|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:What does this actually mean and how does it work? They send enough $$ through various channels to ensure their views have a disproportionately large impact on the policy of the country as opposed to public will. It's not just banks, it's the rich, it's insurance companies, it's defense contractors. Honestly a surprising amount of it is done openly via campaign donations, superpacs, etc but there's plenty of 'you scratch my back i scratch yours' going on in all levels of government. It's one of the reasons it's literally impossible for an insider to change anything.
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:13 |
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:They send enough $$ through various channels to ensure their views have a disproportionately large impact on the policy of the country as opposed to public will. It's not just banks, it's the rich, it's insurance companies, it's defense contractors. Honestly a surprising amount of it is done openly via campaign donations, superpacs, etc but there's plenty of 'you scratch my back i scratch yours' going on in all levels of government. It's one of the reasons it's literally impossible for an insider to change anything. Do you think that former contractors are biased toward their employers because they were paid? You do realise speaking fees are pay, right? Pay for work done? Not just gift money?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Do you think that former contractors are biased toward their employers because they were paid? Thank you, Justice John Roberts, I now recognize there is no such thing as bribery
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:Thank you, Justice John Roberts, I now recognize there is no such thing as bribery poo poo, gonna have to turn my employer over to the cops now, turns out all this money I'm being paid for my programming work is bribery if I'm a Democrat, a woman or a progressive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
twodot posted:If Obama hasn't taken speaking fees, and Clinton has then that seems like a pretty good reason to treat them differently. gently caress it I changed my mind, new approach: when Obama will inevitably accept speaking fees from banks will you then admit that you were wrong? Will you then say "yes, I was a disingenuous moron?" Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Nov 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Speaking of dumb third party chodes, what do you think of Assange?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:I think fluoride is good + cool Okay good just checking
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:They send enough $$ through various channels to ensure their views have a disproportionately large impact on the policy of the country as opposed to public will. It's not just banks, it's the rich, it's insurance companies, it's defense contractors. Honestly a surprising amount of it is done openly via campaign donations, superpacs, etc but there's plenty of 'you scratch my back i scratch yours' going on in all levels of government. It's one of the reasons it's literally impossible for an insider to change anything. Okay, so what you're describing is lobbying in general, which, I'll agree, is a problem. How does voting for a third party dismantle the mechanisms that allow lobbyists to operate in Washington?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Okay, so what you're describing is lobbying in general, which, I'll agree, is a problem. I never said it did also lol if you think "lobbying" encompasses all of the behavior im talking about NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 22:56 on Nov 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I never said it did What do you think voting third party does? You've never been to clear about that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What do you think voting third party does? You've never been to clear about that. ~*it sends a message*~
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What do you think voting third party does? You've never been to clear about that. Not sure what a Hillary vote does, either, with regard to lobbying and the effect of moneyed interests in public policy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Not sure what a Hillary vote does, either, with regard to lobbying and the effect of moneyed interests in public policy. It means Supreme Court nominees that are likely to overturn the Citizens United decision, and it means the CFPB gets to stay open, for starters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What do you think voting third party does? You've never been to clear about that. It depends on where you live. In firmly blue and firmly red states, it does as much as voting for the lesser of two evils does. You can squibble about the signaling of third parties or the signaling of a voter mandate, I think they are both equally worthless. Dr. Fishopolis posted:It means Supreme Court nominees that are likely to overturn the Citizens United decision, and it means the CFPB gets to stay open, for starters. Not every vote matters, why shouldn't someone vote their conscience in California?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Not every vote matters, why shouldn't someone vote their conscience in California? I'll say from personal experience that I deeply regret my CA protest vote in 2012 for Jill Stein, having now learned what an idiot she is. I was mad at Obama about drones or something and even though my vote didn't change anything, there's a very real sense of personal regret that I still feel about giving my vote to the Green Party when they didn't deserve it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
It's like listening to a dipshit GOP Yunalesca from FFX. "They chose to vote Green Party...because they had hope."
