Real quick.
Trump fired his campaign manager, the one who got in trouble for grabbing that woman who worked at Breitbart.
Sign he's gonna start taking things more seriously? Or a sign his campaign is in the toilet?
Real quick.
Trump fired his campaign manager, the one who got in trouble for grabbing that woman who worked at Breitbart.
Sign he's gonna start taking things more seriously? Or a sign his campaign is in the toilet?
Real quick.
Trump fired his campaign manager, the one who got in trouble for grabbing that woman who worked at Breitbart.
Sign he's gonna start taking things more seriously? Or a sign his campaign is in the toilet?
I reckon the GOP is gonna try to muscle their way into the campaign to try and take control.
The overwhelming majority of self-identified independents really do just vote for either of the two parties though and always have, which is why third parties aren't viable in the current system. The only third party runs in the history of this country that actually altered an election have come at the expense of one of the two major parties of that time period, whether in 1860, 1912, or 2000. In all of those cases and the cases where they didn't alter the election (like 1948), those voters largely went right back to their main party within the next two elections.
True independents are practically non-existent in our political system, which is a real shame, but that's how it is.
The election of 1824 should also count, even though there was only one party in existence at the time. Four candidates won electoral votes.
I have to say it's good to see (according to taboo's source) that there is not the same insane amount of money wasted, as both partys did during the 2012 election campaigning.
How is the money wasted? Its not like they take from tax money and poor people (unless poor people are choosing to donate to them).
That sort of money is coming from donors and companies and the like who are freely giving the money.
Which is then pumped back into the economy anyhow.
Point being it isn't coming from sources that are needy or earmarked for needy use.
Like the main reason Trump doesn't have shit is he isn't (or isn't having any of his folks) make calls and contacts with supporters and surrogates to get donations.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
For me, it's the freedom to vote for the candidate I want regardless of party. I do see a TON of people feeling smug and superior about being loyal to one specific party though, usually accompanied by attempts to label the other major party evil and the accusation of "if you're not with us, you're against us."
One major party is inarguably a dumpster fire though. Like seriously, this election is the time where that has become objective fact.
Now of course holding the Democrat party up high as holy and good would by dumb. But the GOP is a burning trash bag full of dog doo. One that is now stomping on itself on its own front door.
The election of 1824 should also count, even though there was only one party in existence at the time. Four candidates won electoral votes.
1824 is such an anomaly that it's hard to compare it to other elections; besides the fact that there was only one party that was unable to pick a single candidate, you had a situation where there were four Presidential candidates and three Vice since Calhoun was on the ticket for both John Quincy Adams and Jackson.
@Monkey:
How is the money wasted? Its not like they take from tax money and poor people (unless poor people are choosing to donate to them).
That sort of money is coming from donors and companies and the like who are freely giving the money.
Which is then pumped back into the economy anyhow.
Point being it isn't coming from sources that are needy or earmarked for needy use.
Like the main reason Trump doesn't have shit is he isn't (or isn't having any of his folks) make calls and contacts with supporters and surrogates to get donations.
No one uses matched campaign funds anymore, right? Citizens United was the final nail in that coffin iirc.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
1824 is such an anomaly that it's hard to compare it to other elections; besides the fact that there was only one party that was unable to pick a single candidate, you had a situation where there were four Presidential candidates and three Vice since Calhoun was on the ticket for both John Quincy Adams and Jackson.
So basically this Republican primary if the GOP had its shit together and Jeb won.
@Monkey:
One major party is inarguably a dumpster fire though. Like seriously, this election is the time where that has become objective fact.
I just don't see what the Republican Party is offering people these days beyond scapegoating LBGTs (they've backed off on that since Orlando but will right back at it soon), Latinos, and Muslims for all of society's problems. Their policies can't fix the problems currently being faced largely because so many of those problems currently exist because of their policies.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
So basically this Republican primary if the GOP had its shit together and Jeb won.
If Jeb had won and Trump (and, let's say, Cruz) went off to start his own party in a huff, it'd be like the 1860 election since there was actually an organized opposition party.
The 1820s were weird all around; James Monroe won 99.5% of the vote in 1820 and 1828 had a new, temporary party whose entire platform was basically "We hate Andrew Jackson".
