Party Loyalty is Poison

[eagle1462010]

I could tell who I support, who I voted for. But that's NOT the point. I'm not telling you who to vote for. I'm asking, begging you, you to stop falling for the lesser-of-two-evils idiocy. It has you voting for bad candidates on purpose. Because they're on you "side".
Which makes you worse than useless.

Who is this make believe other choice?

When you only have this or that....YOU MUST CHOOSE.

Other than that you might as well stay home.

 

[dblack]

Honestly, this entire thread/argument makes so much sense to me that I'm literally struggling to understand how others aren't getting it. People just get so entrenched unfortunately.

They don't want to get it. So they won't

 

[BrokeLoser]

Honestly, this entire thread/argument makes so much sense to me that I'm literally struggling to understand how others aren't getting it. People just get so entrenched unfortunately.

Consider this question that drives fence-sitters bananas.
If the Dallas Cowboys are playing the Eagles would you bet on the Giants to win the game?
dblack has proven over and over…he doesn’t “get it”.

 

[Dirk the Daring]

Consider this question that drives fence-sitters bananas.
If the Dallas Cowboys are playing the Eagles would you bet on the Giants to win the game?
dblack has proven over and over…he doesn’t “get it”.

No, I hate both the Cowboys and the Eagles. I would flip the channel and find something better to watch, something more aligned with my interests.

I didn't like Obama or McCain, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Romney or Obama, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Hillary or Trump, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Biden or Trump, so I didn't vote for either. I don't want both parties offering me rotting meat then telling me 'it could be worse.'

 

[dblack]

No, I hate both the Cowboys and the Eagles. I would flip the channel and find something better to watch, something more aligned with my interests.

I didn't like Obama or McCain, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Romney or Obama, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Hillary or Trump, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Biden or Trump, so I didn't vote for either. I don't want both parties offering me rotting meat then telling me 'it could be worse.'

I think part of what we're seeing, is that pretty much everyone here is a hardened, two-party culture warrior, committed to one "side" or the other. But I'm optimistic that there's a core America fed up with the artificial division and ready for something better. We'll see.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

The founders knew it. Anyone with a brain and a pulse knows it. We've replaced principles and values with "sides".

The Founding Fathers Feared Political Factions Would Tear the Nation Apart | HISTORY

The Constitution's framers viewed political parties as a necessary evil.

www.history.com

Political parties are acceptable if they are normal and believe in the rule of law.

But the MAGA Republican Party sure as **** ain't that.

 

[Seymour Flops]

If Massie were president, he'd have cheered the massive tax increase for which he voted as a Congressman because he hates the deficit and what it is doing to the national debt.

Then he'd watch in dismay as not one penny of the tax increase went to reducing the deficit or the debt. Instead, the deficit would rise, as the drunken sailors of the Senate and House spent the additional revenue based on the CBO scoring of what it would be . . . if the CBO's predictions came true (which they would not).

Belatedly, Massie would try to point out that the higher taxes had slowed the economy so that there was not nearly as much additional revenue as was planned for. His erstwhile Democratic allies would take the House, since Republican voters would see so little difference between the spend and tax Democrats and the tax and spend Republicans.

Then they would solve the problems that raising taxes had created the only way they know how: by raising them again.

Then . . . as inevitible . . . a Democrat would rise from the crowd, proclaim himself a centrist, promise to end ___________ as we know it, and be elected by a gullible public, and beat Massie in his attempt to win a second term.

Only to continue the massive growth of government.

But . . . by GAWD . . . they would not be the Bad Orange Man!

 

[dblack]

Political parties are acceptable if they are normal and believe in the rule of law.

Agreed. There's nothing wrong with parties. It's plurality voting and the way it creates artificial division.

 

[BrokeLoser]

No, I hate both the Cowboys and the Eagles. I would flip the channel and find something better to watch, something more aligned with my interests.

I didn't like Obama or McCain, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Romney or Obama, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Hillary or Trump, so I didn't vote for either. I didn't like Biden or Trump, so I didn't vote for either. I don't want both parties offering me rotting meat then telling me 'it could be worse.'