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I'll say from personal experience that I deeply regret my CA protest vote in 2012 for Jill Stein, having now learned what an idiot she is. I was mad at Obama about drones or something and even though my vote didn't change anything, there's a very real sense of personal regret that I still feel about giving my vote to the Green Party when they didn't deserve it. Yeah well I'm sorry you were too stupid to examine the third parties and pick the best one. There are better options in CA.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Yeah well I'm sorry you were too stupid to examine the third parties and pick the best one. There are better options in CA. Isn't one of the goals of voting third party that you hope they hit some sort of milestone (5% for federal funding, 15% for debate appearance) so they get more national recognition? If that's the case, then voting for an even less-popular third party seems like abandoning that goal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Isn't one of the goals of voting third party that you hope they hit some sort of milestone (5% for federal funding, 15% for debate appearance) so they get more national recognition? If that's the case, then voting for an even less-popular third party seems like abandoning that goal. If you're gonna waste your vote when you could be putting it toward taking down Trump, you might as well go whole-hog on that poo poo. Vote for me, I'll give you a billion dollars at zero taxpayer expense if I win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Yeah well I'm sorry you were too stupid to examine the third parties and pick the best one. There are better options in CA. Such as?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Isn't one of the goals of voting third party that you hope they hit some sort of milestone (5% for federal funding, 15% for debate appearance) so they get more national recognition? If that's the case, then voting for an even less-popular third party seems like abandoning that goal. I mean sure but that's not even a remote possibility for the Greens. I suppose if you're Libertarian it would make sense but quite frankly I'm not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I'll say from personal experience that I deeply regret my CA protest vote in 2012 for Jill Stein, having now learned what an idiot she is. I was mad at Obama about drones or something and even though my vote didn't change anything, there's a very real sense of personal regret that I still feel about giving my vote to the Green Party when they didn't deserve it. Ha! I voted for Johnson knowing he was an idiot. Libertarian economics is about as much of a joke as libertarian foreign policy. But when Hills sends Snowden to Supermax for 30 to life, I won't be responsible. Can't exactly complain when I knew she thought Ed should "face the music" and I voted for her anyway instead of the guy who said he'd pardon him. What? Silver's got Georgia at 17.2/82.8 for Cheeto Jesus. Didn't matter how I voted, if that's what you're worried about. Living in a deep red state should have some kind of compensatory silver lining to it, so why not symbolic voting just to come out ahead on my pet issue that I can lord over the obvious winner in "This is why I didn't vote for you!  " fashion later?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
lothar_ posted:Can't exactly complain when I knew she thought Ed should "face the music" and I voted for her anyway instead of the guy who said he'd pardon him. Honest question: Why? Why does voting for someone mean you inherently have to support all of their policies or think everything they do is right? Nobody is going to go "you voted for (X) you have no right to complain about what they do!" Or in comparison why do you think "Well, *I* didn't vote for (X)" means you have any addition weight or moral superiority? It doesn't take a lot of courage to make a choice with no risk or consequences or meaning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
That 17% chance is based on just a 3.1% difference in polling, then whatever Nate does. Which is only about 120,000 people based on GA's 2012 turnout. Probably no way to tell how that compares to the number of Georgians who've convinced themselves their vote doesn't matter, but I'd guess it's lower. e: and 17 is way bigger than zero regardless, fucks sake Polygynous fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Nov 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
lothar_ posted:Ha! I voted for Johnson knowing he was an idiot. Libertarian economics is about as much of a joke as libertarian foreign policy. But when Hills sends Snowden to Supermax for 30 to life, I won't be responsible. Can't exactly complain when I knew she thought Ed should "face the music" and I voted for her anyway instead of the guy who said he'd pardon him. The difference in GA seems to be an average of about 5% according to RealClearPolitics. I also live in GA, so I get that the GOP constantly winning can cause you to feel some apathy, but a 5% difference is really telling. The gap between GOP and Democratic candidates has shrunken. Voting third party does nothing to move that along, especially when the the third parties only seem to make a token effort to participate in local elections.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
