your act together. I'd welcome it; at least knowing what a Libertarian government would look like would be a help. Be ready to answer those questions next time, is my advice. And if an attention whore gets on stage, don't let him strip for five minutes before anyone gets their finger out of their butt and does something about it.

There are a few problems with a third party.

One is that many of us vote to keep the opposing party out less than to get our person in. Trump was not my choice, but it was either vote for him or Hillary may get in. So yes, voting a third party (not that there is one I like) would have helped usher Bill and Hillary back into the White House, and there was just too much at stake given the Supreme Court vacancy.

But even if by some miracle a third party candidate would get in, he or she would not be able to accomplish anything. They would be a political outsider and the other two parties would never let them get their agendas passed. Trump is an outsider, but he at least belongs to the Republican party, and look how hard of a time his own party members are giving him!

Which is what happened with GHW Bush in 1992 and Gore in 2000. After this debacle (for Hillary!) maybe Congress will finally take a serious look at election reform. Specifically to all people to rank their choices versus only picking one and letting winner take all.

Still, I'm tired of voting for the lesser evil and will always vote my conscience from now on.

Maine voted in ranked choice voting in 2016. The powers that be are saying some piece of it violates the State Constitution. I don't think they like the idea much, which makes me like it even more.

Maine also splits its electoral vote by Congressional district, which makes it at least partially independent of the Electoral College's effect of paving over the voices of those in the state who vote outside of the majority. Unfortunately only one other state does that. In all other states the votes of those who vote outside of the majority are effectively cancelled --- which means there's no reason for anyone to vote in the first place because it's not going to make a damn bit of difference. With that going on it's a small miracle that even a shabby 55% of the electorate bothers to vote (that's what it was in 2016 -- 45% of us said, "what's the point?"

When we have millions upon millions of votes being cancelled simply because voters 400 miles away went another direction, that's state mob rule. And if the state in question is already known to tilt "red" or tilt "blue", the only reason to vote is to make a tiny tiny statement against the system by casting a third party vote --- which by definition of that state already being locked in means that 3P vote is going nowhere anyway.

Whether designed to or not the 'winner take all' aspect of the EC system ensures that no third party may ever challenge the Duopoly, which is why we've been stuck with it for a century and a half. I don't know why we all can't see that.

As someone described above a voter may detest candidate A but detest candidate B even more, leading them to vote for A solely to block B like a giant game of tic tac toe. That's not a good reason to vote for A but the Duopoly knows this and it completely removes their burden of running competent candidates and the whole thing becomes nothing more than a giant horse race the Duopoly wins every time.

And every four years we figure this out, and every four yeas we do nothing about it, and the next time around we do the same thing, expecting different results.

Fifty-five percent participation. That's atrocious. We shouldn't lie back and accept that.

Many months ago, I conversed with a poster here who went into great specifics about a movement to abolish the E.C. It is a real "thing," although it isn't getting much "airtime" anywhere. There's a petition and such.
The "tiny statement made by a 3P vote" is what got us that miserable Governor Paul LePage, most say; it is the reason the majority of voters now want ranked choice voting. The Independent Elliot Cutler got a significant % of votes that most likely would have gone to the Democrat. Why tf we gave LePage a second term is anyone's guess, but I believe it has something to do with a very weak Democratic candidate and the fact that LePage was less combative and irrational in his first term; the devil you know....
As LePage himself says, he was Trump before Trump was Trump. And it's true, but people didn't learn from our mistake.

 

[Pogo]

Trump caused the violence in this country! Don't try blaming the democrats. View attachment 133919

Trump didn't cause it, but when statements like that come from the top, it legitimizes it's open expression and creates a sense of a free for all.

Y'all remember this scene?

​

That guy is suing Rump specifically for inciting that aggression. That's Alvin Bamberger, member of the Korean War Veteans Association, pushing a black girl out of the room in response to Rump's "get 'em outta here".

>> LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WDRB) – One of the men accused in a lawsuit of assaulting a protester at a Donald Trump rally in Louisville last year has filed a counter-claim against the president, saying “he would not have acted as he did without” Trump’s “urging and inspiration.”

This guy, a "white nationalist" one-third Bambeger's age, is also suing Rump for the same reason in the same incident, in a separate suit..

Interesting passage from the first link:

>> Attorneys for Trump denied wrongdoing in an answer to the original lawsuit on Friday, arguing, in part, that he is “immune from suit because he is President.”

