But if the polls say Kamala is ahead, doesn't that prove the polls are rigged?
As I have mentioned before, as recently as a few days ago, I do not like Kamala. I didn't like her policies as CA AG. She's no liberal.
So, I want to take this opportunity to say, it's kind of sad that the very first female POTUS is going to be her.
However, may I also say
ANYONE BUT TRUMP
GO, KAMALA!
And, honestly, better her than Hillary.
You should do a podcast, I bet it would be incredible!If everyone who thinks both Trump and Harris suck would vote for Jill Stein we could have our first president who happens to be a woman and... this is the best part... she WOULDN'T SUCK!
'Muricans are fucking brain damaged lemmings.
#TranscendTheDuopoly
Oh, I'm sure everything is rigged, and in reality, Donny should be King!But if the polls say Kamala is ahead, doesn't that prove the polls are rigged?
I will vote for Jill Stein. But she won't win, because two-party system entrenched in the US.If everyone who thinks both Trump and Harris suck would vote for Jill Stein we could have our first president who happens to be a woman and... this is the best part... she WOULDN'T SUCK!
'Muricans are fucking brain damaged lemmings.
#TranscendTheDuopoly
I will vote for Jill Stein. But she won't win, because two-party system entrenched in the US.
You should do a podcast, I bet it would be incredibly mind numbingly BORING
Yes, but most people don't understand when they're being propagandized....and the reason that's a thing is because 'Muricans are fucking brain damaged lemmings.
Q.E.D
It's not and never was mysterious or complicated; an average still somewhat naive bastard like me figured out in the 1980s that the duopoly was a dead end for fuck's sake. There's no excuse for the rest of the voting public remaining stuck on stupid.
Isn't speech at its most basic level "propaganda", ie giving or exchanging of information?Yes, but most people don't understand when they're being propagandized.
I could argue all day long for Instant Runoff Voting. It wouldn't change the structure of government, just the process of running for office and voting for candidates. I don't believe the two-party system is democratic. It's so corrupt.Isn't speech at its most basic level "propaganda", ie giving or exchanging of information?
Gary posts about the evils of "The Duopoly" everyday...in my estimation, primaries are for the masses of candidates to state their cases and hope they win the ticket to the final countdown....I've yet to see a compelling argument for a better system of choosing elected office holders, no matter how many times I see the word duopoly. I don't see the Parliamentary system many of our EU friends have, where you have 6+/- parties that have to ultimately all band together to form a government, hey you Crypto-Fascists Join us Greens and we'll rule the world!!
Change my mind.
My pet theory is we need to overhaul how we fund campaigns, I think we can all agree that when our crush wins a seat at the table we want them governmenting hard af, not spending half their time "fundraising" take the big money out of the political machinery. If we want to have debates let them be moderated and fact checked in rt debates.
What is it about the "two party" system that is inherently corrupt?I could argue all day long for Instant Runoff Voting. It wouldn't change the structure of government, just the process of running for office and voting for candidates. I don't believe the two-party system is democratic. It's so corrupt.
By "propaganda" I mean using speech that isn't exactly honest or thorough to sell people on ideas/laws/etc. that aren't really good for them. But people very often convince themselves, based on this less than truthful "speech" or messaging, or whatever it is, that their government/corporations/etc are doing the right thing.
Yes, fundraising is one of the most corrupt aspects of the US political system.
Isn't speech at its most basic level "propaganda", ie giving or exchanging of information?
Gary posts about the evils of "The Duopoly" everyday...in my estimation, primaries are for the masses of candidates to state their cases and hope they win the ticket to the final countdown....I've yet to see a compelling argument for a better system of choosing elected office holders, no matter how many times I see the word duopoly. I don't see the Parliamentary system many of our EU friends have, where you have 6+/- parties that have to ultimately all band together to form a government, hey you Crypto-Fascists Join us Greens and we'll rule the world!!
Change my mind.
My pet theory is we need to overhaul how we fund campaigns, I think we can all agree that when our crush wins a seat at the table we want them governmenting hard af, not spending half their time "fundraising" take the big money out of the political machinery. If we want to have debates let them be moderated and fact checked in rt debates.
The corrupt part is during the primaries, and the ways in which the RNC and the DNC tally those votes. The DNC's super delegate system can be very rigged. They rigged it against Bernie in 2016.What is it about the "two party" system that is inherently corrupt?
Imo working locally to support the lesser represented parties to help elevate them to national standing might be more productive. In a sense at least 'electorally' we're not really two party since
The two parties are becoming less relevant, as independents and unaffiliated are becoming the majority "Party"
HIGHLIGHTS
- As of March 2024, 45 million registered voters in these areas identified themselves as . At 38.28%, Democrats represented the single largest share of registered voters in the states and territories that allow voters to indicate partisan affiliation on their registration forms.
- A total of 35.7 million registered voters identified themselves as , representing 30.35% of registered voters in these areas.
- A total of 32.5 million registered voters identified themselves as independents or unaffiliated with any political party. This amounted to 27.67% of registered voters in these areas.
- Approximately 4.3 million registered voters identified themselves as members of . This amounted to 3.7% of registered voters in these areas.
- In the , (D) received a combined 53.5% of the vote to ’s (R) 44.7% across these states and territories. Both candidates received a larger percentage of votes than the percentage of their respective party’s registered voters.
- Independent and minor-party voters made up 31.80% of all registered voters in these areas, while independent and minor-party presidential candidates received about 1.9% of the vote nationwide.