For me, it's the freedom to vote for the candidate I want regardless of party. I do see a TON of people feeling smug and superior about being loyal to one specific party though, usually accompanied by attempts to label the other major party evil and the accusation of "if you're not with us, you're against us."
First, you're gonna get smug jerks on any side of any issue. There's no such thing as a purely perfect group of people because at the end of the day, it's human nature we're dealing with here.
That being said, unfortunately, the system isn't such that a 3rd party or an independant can NOT conceivably win and it isn't exactly an easy fix.
The issue really is voter apathy I think. The Majority of voters really DON'T pay attention to the minutia of the issues and want an easy answer, and voting along party lines is that easy answer to them. There are some issues where the parties have striking differences that they have been sure to carve out for themselves in the public conciousness.
LGBT issues is a big one. You can find Pro-LGBT republicans, but the party's official platform is to be Anti-LGBT and the majority of the Republicans in power follow suit as a result. If that's a big issue for you, you don't have to research a particular candidate to know which one PROBABLY falls on the side you are. That's true for a lot of issues, like "Big vs. Small Government", "Gun Control", "Women's Reproductive Rights" etc.
Due to this, the two major parties always get the VAST majority of the votes since even a lot of the people who fancy themselves "Independent" will tend to back one of the two big ones more often than not on average.
I honestly don't know what it will take to fix it tbh, but the problem with all of the people saying they won't vote for Hillary or Trump because they "Shouldn't have to" vote for the "Lesser of Two evils" is that, just voting for the 3rd party candidate won't really do anything substantial.
The worst you will accomplish is taking votes away from the big two and potentially Nadering it as a spoiler candidate, and we're stuck with the WORSE of the two evils for at least 4 years as a result That's why Bernie Sanders promised not to run as an independent. As much as he wants to change things, he knows how this works and he knows it's gonna be either Hillary or Trump as our president, and he does NOT want Trump.
and 1828 had a new, temporary party whose entire platform was basically "We hate Andrew Jackson".
In a just world they would've won 99.5% of the vote.
Andrew Jackson/John C. Calhoun, Why vote for the lesser evil when you can vote for the full evil?
The 1820s were weird all around; James Monroe won 99.5% of the vote in 1820 and 1828 had a new, temporary party whose entire platform was basically "We hate Andrew Jackson".
This is my platform.
Word got out that republicans are planning to attend the GOP convention wearing paper bags with eyeholes to conceal their identities.
@Monkey:
How is the money wasted? Its not like they take from tax money and poor people (unless poor people are choosing to donate to them).
It's just, was it really necessary to drain roughly 80 million dollars from various sources and spend it on ads and alike?
It's just, was it really necessary to drain roughly 80 million dollars from various sources and spend it on ads and alike?
Draining dollars from rich people, and companies, and countless small donations from middle class people …yeah sure why not?
And campaigning is expensive. Good campaigning. You need tons of manpower, advertising, transportation, down to the smallest details in order to get out the vote in a whole bunch of different states. Across the entire breadth of the states.
And you have to do more of it than the other person.
Money is only really wasted when it is spent by things that would otherwise have been using it for very important things. Otherwise it just y'know, goes back into circulation. If a rich guy was wavering on whether to donate a grand to charity or a campaign sure that would have been a waste (unless that charity addresses things effected by politics). But I think we both know that such a decision really isn't being made by such people.
It's just, was it really necessary to drain roughly 80 million dollars from various sources and spend it on ads and alike?
For a presidential campaign in the 21st century?
Yes.
The GOP has become the laughing stock of the country.
The debate calendar has been set.
Monday, September 26, 2016 - Wright State University, Dayton, OH
Tuesday, October 4, 2016 (VP debate) - Longwood University, Farmville, VA
Sunday, October 9, 2016 - Washington University, St. Louis, MO
Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - UNLV, Las Vegas, NV
On top of that, the idea that he financed his own campaign is bunk. He did a loan that's repayable by the Republican war chest should he become the nominee. Rather than having put in millions he's only put in a few thousand.
No shock; keep in mind that he said that he'd make our creditors take a "haircut" and settle for less than what we owe and that we can't default since the U.S. Mint prints money,
Also, this gem, which isn't about the economy, but still bears mentioning:
@U.S.:
At a reception in New York City around 1990 … Trump expressed envy of Burt’s position and proceeded to offer advice on how best to cut a “terrific” deal with the Soviets. Trump told Burt to arrive late to the next negotiating session, walk into the room where his fuming counterpart sits waiting impatiently, remain standing and looking down at him, stick his finger into his chest and say “Fuck you!”