That sounds like an act of nobility or stupidity….By not voting for neither Obama nor McCain or Romney nor Obama stop them from winning…how about Hillary or Trump…or Biden or Trump…did you stop any of them from winning?
Do you not make compromises in your life…often accepting the better of two available options?
If you absolutely HAD to secure a home loan to keep your home out of foreclosure (like you have to have a President) and only two lenders offered you a loan would you decline both and let your home be taken from you?
Come on man…don’t get sucked into dblack ‘s bizarre as hell Twilight Zone.

 

[BrokeLoser]

No, I hate both the Cowboys and the Eagles. I would flip the channel and find something better to watch, something more aligned with my interests.

Does that stop one of them from winning that game?

 

[dblack]

Does that stop one of them from winning that game?

Unfortunately, with our current system, you can't vote against a candidate. All you can do is vote FOR one candidate. With other voting systems you can do this, but two party goons resist change to those systems. Gotta wonder why.

 

[JoeB131]

Try to keep your facts straight

The early southern economy depended on black slavery

But not America as a whole

Well, actually, yet the country as a whole. In the 1790 Census, there were as many slaves in NY as their were in Georgia (about 25,000)

The difference is while the abolition movement gained ground in the North, it lost ground in the South.

Even as the Free States grew, they were reluctant to ban slavery until the Civil War. Too much of the economy depended on it. And they turned a blind eye when de facto slavery was re-imposed through Jim Crow, Debt Peonage, etc.

 

[JoeB131]

Unfortunately, with our current system, you can't vote against a candidate. All you can do is vote FOR one candidate. With other voting systems you can do this, but two party goons resist change to those systems. Gotta wonder why.

How is that going to work, exactly, this "voting against a candidate"?

Some places do allow "None of the Above" as an option. It never gets more than a few percent.

 

[Mac-7]

Well, actually, yet the country as a whole. In the 1790 Census, there were as many slaves in NY as their were in Georgia (about 25,000)

Yes, 6% black slaves in New York vs 35% black slaves in Georgia

So I stand by my point that black slaves contributed to building America, but were far less important in the North than what whites did

 

[dblack]

How is that going to work, exactly, this "voting against a candidate"?

I've explained it to you. So I know your question is disingenuous. But for the sake of others here, voting systems like Approval voting or Ranked Choice voting or Score voting let you vote against candidates. In Approval voting this is down by simply voting "no" for the candidate in question. In RCV, you rank the candidate last - meaning your vote goes to whoever has the best of beating them. Score voting is similar. It's not rocket science, Joe. I suspect even you could understand if you cared enough to try.

 

[sartre play]

God would not allow that to happen

He created America for a purpose and there is nothing hateful libs can do to stop it

Show me where GOD created a world hell bent on supporting any political party.
How about no other Gods before me?

 

[dblack]

Show me where GOD created a world hell bent on supporting any political party.
How about no other Gods before me?

They have kind of turned it into religion.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Unfortunately, with our current system, you can't vote against a candidate. All you can do is vote FOR one candidate. With other voting systems you can do this, but two party goons resist change to those systems. Gotta wonder why.

While the base concept may be sound RCV is way too complicated for the voters Democrats want voting…Democrats say their voters are too stupid to obtain identification, too stupid to make it to the polls…RCV can’t work for this nation.

 

[Dirk the Daring]

That sounds like an act of nobility or stupidity….By not voting for neither Obama nor McCain or Romney nor Obama stop them from winning…how about Hillary or Trump…or Biden or Trump…did you stop any of them from winning?
Do you not make compromises in your life…often accepting the better of two available options?
If you absolutely HAD to secure a home loan to keep your home out of foreclosure (like you have to have a President) and only two lenders offered you a loan would you decline both and let your home be taken from you?
Come on man…don’t get sucked into dblack ‘s bizarre as hell Twilight Zone.

Sucked in? I had no idea who dblack was before this thread, and I've felt like this for over 10 years.

 

[Dirk the Daring]

Does that stop one of them from winning that game?

Holler at me the next time a presidential election is decided by one vote. Like I said earlier, my area's leaning is already pre-determined.