Elections are coming up

[dilligaf0]

Almost? They are blatant about it, even said so when Bernie Sander's supporters sued the DNC because of how it favoured one candidate over the other. [rul=[URL]https://observer.com/2017/05/dnc-averts-democracy-lawsuit-bernie-sanders-supporters/]Another[/URL] article[/url].

Side note, here's something interesting from the first link: The DNC used to keep black voters out of it's primaries, because they preferred white people. Interesting how they are using the courts to control the voting process. Between this article, the DNC suing the Green Party (linked in my previous post), as well as theym blatantly stating in court they don't have to be fair and impartial and can do as they please because they are a corporation...

Yeah, really makes me wonder why anyone supports any party at all. I'm picking on the DNC here because some people think they're infallable. The DNC is just as corrupt as the RNC

Two things I want to point out here.
1) In the 1960's and earlier the Democratic party was the same people as the Republican party now, ultra "right-wing" conservatives.
2) Both parties are tone deaf to people's lives.
https://thebea.st/2OvFVnw?source=twitter&via=desktop via @thedailybeast

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Two things I want to point out here.
1) In the 1960's and earlier the Democratic party was the same people as the Republican party now, ultra "right-wing" conservatives.
2) Both parties are tone deaf to people's lives.
https://thebea.st/2OvFVnw?source=twitter&via=desktop via @thedailybeast

Correct, the parties have changed over the years. But, many do not understand the history.

 

[Tracerhead]

We could have an entirely different discussion about people's lack of understanding, or complete misunderstanding of history in general. Every time the Republicans claim to be the party of Lincoln my eye starts to twitch. The struggles of being a history major.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

One if by land, two if by sea...

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-20/did-british-collude-steal-election-hillary

Lies.
Lies upon lies upon lies.

I realize that I am expected to mindlessly accept the notion that Hillary is irrelevant now since she currently does not hold office. I am also expected to just forget the lies of the GW Bush administration, and accept his thoughts on "pushing back against Putin" and our "free press" as he sits next to a nodding, smiling Ellen.

The way I see it now, Trump is either
a) the first real president we have had in my lifetime
b) another bait-and-switch scam like Obama/GW/Clinton

If a) is correct, might as well give the Commander in Chief the Republican votes he asked for, and hope and pray that enemies foreign and domestic are revealed and dealt with.
if b) is correct, autonomous reproductive organs and support for Abraham Lincoln are hilariously irrelevant, along with the votes I cast the other day.

I may have things completely wrong, but I do understand that racism and race-baiting are the same thing.

 

[dilligaf0]

I'll just leave this here for whatever it's worth.
https://shareblue.com/russia-president-vladimir-putin-annual-address-americas-downfall/

The way I see it now, Trump is either
a) the first real president we have had in my lifetime
b) another bait-and-switch scam like Obama/GW/Clinton

a) My lifetime is longer, and he's a con-man in the mold of Nixon.
b) My list of scammers goes back farther, GHWB, Reagan, Carter, Nixon and LBJ added to your list.
JFK was too short to see how he might have been ultimately, but I think his assassination did emphasize the temporary nature of the office and anything accomplished by it's occupant.

 

[JickyJuly]

Uninformed people shouldn't vote. There's no excuse for being uninformed. They mail you a sample ballot. Early voting here happens at the library. Someone who doesn't know what they're voting for can easily hit the library to Google and vote. Anyone too lazy to check into things and just vote party lines or for funsies might as well just sit down.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

I'll just leave this here for whatever it's worth.
https://shareblue.com/russia-president-vladimir-putin-annual-address-americas-downfall/

a) My lifetime is longer, and he's a con-man in the mold of Nixon.
b) My list of scammers goes back farther, GHWB, Reagan, Carter, Nixon and LBJ added to your list.
JFK was too short to see how he might have been ultimately, but I think his assassination did emphasize the temporary nature of the office and anything accomplished by it's occupant.

Shareblue bringing me word from Putin....what a delicious irony! I can only assume they have been infiltrated by Russian bots.