In that response, attorneys for Trump asked that the lawsuit be dismissed and the president be awarded costs, expenses and attorney’s fees. <<
​

----- that's the same orange kkklown who said, on the record, "Don't hurt 'em --- if you do I'll pay for your legal fees, I promise". Now he's asking THEM to pay HIM. Unbelievable.

And of course John McGraw here

​

--- has since apologized and made amends personally with the man he punched, realizing the same thing.

People are slowly starting to figure out they've been manipulated into a mass mentality violence and that their acted-out animosity is not coming from each other, but from the orange klown on stage pitting them into adversarial camps. The poster above cited some of the same statements engineered to produce the same result.

That's the source of the spike in political animosity and it's what makes the presence of a demagogue engaging in psychological mass hypnosis SO dangerous.

 

[Pogo]

Seriously. This toxic partisan political culture is poisoning civil society.

What the hell is wrong with us?

The left and the right pulling hair and screeching their bumpersticker slogans and broad brush pig ignorant partisan blamegaming? What's wrong with us?

I'm no youngster. I've never seen such a dangerous ambient.

We have someone shooting at one of our few remaining bipartisan non political fun charitable events because he wants to kill a bunch of (insert political party).

The rhetoric flooding the country is poisoning us. And no one wants to take responsibility for stepping up and saying "enough already". For changing it.

Our representatives are colleagues first and foremost. Political opponents second. They recognize it. That violence against one is violence against the others and against our very institutions. Why are we unable to recognize that?

It's a damn shame that our president played such a big role in the hatred and isn't the leader we need to heal the wounds.

How would you know? You have yet to give him even at least chance. So for me your opinions are way too biased to take serious. You just want to blame. It's time to lay away the blame and try to heal a bit.

I would add that I wish Trump would do something to that end but I don't think it's in his character

Completely agree. He's not happy unless he's inciting some kind of conflict that will ultimately pay off for Numero Uno. That's exactly why I've been railing against the orange klown for two years.

I have not the slightest inkling of a shred of a doubt that, in last week's Congressional Baseball Game saga he found the shooting far more useful for "scoring points" than he found the game useful for unity. "Unity" is too democratic --- no ROI for Numero Uno. He gets far more points for "I'd like to punch him in the mouth".

And that's the problem -- them there "points". Rump is basically playing the role of Gorgan in the Star Trek episode entitled "And the Children Shall Lead" (1968) --- an outside interloper manipulating two factions to oppose each other for his own personal profit:

when left unattended in one of the ship's rooms, the children chant an invocation and summon a glowing humanoid apparition named Gorgan, who advises them to take control of the crew and spurs them on by saying, "As you believe, so shall you do, so shall you do." At Gorgan's direction, the eldest child, Tommy, uses mental powers to trick the crew into steering the ship towards Marcus XII while presenting illusions that make them think they are still in orbit above Triacus.

Upon reviewing troublesome expedition film recorded by Starnes, Spock, McCoy, and Kirk return to the bridge to find the children and Gorgan fully in control of the crew. Unable to break their hold on the crew, Spock observes that the children are merely possessed by Gorgan, who must be the evil embodiment of an ancient group of space-warring marauders released by Starnes's archaeological survey....​

 

[sealybobo]

The "obama version" was a Minneapolis theater with NO national significance and the actor was just a "lanky black man" --- got ZERO national exposure.

The CURRENT perversion is in the HOME ******* TOWN of the President in the most well known park and city in the world and was PRODUCED by a Major Media corporation... It's that ACCELERATION that is going on that gonna get bodies in the streets. You need to be aware of the AMPLIFICATIONS of all this political tribal conflict.

And using one obscure occurrence to ABSOLVE a more egregious occurrence is what's gonna inevitably turn this into a hot war....

Do you really want to make it against the law to criticize the President or our government?

This ain't about ANY legislation. It's about regaining LEADERSHIP, humility in serving in govt, DECENCY, and accountability in govt.

It's also about SURVIVAL in an age when the major media is part of the "insurgency".. What I WANT is for folks to use their judgement muscles before they atrophy away. And that means realizing the seriousness of an inherently UNSTABLE 2 party domination of everything politics. They've LOCKED UP the power. There is no ability for even our elected Congress people to speak their minds freely. Or act as independent identities.

To paraphrase Dr McCoy of Star Fleet -- "Dammit Jim -- I'm a libertarian -- not a fascist".. The 2 Brand Name parties have become the greatest threat to the Republic.

