2020 US General Election Thread IX: One Month and Counting

[Dresderstan]

Except if somebody is voting for the person they believe would be best for the job, it's not a wasted vote.

Though electoralism is a joke anyway.

That could happen in Indiana for governor. The Libertarian candidate could get a significant portion of the vote.

According to one poll, and one source of donations of 165K in one week, compared to the multi millions both the GOP and Dem candidates can achieve in that time.

[San Lumen]

That could happen in Indiana for governor. The Libertarian candidate could get a significant portion of the vote.

According to one poll, and one source of donations of 165K in one week, compared to the multi millions both the GOP and Dem candidates can achieve in that time.

In Indiana that's a lot of money for third party. We might be getting a new poll soon.

[The Black Forrest]

Sure. Good thing most people aren't like that.

Well, I only have NSG as my sample size with ‘third party’ people for the most part only emerging every four years to be smug dicks about the election and acting like the actual candidates matter. I won’t pretend to have taken a survey.

I have been here as long as well and can confirm it. During a presidential election. Two party conspiracy! They are destroying the country!, etc., etc., etc. During a “boring” election? Not much in the way of comments.

[West Leas Oros 2]

So then why does this thread oppose third parties doing grass roots campaigns?

They aren’t doing grass roots campaigns. It’s just bitching about the two party conspiracy.

Mind you; nothing wrong with saying vote green. Just like people saying considering how bad trump and the republicans are...it’s a waste of a vote.

I don't know about you, but where I live, there's no shortage of grassroots efforts. Whether the third parties are doing it or not, that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be. Yeah, complaining about the big parties wont change anything, but neither will saying "third parties should just give up an not try".

[Cannot think of a name]

They aren’t doing grass roots campaigns. It’s just bitching about the two party conspiracy.

Mind you; nothing wrong with saying vote green. Just like people saying considering how bad trump and the republicans are...it’s a waste of a vote.

I don't know about you, but where I live, there's no shortage of grassroots efforts. Whether the third parties are doing it or not, that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be. Yeah, complaining about the big parties wont change anything, but neither will saying "third parties should just give up an not try".

Don't conflate the two arguments. There are the 'third parties don't and will never matter' crowd who at the very least have all of electoral history to go by. Then there are the people who vote for their third party in non-sexy elections frustrated that hipsters who just want to whine about the two majors who only become third party voters during presidential elections taking up all the oxygen.

It's usually accompanied by ludicrous expectations of what a third party means to the landscape, like they're going to ride in on horses and drive out all the bad things instead of just being another coalition that will have to be negotiated with to get anything done and will be just as beholden to having to get elected and all that comes with it and will have to be held to account just like the major parties.

[Ngelmish]

Except if somebody is voting for the person they believe would be best for the job, it's not a wasted vote.

Though electoralism is a joke anyway.

That could happen in Indiana for governor. The Libertarian candidate could get a significant portion of the vote.

Yes, it could happen, but will it? Doubtful. Libertarian candidates for statewide office do make a lot of noise every once in awhile here, but their vote share reliably shrinks come election day.

[West Leas Oros 2]

I don't know about you, but where I live, there's no shortage of grassroots efforts. Whether the third parties are doing it or not, that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be. Yeah, complaining about the big parties wont change anything, but neither will saying "third parties should just give up an not try".

Don't conflate the two arguments. There are the 'third parties don't and will never matter' crowd who at the very least have all of electoral history to go by. Then there are the people who vote for their third party in non-sexy elections frustrated that hipsters who just want to whine about the two majors who only become third party voters during presidential elections taking up all the oxygen.

It's usually accompanied by ludicrous expectations of what a third party means to the landscape, like they're going to ride in on horses and drive out all the bad things instead of just being another coalition that will have to be negotiated with to get anything done and will be just as beholden to having to get elected and all that comes with it and will have to be held to account just like the major parties.