So conflicted; on one hand such an assassination after the recent Jo Brand fiasco (to say nothing of that other horrifying killing event) would just be adding fuel to the unruly flames.
On the other hand it's Donald Trump. Being a pacifist can be hard.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-cycles-campaign-funds-back-into-businesses
Trump is funnelling money from his campaign to his businesses.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-cycles-campaign-funds-back-into-businesses
Trump is funnelling money from his campaign to his businesses.
Allright, he never had any intention to run a campaign. This confirms it.
So next speech he'll want to ban all white guys from the UK, right?
But dude, if you're going to attempt an assassination, bring your own gun, don't try to take one off a police officer.
Also, waiting for Trump to claim it would be much safer if everyone at his rally was carrying a concealed weapon.
So next speech he'll want to ban all white guys from the UK, right?
But dude, if you're going to attempt an assassination, bring your own gun, don't try to take one off a police officer.
Here's the best part:
He had to try to take the gun from a cop, because Trump Rallies are GUN FREE ZONES!!!
Here's the best part:
He had to try to take the gun from a cop, because Trump Rallies are GUN FREE ZONES!!!
The irony lol… Smh
Hillary shredded Trump today in a 45-minute speech focused on his incompetence. It's pretty glorious.
Can't wait for those debates
That Chapter 11 burn actually made my computer smoke.
Interesting argument about how the Democrats won't become ideologically stronger but rather even more complacent following the Trump debacle.
The last time I heard Matt Taibbi talk about an election, it was when he was insisting that Romney was really pretty moderate and the 2012 election doesn't matter all that much.
He should stick to writing Wall Street takedowns and shitting on Tom Friedman.
First, you're gonna get smug jerks on any side of any issue. There's no such thing as a purely perfect group of people because at the end of the day, it's human nature we're dealing with here.
They're by far the loudest people though, and the ones you hear from most often in major news sources and in real life.
@Demon:
The worst you will accomplish is taking votes away from the big two and potentially Nadering it as a spoiler candidate, and we're stuck with the WORSE of the two evils for at least 4 years as a result That's why Bernie Sanders promised not to run as an independent. As much as he wants to change things, he knows how this works and he knows it's gonna be either Hillary or Trump as our president, and he does NOT want Trump.
This is an excuse to silence people who don't want to step in line and vote for the "correct" candidate. The more candidates we have, the better our election system is, and the major reasons for Gore's loss have nothing to do with Nader.
I don't mean to accuse you of malice, it's just that any independent candidate in this country is unfairly saddled with the "original sin" of past major party losses.
Edit:
I've noticed a problem more and more with upper class groups and a sense of entitlement. Hillary Clinton is not entitled to all democrats' votes, and Donald Trump is not entitled to all Republican votes. It's kind of like the ridiculous claims made by big media in regards to the pirate bay and the trillions of dollars they've "lost". Someone who shows interest in a game or movie was not necessarily going to spend money on it, and did not necessarily have the expendable income to do so in the first place. Likewise, someone who openly supported Bernie was not necessarily going to vote for him when it came down to the wire.
If people really want 3rd party, then it needs to start at the local government level and build upwards. There has to be a change in in the voters. You can't just suddenly vote 3rd party for the president just for the fuck of it, there's no base support
If people really want 3rd party, then it needs to start at the local government level and build upwards. There has to be a change in in the voters. You can't just suddenly vote 3rd party for the president just for the fuck of it, there's no base support
Pretty much agree.
If people really want 3rd party, then it needs to start at the local government level and build upwards. There has to be a change in in the voters. You can't just suddenly vote 3rd party for the president just for the fuck of it, there's no base support
Yeah, Taboo hit the nail on the head.
The more candidates we have, the better our election system is, and the major reasons for Gore's loss have nothing to do with Nader.
I don't mean to accuse you of malice, it's just that any independent candidate in this country is unfairly saddled with the "original sin" of past major party losses.
Robo, you're not wrong. The only problem is, you're talking about how it SHOULD be and not how it IS. Just like Taboo said, you don't fix things by wanting them fixed and acting like they're fixed already without having done anything.