I have confidence "We, the People" will keep the fascists, socialists and other authoritarians at bay for decades. Still, it never hurts to follow the mottos of the Scottish Police; Semper Vigilo and the US Coast Guard; Semper Paratus.

That's what you said when we passed Medicare and public schools.

Really? I doubt I was online then, but if you have a quote proving your accusation, I'd love to see it. Otherwise, I'll have to conclude you are a low-life lying troll.

Then to some people you're a socialist. Because those are socialist programs you dumb ****.

 

[Pogo]

Seriously. This toxic partisan political culture is poisoning civil society.

What the hell is wrong with us?

The left and the right pulling hair and screeching their bumpersticker slogans and broad brush pig ignorant partisan blamegaming? What's wrong with us?

I'm no youngster. I've never seen such a dangerous ambient.

We have someone shooting at one of our few remaining bipartisan non political fun charitable events because he wants to kill a bunch of (insert political party).

The rhetoric flooding the country is poisoning us. And no one wants to take responsibility for stepping up and saying "enough already". For changing it.

Our representatives are colleagues first and foremost. Political opponents second. They recognize it. That violence against one is violence against the others and against our very institutions. Why are we unable to recognize that?

It's a damn shame that our president played such a big role in the hatred and isn't the leader we need to heal the wounds.

How would you know? You have yet to give him even at least chance. So for me your opinions are way too biased to take serious. You just want to blame. It's time to lay away the blame and try to heal a bit.

I would add that I wish Trump would do something to that end but I don't think it's in his character

Completely agree. He's not happy unless he's inciting some kind of conflict that will ultimately pay off for Numero Uno. That's exactly why I've been railing against the orange klown for two years.

I have not the slightest inkling of a shred of a doubt that, in last week's Congressional Baseball Game saga he found the shooting far more useful for "scoring points" than he found the game useful for unity. "Unity" is too democratic --- no ROI for Numero Uno. He gets far more points for "I'd like to punch him in the mouth".

And that's the problem -- them there "points". Rump is basically playing the role of Gorgan in the Star Trek episode entitled "And the Children Shall Lead" (1968) --- an outside interloper manipulating two factions to oppose each other for his own personal profit:

when left unattended in one of the ship's rooms, the children chant an invocation and summon a glowing humanoid apparition named Gorgan, who advises them to take control of the crew and spurs them on by saying, "As you believe, so shall you do, so shall you do." At Gorgan's direction, the eldest child, Tommy, uses mental powers to trick the crew into steering the ship towards Marcus XII while presenting illusions that make them think they are still in orbit above Triacus.

Upon reviewing troublesome expedition film recorded by Starnes, Spock, McCoy, and Kirk return to the bridge to find the children and Gorgan fully in control of the crew. Unable to break their hold on the crew, Spock observes that the children are merely possessed by Gorgan, who must be the evil embodiment of an ancient group of space-warring marauders released by Starnes's archaeological survey....​

--- and then how eerie is this prescient TV western from 1958, about a con artist named Trump who warns of imminent disaster and of course, only he, Trump, can save the town and he'll do it by building a wall...

​

“I am the only one. Trust me. “I can build a wall around your homes."---- Trump TV character, 1958
"I alone can fix it. We will build a great wall" --- Trump reality, 2015-16

What does it take to see through con jobs like this? I mean this is a really bad TV show from six decades ago.

Then there was this film from the same era --

​

 

[Pogo]

Thanks to you and TN, I started looking into this Libertarian Party prior to their convention. I looked at articles and write ups on the candidates, and I read your posts and I STILL got more and more confused about what it would look like. Then I watched the televised portion of the convention and it was obvious that the Party has not yet found its professional footing. I've seen town meetings a lot more together than that was. You folks don't have to be slick and shiny and bullshit driven but you do need to have your act together. I'd welcome it; at least knowing what a Libertarian government would look like would be a help. Be ready to answer those questions next time, is my advice. And if an attention whore gets on stage, don't let him strip for five minutes before anyone gets their finger out of their butt and does something about it.

There are a few problems with a third party.

One is that many of us vote to keep the opposing party out less than to get our person in. Trump was not my choice, but it was either vote for him or Hillary may get in. So yes, voting a third party (not that there is one I like) would have helped usher Bill and Hillary back into the White House, and there was just too much at stake given the Supreme Court vacancy.