I am prepared to believe Trump may be in the mold of Nixon. I am even willing to accept that he may be a whole whole lot worse. What I am not prepared to do is surrender my critical thinking to the dailybeast/shareblue/npr crowd and thier increasingly absurd "hitler...hitler...hitler...nixon...nixon...nixon...racist...misogynist...white male...blah...blah...blah" mantra.

Neither will I be swayed by your attempt to support your opinion with a moronic "I'm older than you". If Trump = Nixon, show me why. Evidence. Otherwise, your words are nothing more than proof of the power of social conditioning as far as I am concerned.

From what I have seen so far, there are some apt comparisons to be made to Nixon, Watergate, and "it's not the crime, it's the coverup". At least on that point we agree.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

Uninformed people shouldn't vote.

Well then we have a problem. Creating an uninformed underclass appears to be the goal of our media/academic elites.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/10/13/pers-o13.html#pk_campaign=sidebar&pk_kwd=mostread

 

[JickyJuly]

Well then we have a problem. Creating an uninformed underclass appears to be the goal of our media/academic elites.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/10/13/pers-o13.html#pk_campaign=sidebar&pk_kwd=mostread

Uninformed folks who feel they won't be hurt personally benefit both parties. You didn't need an article to come to that understanding did you?

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Uninformed people shouldn't vote. There's no excuse for being uninformed. They mail you a sample ballot. Early voting here happens at the library. Someone who doesn't know what they're voting for can easily hit the library to Google and vote. Anyone too lazy to check into things and just vote party lines or for funsies might as well just sit down.

I'm in complete agreement with you, which is why I'm at best lukewarm on the get more people to vote campaign. It is true in this election that young people are pretty much the key to stopping Trump and his band of corrupt cronies but when I hear young people say I'm not going to vote because I don't feel informed enough to make an opinion, I really appreciated their honesty. Now if we could just get low information Trump voters to do the same.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

Uninformed folks who feel they won't be hurt personally benefit both parties. You didn't need an article to come to that understanding did you?

No.

 

[Bocefish]

Uninformed people shouldn't vote. There's no excuse for being uninformed. They mail you a sample ballot.

Really?

Ihave never received a sample ballot in all my years of voting.

I dunno how they expect us to vote on judges either so I vote em all out to get some new blood in there.

Low info voters are everywhere on both sides.

It irks me when highly influential actors/pop/rap stars like Taylor Swift or Kanye West try to use their celebrity to sway votes.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Really?

Ihave never received a sample ballot in all my years of voting.

I dunno how they expect us to vote on judges either so I vote em all out to get some new blood in there.

Low info voters are everywhere on both sides.

It irks me when highly influential actors/pop/rap stars like Taylor Swift or Kanye West try to use their celebrity to sway votes.

Why?

What's the difference betweenwhat Kanye and Taylor are doing and you? Aren't you trying to sway voters by posting on this board? I certainly am. You certainly have strong opinions and spend a fair amount of time expressing them.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

I'm in complete agreement with you, which is why I'm at best lukewarm on the get more people to vote campaign. It is true in this election that young people are pretty much the key to stopping Trump and his band of corrupt cronies but when I hear young people say I'm not going to vote because I don't feel informed enough to make an opinion, I really appreciated their honesty. Now if we could just get low information Trump voters to do the same.

This is the kind of BS that continues to push the extremism of politics. You say young voters don't know, then you talk about getting the uninformed Trump voters to not show up. Okay. So, you're insinuating that every person who votes blue knows best and is informed? Really?

If you're going to call out one, please call out all. The more people who realize that this heavy bias is causing more harm than good, hopefully the more people will vote (or not) based upon their views and not ignorantly down party lines.

 

[JickyJuly]

Really?

Ihave never received a sample ballot in all my years of voting.

I dunno how they expect us to vote on judges either so I vote em all out to get some new blood in there.

Low info voters are everywhere on both sides.

It irks me when highly influential actors/pop/rap stars like Taylor Swift or Kanye West try to use their celebrity to sway votes.

That's weird. Maybe it goes by state whether they're mailed or not. Either way, they exist and make looking into people yourself easy enough for almost anyone. Voting out the old and getting new seems like a reasonable approach in a pinch. People getting too comfortable in their positions is a big issue.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

That's weird. Maybe it goes by state whether they're mailed or not. Either way, they exist and make looking into people yourself easy enough for almost anyone. Voting out the old and getting new seems like a reasonable approach in a pinch. People getting too comfortable in their positions is a big issue.