lothar_ posted:Ha! I voted for Johnson knowing he was an idiot. Libertarian economics is about as much of a joke as libertarian foreign policy. But when Hills sends Snowden to Supermax for 30 to life, I won't be responsible. Can't exactly complain when I knew she thought Ed should "face the music" and I voted for her anyway instead of the guy who said he'd pardon him. Good news, you're in good company with the rest of the third-party mouthbreathers in this thread! Fucks sake, I actually respect Sethex more than you or NFS. Like he's a piece of poo poo libertarian (and I will mock him because of that) but at least he's for a candidate that's inline with his personal politics. You are just doing this so you can act sanctimonious vs a popular candidate. NewForumSoftware posted:Yeah well I'm sorry you were too stupid to examine the third parties and pick the best one. There are better options in CA. so close
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
Trust me. As someone who grew up in Florida, who knows a lot of people who didn't vote or voted third party in 2000: you may end up regretting it for the rest of your life if you decide to sit this one out, or cast a protest vote. Off to bed now. Up bright and early tomorrow to knock on doors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Bloops Crusts posted:Trust me. As someone who grew up in Florida, who knows a lot of people who didn't vote or voted third party in 2000: you may end up regretting it for the rest of your life if you decide to sit this one out, or cast a protest vote. And before the sanctimony starts- yes, this individual vote wouldn't have changed the outcome, but it would have been that one vote closer or that one vote more resounding a defeat / victory. poo poo doesn't need to have hinged on your vote for your vote to have been on the correct side.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 06:00
|
|
|
Why are we saying that it is throwing your vote away to run up the score against white-nationalism?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Why are we saying that it is throwing your vote away to run up the score against white-nationalism? The opposite.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
Somfin posted:The opposite. No, he's right, the dipshit third-party supporters are saying exactly that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
On "why shouldn't I vote my conscience", you need to look at the fact that a 3rd party can poo poo out whatever pipe dream platform they want, since they have no intention of winning, plan to enact any part of their platform... Hell, for the most part they make little effort to even agitate for their policies. Is that really "representing your conscience"? All they have to do is write words on paper. Major candidates have to appeal to large swathes of people and plan on ramming policy through Congress. Plus, since the PRDND is all single issue on wall street/foreign policy, how many third party candidates do we trust not to start launching drones and cashing checks as soon as they hit the big leagues? 3rd parties seem so ineffectual and hypocritical to me that it honestly feels more moral to rack up the vote for Hitlery, because most of her issues are systematic issues that every candidate is guilty of. Election time is the worst time to tackle those.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Voting for a third party (or write in) candidate is throwing your vote away because there is a zero percent chance of that candidate winning the election and also a zero percent chance that either actual political party will care about your missing vote, so your vote affected literally nothing except making you feel slightly better about your own dumb values.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
 If you think your vote counts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:
gently caress, I've never seen a take so hot 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
vintagepurple posted:On "why shouldn't I vote my conscience", you need to look at the fact that a 3rd party can poo poo out whatever pipe dream platform they want, since they have no intention of winning, plan to enact any part of their platform... Hell, for the most part they make little effort to even agitate for their policies. Is that really "representing your conscience"? All they have to do is write words on paper. Major candidates have to appeal to large swathes of people and plan on ramming policy through Congress. quote:Plus, since the PRDND is all single issue on wall street/foreign policy, how many third party candidates do we trust not to start launching drones and cashing checks as soon as they hit the big leagues? quote:3rd parties seem so ineffectual and hypocritical to me that it honestly feels more moral to rack up the vote for Hitlery, because most of her issues are systematic issues that every candidate is guilty of. Election time is the worst time to tackle those. The Shortest Path posted:Voting for a third party (or write in) candidate is throwing your vote away because there is a zero percent chance of that candidate winning the election and also a zero percent chance that either actual political party will care about your missing vote, so your vote affected literally nothing except making you feel slightly better about your own dumb values.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
i threw my vote to gloria la riva 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i threw my vote to gloria la riva Same
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i threw my vote to gloria la riva As did I.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:13 |
|
|
Looking at Florida, I can confirm that third-party voters are, in fact, a loving cancer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 04:28
|
|