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.
Advertisement
by Dresderstan » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:19 pm
by San Lumen » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:21 pm
Dresderstan wrote:San Lumen wrote: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.
by The Black Forrest » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:22 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote: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.
by West Leas Oros 2 » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:22 pm
The Black Forrest wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote: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.
WLO Public News: Outdated Factbooks and other documents in process of major redesign! ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: <error:not found>
by Cannot think of a name » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:32 pm
West Leas Oros 2 wrote:The Black Forrest wrote:
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".
by Ngelmish » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:34 pm
by West Leas Oros 2 » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:34 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote: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.
WLO Public News: Outdated Factbooks and other documents in process of major redesign! ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: <error:not found>
by Dresderstan » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:35 pm
West Leas Oros 2 wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote: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.
by Greater Miami Shores » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:37 pm
The Black Forrest wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote: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.
by West Leas Oros 2 » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:38 pm
Greater Miami Shores wrote:The Black Forrest wrote:
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.
WLO Public News: Outdated Factbooks and other documents in process of major redesign! ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: <error:not found>
by San Lumen » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:42 pm
Dresderstan wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote: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.
by Dresderstan » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:44 pm
by Kannap » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:45 pm
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
by San Lumen » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:49 pm
by Kannap » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:51 pm
San Lumen wrote:Dresderstan wrote: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.Kannap wrote:
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.
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
by Dresderstan » Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:52 pm
San Lumen wrote:Dresderstan wrote: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.Kannap wrote:
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.
by Kowani » Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:24 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote: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.
by Tyrassueb » Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:40 pm
Kowani wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote: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.
by Czechostan » Sat Sep 26, 2020 5:23 pm
Kowani wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote: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.
by The Reformed American Republic » Sat Sep 26, 2020 5:50 pm
by Rio Cana » Sat Sep 26, 2020 6:45 pm
The Black Forrest wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote: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.
by Northern Davincia » Sat Sep 26, 2020 7:11 pm
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:Northern Davincia wrote: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".
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by The Black Forrest » Sat Sep 26, 2020 7:16 pm
Northern Davincia wrote:Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
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.
by Northern Davincia » Sat Sep 26, 2020 7:20 pm
The Black Forrest wrote:Northern Davincia wrote: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.
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aggicificicerous, Ariddia, Benuty, Celritannia, Connori Pilgrims, Google [Bot], Hurtful Thoughts, KELTIONIALANG, Neu California, The Archregimancy, Uiiop
Advertisement