- In those states that prompt voters to indicate partisan affiliation on registration forms, affiliation with a political party may be a condition of participation in that party's primaries. To learn more about primary participation criteria, .
I've been unaffiliated for a long time, my only downside is to date Oregon has a closed primary, meaning if you aren't registered as a Plaid, you can't vote for the plaid candidate in the primary.
The corrupt part is during the primaries, and the ways in which the RNC and the DNC tally those votes. The DNC's super delegate system can be very rigged. They rigged it against Bernie in 2016.
Yes, there are a lot of "other" voters, but those candidates cannot win.
Look into IRV, please (or ranked choice voting -- same thing_) It actually is democratic, and it is being used in some districts and states already.
Yeah, except he knew he couldn't possibly win as a Democrat. He voted with Dems for decades, and served his country for decades. He deserved a shot, and he took the only one that was feasible. The DNC closed ranks on him, even though what he was doing was fully legal. They were happy to use him every single time they needed his vote or his voice.I don't care who gets upset with me. Bernie was not running as a Democrat, he simply wanted to use the funding the Democrats had. He has been an independent. Which is fine. Run completely independently then.
I'm sorry, in the political arena, don't use other people. They will push back.
Yeah, except he knew he couldn't possibly win as a Democrat. He voted with Dems for decades, and served his country for decades. He deserved a shot, and he took the only one that was feasible. The DNC closed ranks on him, even though what he was doing was fully legal. They were happy to use him every single time they needed his vote or his voice.
I don't feel like getting into a big argument about this.He can't win as a Democrat, he's not a Democrat. Sure, his vote meant passing legislation for things that the American people were for. He doesn't vote for himself or does he? He votes for people.
He just recently was 100% behind Biden while shitting on him at the same time saying he was not well. What was that about?
Everyone plays games is how I see it.
I don't feel like getting into a big argument about this.
I actually worked on the successful campaign to bring IRV to San Francisco. I am proud of that fact, and I challenge everyone to learn more about it. See if you don't think it would be a better option where you vote as well. It's a truly democratic process.Ranked choice voting (RCV) is a proven voting method that has been used for major elections in the U.S. and other countries for over a century. Multi-winner RCV was invented in the 1850s as a proportional representation system to be used in multi-winner elections. In the 1870s, it was adapted to the single-winner form. It is sometimes referred to as instant runoff voting (IRV), preferential voting, proportional representation, single transferable vote (STV), and a number of other names.
RCV is already being used all across the country in a wide range of jurisdictions. As of the 2022 elections, RCV has been adopted in 62 jurisdictions. Some prominent examples include:
- Alaska
- Maine
- New York City
- Cambridge, MA
- Minneapolis, MN
- San Francisco, CA
RCV has also been used to nominate candidates for a general election. It was used by 2020 Democratic primary voters in Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas, and Wyoming. Additionally, RCV was used by the Virginia Republican Party to select their nominees for statewide office and select congressional districts in 2021.
People should be able to vote for their favorite candidate without fear that they should vote for someone they don't really like just to prevent a lunatic from winning. RCV, or IRV, makes the "lesser of two evils" choice unnecessary.
I'll have to read up more on this, I'm not "seeing" it in the General for a Seat or an Office, we don't sit one and a percentage of peoples at the big desk in the Oval Office, or any of the 535 seats in Congress. Primaries yes I can see it.Ranked choice voting (RCV) is a proven voting method that has been used for major elections in the U.S. and other countries for over a century. Multi-winner RCV was invented in the 1850s as a proportional representation system to be used in multi-winner elections. In the 1870s, it was adapted to the single-winner form. It is sometimes referred to as instant runoff voting (IRV), preferential voting, proportional representation, single transferable vote (STV), and a number of other names.
RCV is already being used all across the country in a wide range of jurisdictions. As of the 2022 elections, RCV has been adopted in 62 jurisdictions. Some prominent examples include:
- Alaska
- Maine
- New York City
- Cambridge, MA
- Minneapolis, MN
- San Francisco, CA
RCV has also been used to nominate candidates for a general election. It was used by 2020 Democratic primary voters in Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas, and Wyoming. Additionally, RCV was used by the Virginia Republican Party to select their nominees for statewide office and select congressional districts in 2021.
People should be able to vote for their favorite candidate without fear that they should vote for someone they don't really like just to prevent a lunatic from winning. RCV, or IRV, makes the "lesser of two evils" choice unnecessary.
That's not the reason for it. The reason for it is so I could vote for two choices for president, a first choice and a second choice. I could have voted for Bernie AND Hillary, and if Bernie was thrown out in the first round of counting, my vote would then automatically go to Hillary. That way, I would not have inadvertently helped Trump to win. They throw out the low vote getters and recount until one person has a majority of the votes.I'll have read up more on this, I'm not "seeing" it in the General for a Seat or an Office, we don't sit one and a percentage of peoples at the big desk in the Oval Office, or any of the 535 seats in Congress. Primaries yes I can see it.
OK, that makes more sense than what I was thinking. Although it goes against the grain of lots of my background training, along the lines of "If you have a shadow of a doubt, you have already given up/lost" But one could say different circumstances than war or used car sales.That's not the reason for it. The reason for it is so I could vote for two choices for president, a first choice and a second choice. I could have voted for Bernie AND Hillary, and if Bernie was thrown out in the first round of counting, my vote would then automatically go to Hillary. That way, I would not have inadvertently helped Trump to win.