You have to fix them overall first, and then you can start reaping the benefits of them being fixed.
Taboo is right that increasing the independent and 3rd party base in congress is a good start. Another thing, we need to get rid of Citizen's United so it becomes possible for a smaller party and/or candidate to be able to afford to run on the same level as the Dems and Repubs.
That's the biggest reason I'm voting for Hillary. I've said this a few times already, but Trump will appoint supreme court Justices who are VERY Far Right, he's flat out said he is. He does that, and we will never be rid of Citizen's United.
Nader had plenty to do in Gore's loss as well.
Is pestering Dems part of the Green Party program or something? Jill Stein said Hillary is worse than Trump.
Is pestering Dems part of the Green Party program or something? Jill Stein said Hillary is worse than Trump.
And I repeat, Getting Republicans Elected Every November
Is pestering Dems part of the Green Party program or something? Jill Stein said Hillary is worse than Trump.
Yeah this is that other issue, which is that the candidates of the third parties tend to not ready for prime time at best, and sort of loopy and dumb at worst.
This is a symptom of their marginalized positions of course, but its also another damn fine reason Taboo is right. Because the party actually has to be built to begin with.
A party that says stupid attention getting edgelord quotes like that is not ready to do anything serious to begin with.
Yeah sure they may better represent your ideas, but few people in them would be able to competently do much if they did win.
This is an excuse to silence people who don't want to step in line and vote for the "correct" candidate. The more candidates we have, the better our election system is, and the major reasons for Gore's loss have nothing to do with Nader.
If even a third of the 20,000 people who voted for Nader in New Hampshire had voted for Gore, he'd have won the electoral college alongside the popular vote. So, yes, he did most certainly play a major role in Gore's loss by convincing those people that there was no substantial difference between Gore and Bush, which is especially ironic seeing as how promoting environmentalism was one of the entire reasons the Green Party was even created in the first place.
These days I hear a lot of "B-B-B-B-BUT LIEBERMAN" from the unapologetic Naderites/accessories to murder who apparently don't know that it was 2000 and Lieberman publicly being a crazy asshole wasn't a thing back then.
So Trump is inspiring people to make independent runs for Congress.
The jackass that put up the sign lives about thirty minutes south of me.
So Trump is inspiring people to make independent runs for Congress.
http://images.dailykos.com/images/266116/story_image/white.jpg?1466611293
The jackass that put up the sign lives about thirty minutes south of me.
Tyler told Channel 3 he has no hatred in his heart for "people of color." He says the sign's message is that America should go back to a "1960s, Ozzie and Harriet, Leave it to Beaver time when there were no break-ins; no violent crime; no mass immigration."
"no break-ins unless you lived in one of 'their' neighborhoods, no violent crime unless a black man dared to make small talk with a white woman, no mass immigration except for the constant stream of immigrants this county has had unabated since the mid-19th century, and most of all none of the rap music blasting at all hours of the day"
…he does know Leave it to Beaver was a television show, not a documentary, right?
And that the world didn't used to be in black and white?
1950s, Ozzie and Harriett, Leave it to Beaver
The 50's in America: Only good if you were a upper middle class male WASP.
Rin: agreed. Trump's also going to default on the national debt…
...which could cause a few problems.
If even a third of the 20,000 people who voted for Nader in New Hampshire had voted for Gore, he'd have won the electoral college alongside the popular vote. So, yes, he did most certainly play a major role in Gore's loss by convincing those people that there was no substantial difference between Gore and Bush, which is especially ironic seeing as how promoting environmentalism was one of the entire reasons the Green Party was even created in the first place.
That's just it though, those twenty thousand people are an unknown factor. They could easily have stayed home and not voted for anyone, and there's even the possibility that Nader brought MORE voters to Gore by keeping people active and interested in politics.
Bernie brought tons of attention to important issues that the democrats have neglected, and after seeing their recent action on gun control I have some faith that those issues will be addressed in the coming years. As a result, I think I'm going to vote for Hillary.
And that the world didn't used to be in black and white?
So Trump is inspiring people to make independent runs for Congress.
http://images.dailykos.com/images/266116/story_image/white.jpg?1466611293
The jackass that put up the sign lives about thirty minutes south of me.
I don't see any cameras… go plant a confederate flag out there. :P