Honestly I just want congress to look more colorful in terms of parties. I want us to look like the parliaments of Europe and shit. I want to be able to talk about elections the way Canadians do.

[Dresderstan]

Don't conflate the two arguments. There are the 'third parties don't and will never matter' crowd who at the very least have all of electoral history to go by. Then there are the people who vote for their third party in non-sexy elections frustrated that hipsters who just want to whine about the two majors who only become third party voters during presidential elections taking up all the oxygen.

It's usually accompanied by ludicrous expectations of what a third party means to the landscape, like they're going to ride in on horses and drive out all the bad things instead of just being another coalition that will have to be negotiated with to get anything done and will be just as beholden to having to get elected and all that comes with it and will have to be held to account just like the major parties.

Honestly I just want congress to look more colorful in terms of parties. I want us to look like the parliaments of Europe and shit. I want to be able to talk about elections the way Canadians do.

Honestly so do I, their elections are the most interesting for a country with a parliamentary FPTP system.

[Greater Miami Shores]

So then why does this thread oppose third parties doing grass roots campaigns?

They aren’t doing grass roots campaigns. It’s just bitching about the two party conspiracy.

Mind you; nothing wrong with saying vote green. Just like people saying considering how bad trump and the republicans are...it’s a waste of a vote.

Most of my fellow Republicans and I strongly disagree, and I am not lying, Trump is great, Trump is awesome, and I am not lying.

[West Leas Oros 2]

They aren’t doing grass roots campaigns. It’s just bitching about the two party conspiracy.

Mind you; nothing wrong with saying vote green. Just like people saying considering how bad trump and the republicans are...it’s a waste of a vote.

Most of my fellow Republicans and I strongly disagree, and I am not lying, Trump is great, Trump is awesome, and I am not lying.

What on earth does this have to do with third parties?

[San Lumen]

Honestly I just want congress to look more colorful in terms of parties. I want us to look like the parliaments of Europe and shit. I want to be able to talk about elections the way Canadians do.

Honestly so do I, their elections are the most interesting for a country with a parliamentary FPTP system.

Stop whining and get a referendum on the ballot like in several states this year.

[Dresderstan]

Honestly so do I, their elections are the most interesting for a country with a parliamentary FPTP system.

Stop whining and get a referendum on the ballot like in several states this year.

Oh yeah because trust the electorate too brainwashed by the hyperpartisan corporate elitist to get any actual reform.

[Kannap]

Honestly so do I, their elections are the most interesting for a country with a parliamentary FPTP system.

Stop whining and get a referendum on the ballot like in several states this year.

Sure, the country would be a better place if I were a dictator who could single handedly make constitutional amendments, but alas we don't live in such a reality.

[San Lumen]

Stop whining and get a referendum on the ballot like in several states this year.

Oh yeah because trust the electorate too brainwashed by the hyperpartisan corporate elitist to get any actual reform.

How did several major cities and Maine get RCV? This magical thing called a referendum.

Stop whining and get a referendum on the ballot like in several states this year.

Sure, the country would be a better place if I were a dictator who could single handedly make constitutional amendments, but alas we don't live in such a reality.

I wasn’t referring to a constitutional amendment.

[Kannap]

Oh yeah because trust the electorate too brainwashed by the hyperpartisan corporate elitist to get any actual reform.

How did several major cities and Maine get RCV? This magical thing called a referendum.

Sure, the country would be a better place if I were a dictator who could single handedly make constitutional amendments, but alas we don't live in such a reality.

I wasn’t referring to a constitutional amendment.

North Carolina doesn't allow for state initiatives/referendums, only legislatively referred constitutional amendments.

[Dresderstan]

Oh yeah because trust the electorate too brainwashed by the hyperpartisan corporate elitist to get any actual reform.

How did several major cities and Maine get RCV? This magical thing called a referendum.

Sure, the country would be a better place if I were a dictator who could single handedly make constitutional amendments, but alas we don't live in such a reality.