I'm all for term limits. Have always said that if the President has term limits placed on him, so should others.

As to voting out the incumbent, sometimes those who replace them are much worse. Look at the two major parties. They continue to move towards the extremes. Not saying we shouldn't. Rather, that we should know who it is that we're voting for.

 

[dilligaf0]

Shareblue bringing me word from Putin....what a delicious irony! I can only assume they have been infiltrated by Russian bots.

I am prepared to believe Trump may be in the mold of Nixon. I am even willing to accept that he may be a whole whole lot worse. What I am not prepared to do is surrender my critical thinking to the dailybeast/shareblue/npr crowd and thier increasingly absurd "hitler...hitler...hitler...nixon...nixon...nixon...racist...misogynist...white male...blah...blah...blah" mantra.

Neither will I be swayed by your attempt to support your opinion with a moronic "I'm older than you". If Trump = Nixon, show me why. Evidence. Otherwise, your words are nothing more than proof of the power of social conditioning as far as I am concerned.

From what I have seen so far, there are some apt comparisons to be made to Nixon, Watergate, and "it's not the crime, it's the coverup". At least on that point we agree.

I didn't refer to anyone's ideas or opinions as "moronic" or any other juvenile insulting terms. Since that's all you can come up with, you're no longer worth my time or effort.
Follow your little gold loving idol as far as he can take you.
I can say "Nixon...." because I saw it first hand. His power-hungry lust. Try reading a history book.

 

[JickyJuly]

This is the kind of BS that continues to push the extremism of politics. You say young voters don't know, then you talk about getting the uninformed Trump voters to not show up. Okay. So, you're insinuating that every person who votes blue knows best and is informed? Really?

If you're going to call out one, please call out all. The more people who realize that this heavy bias is causing more harm than good, hopefully the more people will vote (or not) based upon their views and not ignorantly down party lines.

Both parties use manipulative tactics, but I think it is fair to say that Trump, more than any other candidate, has relied on lies. His people use the words "alternative facts" and "fake news". Anyone still supporting him is actively taking in lies. To call them misinformed is kinder than deserved really.

The Democrats aren't extreme enough for actual liberal people. They rely on presenting phony, neo-liberal attitudes and scooping up those who are happy to think far enough to feel selective outrage, but not far enough to really insist that anything change. They grab the youth who are just figuring out that the world is complex and the yuppies who don't want to feel guilty or old. Then, they pressure groups that are actively hurt by the right to vote blue even though their actions in office don't do enough to help said groups. If anything, the Dems have slowed progress by moving more toward the middle, supporting endless wars and just giving self serving folks permission to enjoy capitalism blindly as long as they vote blue and tut tut whatever thing we're mad about this week and forget the next.

The GOP always relies heavily on misinformation. A good number of their votes come just from misrepresenting the Bible and abortion. Climate change. Selling the idea of small government while they try to continue the war on drugs, prison overload and unnecessary "moral" controls. Claiming to be the party of the working man while actively opposing unions. On top of that, the side who already has their guy in office will always be the one who puts more misinformation out there. They never do all of the stuff they campaigned on. They have to paint a picture that looks more appealing to their crowd.

 

[AudriTwo]

I dunno how they expect us to vote on judges either so I vote em all out to get some new blood in there.

I vote for judges based on their judgments. Were they fair and how partisan are they? If they are gungho about whatever party they are in, they don't get my vote. If they were never a judge, I read up on their law career and what arguments they made for the people they represented.


Really shouldn't be constantly voting out judges because you don't know how to vote on judges. You maybe costing a really good judge their job based on your ignorance and costing your county someone very deserving of serving.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Both parties use manipulative tactics, but I think it is fair to say that Trump, more than any other candidate, has relied on lies. His people use the words "alternative facts" and "fake news". Anyone still supporting him is actively taking in lies. To call them misinformed is kinder than deserved really.