But even if by some miracle a third party candidate would get in, he or she would not be able to accomplish anything. They would be a political outsider and the other two parties would never let them get their agendas passed. Trump is an outsider, but he at least belongs to the Republican party, and look how hard of a time his own party members are giving him!

Which is what happened with GHW Bush in 1992 and Gore in 2000. After this debacle (for Hillary!) maybe Congress will finally take a serious look at election reform. Specifically to all people to rank their choices versus only picking one and letting winner take all.

Still, I'm tired of voting for the lesser evil and will always vote my conscience from now on.

Maine voted in ranked choice voting in 2016. The powers that be are saying some piece of it violates the State Constitution. I don't think they like the idea much, which makes me like it even more.

Maine also splits its electoral vote by Congressional district, which makes it at least partially independent of the Electoral College's effect of paving over the voices of those in the state who vote outside of the majority. Unfortunately only one other state does that. In all other states the votes of those who vote outside of the majority are effectively cancelled --- which means there's no reason for anyone to vote in the first place because it's not going to make a damn bit of difference. With that going on it's a small miracle that even a shabby 55% of the electorate bothers to vote (that's what it was in 2016 -- 45% of us said, "what's the point?"

When we have millions upon millions of votes being cancelled simply because voters 400 miles away went another direction, that's state mob rule. And if the state in question is already known to tilt "red" or tilt "blue", the only reason to vote is to make a tiny tiny statement against the system by casting a third party vote --- which by definition of that state already being locked in means that 3P vote is going nowhere anyway.

Whether designed to or not the 'winner take all' aspect of the EC system ensures that no third party may ever challenge the Duopoly, which is why we've been stuck with it for a century and a half. I don't know why we all can't see that.

As someone described above a voter may detest candidate A but detest candidate B even more, leading them to vote for A solely to block B like a giant game of tic tac toe. That's not a good reason to vote for A but the Duopoly knows this and it completely removes their burden of running competent candidates and the whole thing becomes nothing more than a giant horse race the Duopoly wins every time.

And every four years we figure this out, and every four yeas we do nothing about it, and the next time around we do the same thing, expecting different results.

Fifty-five percent participation. That's atrocious. We shouldn't lie back and accept that.

Many months ago, I conversed with a poster here who went into great specifics about a movement to abolish the E.C. It is a real "thing," although it isn't getting much "airtime" anywhere. There's a petition and such.
The "tiny statement made by a 3P vote" is what got us that miserable Governor Paul LePage, most say; it is the reason the majority of voters now want ranked choice voting. The Independent Elliot Cutler got a significant % of votes that most likely would have gone to the Democrat. Why tf we gave LePage a second term is anyone's guess, but I believe it has something to do with a very weak Democratic candidate and the fact that LePage was less combative and irrational in his first term; the devil you know....
As LePage himself says, he was Trump before Trump was Trump. And it's true, but people didn't learn from our mistake.

Yeah the whole problem with reforming the Electoral College system is that it only seems to come up every four years because that's the only time it's in operation. By then it's too late and we scratch our heads and go "why didn't we fix this before?" and we squawk about it and then do nothing. Four years later we do it all over again.

I dunno what it takes to fix that. I guess we'd have to elect a president who squeaked out an EC majority and then demonstrated what a disaster that choice was. That would serve as a daily reminder of how a demagogue could manipulate the system.

Hmmm....

 

[WEATHER53]

Only in lib land is it offered with resounding but false authority that after losing, the rules need to be changed rather than the participant reevaluating their approach

 

[RightyTighty]

Only in lib land is it offered with resounding but false authority that after losing, the rules need to be changed rather than the participant reevaluating their approach

The majority lost. That is a problem alright.

 

[WEATHER53]

Only in lib land is it offered with resounding but false authority that after losing, the rules need to be changed rather than the participant reevaluating their approach

The majority lost. That is a problem alright.

the majority lost what?

 

[OldLady]

Only in lib land is it offered with resounding but false authority that after losing, the rules need to be changed rather than the participant reevaluating their approach

Both need to happen. However, it is a reasonable argument to broach. This country now elects every other representative with majority vote, except the President. It was initially done the way it was because the original 13 colonies/states had no intention of handing over their authority to another governmental entity; the King experience was still too close and the States' makeups were too different.