I wasn’t referring to a constitutional amendment.

Not PR, nor is it IRV, and it really isn't any actual fucking change at all.

[San Lumen]

How did several major cities and Maine get RCV? This magical thing called a referendum.



I wasn’t referring to a constitutional amendment.

Not PR, nor is it IRV, and it really isn't any actual fucking change at all.

How it is not change?

[Kowani]

I don't know about you, but where I live, there's no shortage of grassroots efforts. Whether the third parties are doing it or not, that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be. Yeah, complaining about the big parties wont change anything, but neither will saying "third parties should just give up an not try".

Don't conflate the two arguments. There are the 'third parties don't and will never matter' crowd who at the very least have all of electoral history to go by. Then there are the people who vote for their third party in non-sexy elections frustrated that hipsters who just want to whine about the two majors who only become third party voters during presidential elections taking up all the oxygen.

It's usually accompanied by ludicrous expectations of what a third party means to the landscape, like they're going to ride in on horses and drive out all the bad things instead of just being another coalition that will have to be negotiated with to get anything done and will be just as beholden to having to get elected and all that comes with it and will have to be held to account just like the major parties.

3rd parties got us Wilson.
That’s a major damn change.

[Tyrassueb]

Don't conflate the two arguments. There are the 'third parties don't and will never matter' crowd who at the very least have all of electoral history to go by. Then there are the people who vote for their third party in non-sexy elections frustrated that hipsters who just want to whine about the two majors who only become third party voters during presidential elections taking up all the oxygen.

It's usually accompanied by ludicrous expectations of what a third party means to the landscape, like they're going to ride in on horses and drive out all the bad things instead of just being another coalition that will have to be negotiated with to get anything done and will be just as beholden to having to get elected and all that comes with it and will have to be held to account just like the major parties.

3rd parties got us Wilson.
That’s a major damn change.

More like the Republican party got us Wilson, amirite?

[Czechostan]

Don't conflate the two arguments. There are the 'third parties don't and will never matter' crowd who at the very least have all of electoral history to go by. Then there are the people who vote for their third party in non-sexy elections frustrated that hipsters who just want to whine about the two majors who only become third party voters during presidential elections taking up all the oxygen.

It's usually accompanied by ludicrous expectations of what a third party means to the landscape, like they're going to ride in on horses and drive out all the bad things instead of just being another coalition that will have to be negotiated with to get anything done and will be just as beholden to having to get elected and all that comes with it and will have to be held to account just like the major parties.

3rd parties got us Wilson.
That’s a major damn change.

It's not a national election, but I can think of a certain mayor of Burlington/Representative/Senator who was elected as an independent candidate and has exerted considerable influence on US politics.

[The Reformed American Republic]

No it isn't. USA today is owned by a large conglomerate and its quite centrist.

Thats the thing about centrism, centrism, by it's nature, supports the status quo. Name me one centrist who supports a third party.

Centrism does not exist. It's an out for those who don't understand politics or someone who just wants to appear superior to everyone else by being above left and right.

[Rio Cana]

The most famous one "a vote third party is a wasted vote", or "there aren't other options, only democrat and republican". Over time, these ideas got so ingrained in the public consciousness that now people spread their propaganda for them.

Indeed. Like if only a green or libertarian was potus because everything would change.

No. What the US needs is a Citizens Movement Party. They would get the politics out of government. They would also be made up of people from different ideological beliefs. In Mexico, the Citizens Movement party, also called the Orange Party, won control of Jalisco state. In the US territory of Puerto Rico the two main parties which have dominated politics are seeing competition due to a new Citizens Party called Citizens Victory Party. This political party has members who were part of the other two main opposition political parties who were disgusted by the corruption.