The Democrats aren't extreme enough for actual liberal people. They rely on presenting phony, neo-liberal attitudes and scooping up those who are happy to think far enough to feel selective outrage, but not far enough to really insist that anything change. They grab the youth who are just figuring out that the world is complex and the yuppies who don't want to feel guilty or old. Then, they pressure groups that are actively hurt by the right to vote blue even though their actions in office don't do enough to help said groups. If anything, the Dems have slowed progress by moving more toward the middle, supporting endless wars and just giving self serving folks permission to enjoy capitalism blindly as long as they vote blue and tut tut whatever thing we're mad about this week and forget the next.

The GOP always relies heavily on misinformation. A good number of their votes come just from misrepresenting the Bible and abortion. Climate change. Selling the idea of small government while they try to continue the war on drugs, prison overload and unnecessary "moral" controls. Claiming to be the party of the working man while actively opposing unions. On top of that, the side who already has their guy in office will always be the one who puts more misinformation out there. They never do all of the stuff they campaigned on. They have to paint a picture that looks more appealing to their crowd.

Agreed, Jicky. I'm personally tired of one side or the other pointing fingers, and laying blame on the other. When, they themselves, are as much to blame for the way things are. Instead of voting "to keep the bad guys out", "lesser of two evils", or because "Only vote Blue/Red". Those who associate themselves with a political party should be holding their representatives accountable for their actions, misactions or failure to act appropriately. People need to get away from the dogmatic thought process they are entrenched in when it comes to political parties.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

This is the kind of BS that continues to push the extremism of politics. You say young voters don't know, then you talk about getting the uninformed Trump voters to not show up. Okay. So, you're insinuating that every person who votes blue knows best and is informed? Really?

If you're going to call out one, please call out all. The more people who realize that this heavy bias is causing more harm than good, hopefully the more people will vote (or not) based upon their views and not ignorantly down party lines.

Nice strawman, I didn't say anything of the sort.

Let's start out with 3 facts
1. Older people vote more than younger people (especially in midterm elections)
2..Older people vote more for Trump and Republicans
3. There are low information.voters certainly on both sides and all age groups. Although I suspect probably more young people than old people fall into the category.

Now, this is anecdotal evidence but I have seen a fair number of interviews similar to this one with young people saying they didn't feel informed enough to vote. I've heard camgirls say it both on this forum and on cam. I've heard plenty of older folks who are low information voters, and plenty who say they aren't going to vote, but the reason is almost always something along the line. "There all a bunch of crooks, or why vote it doesn't matter, never because I'm not informed enough.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Nice strawman, I didn't say anything of the sort.

Let's start out with 3 facts
1. Older people vote more than younger people (especially in midterm elections)
2..Older people vote more for Trump and Republicans
3. There are low information.voters certainly on both sides and all age groups. Although I suspect probably more young people than old people fall into the category.

Now, this is anecdotal evidence but I have seen a fair number of interviews similar to this one with young people saying they didn't feel informed enough to vote. I've heard camgirls say it both on this forum and on cam. I've heard plenty of older folks who are low information voters, and plenty who say they aren't going to vote, but the reason is almost always something along the line. "There all a bunch of crooks, or why vote it doesn't matter, never because I'm not informed enough.

With the omission, and the way it was stated, it was well implied.

As to the younger voters, most don't think about it for a slew of different reasons which leads to them feeling uninformed enough. Just as your video points out. It's on them to learn, and if people don't vote, then those who do get to decide. It's a participant election system. I forget who it was in another thread who said that approximately 15% of the eligible voters decided the elections and they wanted the numbers higher. Admittedly, while I would really like to see an overall increase in the active participation of voting (research and then informed voting), I'm also of the mindset that we get what we vote for. Meaning, if 5% of the population voted, and of that 5% if it's 30% that wins that ultimately chose the elections, it is what it is.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...mers-as-largest-generation-in-u-s-electorate/

Those who don't vote, should do as they did in the elections: remain silent for they chose not to have their voice heard and by default accept whatever may come. If we made a poor choice, such as has occurred over the past few elections, we attempt to remove/recall them. Which, is extremely difficult to do.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

Informed...Can we clearly define this? Just seems silly to me.