 

[Pogo]

Only in lib land is it offered with resounding but false authority that after losing, the rules need to be changed rather than the participant reevaluating their approach

Both need to happen. However, it is a reasonable argument to broach. This country now elects every other representative with majority vote, except the President. It was initially done the way it was because the original 13 colonies/states had no intention of handing over their authority to another governmental entity; the King experience was still too close and the States' makeups were too different.

Another part of this worth noting is that when a third party candidate runs in the Duopoly system, their realistic goal is not to win an outright EC majority, but to prevent anybody else from winning one, which then throws the final decision into the House of Reps. That takes the electorate out of the decision entirely. In theory it doesn't, if (in theory) Congresscritters would vote on behalf of their constituents as they're supposed to, rather than vote on behalf of their political party and their own inclinations, which is what happens in practice. Yet another flaw of dominant Duopoly.

This was (for one example) the whole strategy of the infamous "Dixiecrats" in 1948. And they almost achieved it. Wallace came pretty close 20 years later too.

That ain't how the system is intended to work --- that's gaming the system to remove the popular vote altogether. The whole thing is a perverse machination that operates on negatives --- not on winning votes in its own right but on denying votes to others. On one level it obliteratess the votes of anything less than a majority of a state; on another level it obliterates the votes of the entire country.

 

[charwin95]

Seriously. This toxic partisan political culture is poisoning civil society.

What the hell is wrong with us?

The left and the right pulling hair and screeching their bumpersticker slogans and broad brush pig ignorant partisan blamegaming? What's wrong with us?

I'm no youngster. I've never seen such a dangerous ambient.

We have someone shooting at one of our few remaining bipartisan non political fun charitable events because he wants to kill a bunch of (insert political party).

The rhetoric flooding the country is poisoning us. And no one wants to take responsibility for stepping up and saying "enough already". For changing it.

Our representatives are colleagues first and foremost. Political opponents second. They recognize it. That violence against one is violence against the others and against our very institutions. Why are we unable to recognize that?

It's a damn shame that our president played such a big role in the hatred and isn't the leader we need to heal the wounds.

How would you know? You have yet to give him even at least chance. So for me your opinions are way too biased to take serious. You just want to blame. It's time to lay away the blame and try to heal a bit.

Since when we give a president that kind of tolerance? Like trial and error as we go along?
As you see this administration is very chaotic ALL by self inflicted wounds. It's not all about blaming-------- The divisive speech, him against us, the world is against him, world is falling apart ---------- attitude will only make this problem worse--Solutions are in Trump's hand.

Problem in this country no matter who is at fault the president is responsible. It's that simple.

His NEVER ending lies from campaign to his presidency to Climate Change speech to Cuba speech yesterday is full of distortion and lies. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
He has not denounce the hatred groups that are on the rise because of Trump. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
When Trump speak wrong or lies it doesn't matter it's all acceptable to his supporters. Is that supposed to be acceptable?
So people on the left should just shut up? Is that supposed to be acceptable?
Can you please answer those questions?



Let me give you an example ------------ Qatar crisis in Middle East right now is a serious problem. In Qatar we have a very large and impressive state of the art military base where US spy drones are launched with 10,000 soldiers stationed in that country. The other day Trump blasted Qatar as terrorist supporters just to make the Saudis happy-------- In his admission we are also a terrorist supporters. WHO IN THE WORLD WOULD SAY SOMETHING LIKE THAT? But Trump.
Day after we just seal the sale of 36 F15 fighter jets to Qatar worth $12B. Talking about hypocritism and amateurism in view of foreign government against us.
Instead of defusing the crisis ( contradicting Tillerson ) Trump sided with the Saudis adding fuel to the problem. Guarantee you that is 100% acceptable to Trump supporters.
Guarantee you that is NOT acceptable to the left.
So tell me------ Who is responsible for that kind of disagreement? Guarantee you its not the left or the right.

So tell me ------Where I'm wrong?

and their reaction

I've seen those videos and thank you for posting. Exactly what I just said.
Is that mean that we are also a terrorist supporters? ME conflicts is very fragile, sensitive and need a careful balancing act policy not just one sided. Especially we supply arms to Qatar. Listening to Trump speech-------- How is that going to solve the problem? It did make the Saudis happy which also supports terrorism but it doesn't sound good for the Qataris.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah the whole problem with reforming the Electoral College system is that it only seems to come up every four years because that's the only time it's in operation.

No, it doesn't come up every four years, it comes up when Democrats lose an election because the are not graceful losers and have been brainwashed by their leaders they've been cheated somehow.