The following shows the candidate for the Victory Party who is running for Governor this year. She ran in 2016 but lost. In the following video she is speaking about independent candidates, social media and rescuing Democracy. She explains why she does not want to follow the main parties. She owns her own business worth millions. Video is in English - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5IEVHlQO4E

[Northern Davincia]

I am pro-life in the sense that I believe innocent life should be protected, especially those of children. Should a deranged individual use a gun, I intend for the people to shoot back.
It is absurd to believe that an armed populace is synonymous with murder.

Machine guns are far more likely to kill or injure an innocent in the back range. Throwing a lot of bullets quickly makes "sweeping" over the target a viable way of hitting them, when you don't have time to aim properly (which will be pretty much always if you're firing in self-defense). Obviously that poses a risk to others, in a suburb or city.

The people who currently own machine guns, I'm guessing, do not go for the machine gun when they need a weapon for self-defense. Probably mostly, because only a responsible gun owner or a hard-core criminal would spend that much on a gun. But repeal the Hughes act and a lot more people would be getting a machine-gun specifically for self-defence. And if they have to use them, simply not having the time to check there are no innocents behind their intended target.

The Hughes act IS protecting innocent life, including lives of children. But you want to get rid of it, only because you think a machine-gun would be more effective to protect YOUR OWN life. That's quite hypocritical. You have taken on board a pro-gun position that is actually incompatible with your fundamental principle that innocent life should be protected. You really need to rethink that.

At least admit you went too far in saying there would be less work for the police. Citizens gunning down criminals they "catch in the act", so government is spared the expense of trial and imprisonment, is absolutely contrary to "pro life".

Citizens handling the trouble of criminal activity themselves, defensively, is in perfect alignment with the defense of innocent life. Not all life.
The scenario you have created has no basis in reality from before the passing of the Hughes Act, and so I have no reason to be concerned with it.

[The Black Forrest]

Machine guns are far more likely to kill or injure an innocent in the back range. Throwing a lot of bullets quickly makes "sweeping" over the target a viable way of hitting them, when you don't have time to aim properly (which will be pretty much always if you're firing in self-defense). Obviously that poses a risk to others, in a suburb or city.

The people who currently own machine guns, I'm guessing, do not go for the machine gun when they need a weapon for self-defense. Probably mostly, because only a responsible gun owner or a hard-core criminal would spend that much on a gun. But repeal the Hughes act and a lot more people would be getting a machine-gun specifically for self-defence. And if they have to use them, simply not having the time to check there are no innocents behind their intended target.

The Hughes act IS protecting innocent life, including lives of children. But you want to get rid of it, only because you think a machine-gun would be more effective to protect YOUR OWN life. That's quite hypocritical. You have taken on board a pro-gun position that is actually incompatible with your fundamental principle that innocent life should be protected. You really need to rethink that.

At least admit you went too far in saying there would be less work for the police. Citizens gunning down criminals they "catch in the act", so government is spared the expense of trial and imprisonment, is absolutely contrary to "pro life".

Citizens handling the trouble of criminal activity themselves, defensively, is in perfect alignment with the defense of innocent life. Not all life.
The scenario you have created has no basis in reality from before the passing of the Hughes Act, and so I have no reason to be concerned with it.

You seriously think any yahoo with a gun is not a concern? Are pregnant women supposed to be packing now?

Protecting innocent life? For all your talk about individuality you sound like you want to interfere in other peoples business.

[Northern Davincia]

Citizens handling the trouble of criminal activity themselves, defensively, is in perfect alignment with the defense of innocent life. Not all life.
The scenario you have created has no basis in reality from before the passing of the Hughes Act, and so I have no reason to be concerned with it.

You seriously think any yahoo with a gun is not a concern? Are pregnant women supposed to be packing now?

Protecting innocent life? For all your talk about individuality you sound like you want to interfere in other peoples business.

Any woman, pregnant or not, should be permitted to carry a gun of her choice. Anyone with a sense of morality or investment in politics intends on interfering with people's business in some way or another. I do not believe there is a person, except for the ultimate nihilist, who believes in total inaction in controlling people.