With the gaslighting and deceptions that go on, seems to me that voting is about as useful as a well-meaning prayer (assuming you stay within the bounds of accepted "facts"). And if we were as "informed" as we like to think we are, our civilization might well implode.

I'll just leave this here for whatever it's worth.
https://shareblue.com/russia-president-vladimir-putin-annual-address-americas-downfall/

My contempt for this piece @dilligaf0 shared should be obvious. It is not because I am blindly running along behind a "little gold loving idol"; it is because I am fed up with the lies. Consider this excerpt...

It’s not hard to see why, either. Trump has consistently failed to stand up for American values, choosing instead to take positions that are more in line with dictatorships and rogue nations than democracies.

Follow the link "more in line with dictatorships", and you are here...
https://shareblue.com/trump-named-top-press-oppressor-alongside-worlds-most-brutal-dictators/

Trump was named the winner of the “Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom” award for going “above and beyond to silence critical voices and weaken democracy.”

More faux victimhood. Trump stating the obvious about the controlled media makes him a dictator.

I read Shareblue. In intellectual terms, what I am see in these two articles amounts to a high school clique gossiping about someone they don't like. Juvenile logic.

But maybe Shareblue has it right to an extent. This article points out Trump's endorsement of Fox News, which is a laughable suggestion imo. There may be more truth mixed in with the propaganda at the moment on Tucker and Hannity, but that can change in a heartbeat, and the next thing you know you will be watching a manic Glen Beck in front of a big chalkboard. I'll pass.

When Cory Booker's accuser came forward the other day, I was expecting nothing but a cheap retaliatory smear in the spirit of the Kavanaugh hearing. The last three paragraphs were a breath of fresh air. The flow of information...the narrative...


So who does control the information?

 

[AudriTwo]

VOTE YES ON 13 TO END GREYHOUND RACING IN FLORIDA!

voteyeson13.org

 

[SMuser69]

With the omission, and the way it was stated, it was well implied.

As to the younger voters, most don't think about it for a slew of different reasons which leads to them feeling uninformed enough. Just as your video points out. It's on them to learn, and if people don't vote, then those who do get to decide. It's a participant election system. I forget who it was in another thread who said that approximately 15% of the eligible voters decided the elections and they wanted the numbers higher. Admittedly, while I would really like to see an overall increase in the active participation of voting (research and then informed voting), I'm also of the mindset that we get what we vote for. Meaning, if 5% of the population voted, and of that 5% if it's 30% that wins that ultimately chose the elections, it is what it is.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...mers-as-largest-generation-in-u-s-electorate/

Those who don't vote, should do as they did in the elections: remain silent for they chose not to have their voice heard and by default accept whatever may come. If we made a poor choice, such as has occurred over the past few elections, we attempt to remove/recall them. Which, is extremely difficult to do.

Younger people don't vote because they usually don't own property or understand how taxes and government programs are related to each other. When you pay your first $20k in property taxes when the next town over only pays $4k THEN you ask yourself 'what are we spending money on?'. Older people have seen their taxes go up for years so they know the effects of putting in a politician that wants to give out blank checks or they watched politicians pass a blind eye as crime increased. Nobody votes on the community level until they are INVESTED in that community. Then again there are situations you can't win. Both the judges running in my district support using the police to tax and collect money which I hate.

The other issue is the media discourages people that join parties or labels them with stereotypes because they understand they might lose control of their party messages if the middle voter joins them again.

 

[Lucid1]

One thing I've learned in my many years of voting is that "uninformed" and "uneducated" are often terms thrown around by those who take a superiority position over others by claiming to be actually more "informed" or "educated" over others. The truth of the matter is that people will always vote in their own self interest, and breaking that self interest, or using social issues to conflate that self interest will always be the goal of the opposing ideology. If progressive ideologies are meant to better us as a nation, then those who present those ideologies would do well to present them in a manner that let voters feel like they have a choice when they actually vote. Not that they have been demeaned, bullied or forced into making said vote through emotional manipulation.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Younger people don't vote because they usually don't own property or understand how taxes and government programs are related to each other. When you pay your first $20k in property taxes when the next town over only pays $4k THEN you ask yourself 'what are we spending money on?'. Older people have seen their taxes go up for years so they know the effects of putting in a politician that wants to give out blank checks or they watched politicians pass a blind eye as crime increased. Nobody votes on the community level until they are INVESTED in that community. Then again there are situations you can't win. Both the judges running in my district support using the police to tax and collect money which I hate.

The other issue is the media discourages people that join parties or labels them with stereotypes because they understand they might lose control of their party messages if the middle voter joins them again.

That's one of the reasons they don't. There's also many others. I'm not a fan of tax & collect via law enforcement either. I'm still reviewing who the players are in my area.

I don't know if I agree with your statement on the media. More than a couple of articles I've read have stated that the DNC is attempting to win over the independents and former Republican voters in an effort to not have them count against the DNC. That being said, the DNC has eliminated the chance of an independant to run as a Dem candidate. While I think this ties up the loose ends from the '16 election. I see it as a nail in the coffin for any independent to have a real chance of running anymore.

 

[MSlider]

A human sews your underwear, gets taxed, costs you 3¢ on a $12 product. A machine does it for .005¢ . Costs you the same. No, the machine doesn't have sick days or vacation, but the company doesn't buy their employees. I hope.

Thank you. I didn't know Bill had gone quite that nuts. So we tax machines that replace humans in industry. Do we start today, say all machines that have come before are exempt and only tax "robots" going forward? True robots are lab rarities and what he's talking about are task specific machines. You know, like assembly line car company "robots". If we tax machines replacing human labor and don't exempt prior art that's the complete collapse of agriculture overnight. Tractors, combines, they replace 6-300 people per instance. Same in manufacturing. Stocking shelves, and your first job.

How much do we tax a wrench? A lever is a machine after all.

So Bill wants to impose a tax on things that have aided workers since the lever was invented, which comes at raising the price of the product sold to the consumer who no longer has a job.

Suddenly the "Right to repair" John Deere has been fighting becomes trivial.

 

[MSlider]

A human sews your underwear, gets taxed, costs you 3¢ on a $12 product. A machine does it for .005¢ . Costs you the same. No, the machine doesn't have sick days or vacation, but the company doesn't buy their employees. I hope.

Thank you. I didn't know Bill had gone quite that nuts. So we tax machines that replace humans in industry. Do we start today, say all machines that have come before are exempt and only tax "robots" going forward? True robots are lab rarities and what he's talking about are task specific machines. You know, like assembly line car company "robots". If we tax machines replacing human labor and don't exempt prior art that's the complete collapse of agriculture overnight. Tractors, combines, they replace 6-300 people per instance. Same in manufacturing. Stocking shelves, and your first job.

How much do we tax a wrench? A lever is a machine after all.

So Bill wants to impose a tax on things that have aided workers since the lever was invented, which comes at raising the price of the product sold to the consumer who no longer has a job.

Suddenly the "Right to repair" John Deere has been fighting becomes trivial.

I think it's more a case of loosing people who pay into social security and medicare. So if you want these things to continue you can't do it unless enough living wage jobs are created. Not to mention the expansion of welfare ect. I'm not pushing any agenda just being realistic. I'm in a blue state and they are proposing a capital gains income tax. I feel like I'm going to be punished for saving and planning for retirement.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

I think it's more a case of loosing people who pay into social security and medicare. So if you want these things to continue you can't do it unless enough living wage jobs are created. Not to mention the expansion of welfare ect. I'm not pushing any agenda just being realistic. I'm in a blue state and they are proposing a capital gains income tax. I feel like I'm going to be punished for saving and planning for retirement.

Thus one of the reasons why there appears to be a large push for Universal Basic Income (UBI). I'm torn by it. In some ways, I can see the benefit of it in helping many offset costs. However, there's also many fears of it: 1) how will it be funded, 2) It seems in the US people squander money more than save it, 3) Does it replace existing programs, or is it "on top of". Many others as well.

There's also other things to consider such as why give people the money instead of just reducing taxes overall? Especially when they'd have to tax other things even more just to fund this to give people money. More importantly, while the money is collected by taxes. How do those higher taxes typically get paid for? With any increase of money out, there needs to be an increase of money in. Therefore, cost of living continues to rise.

No one knows what the longevity is of this.

Interesting article from the New Yorker.