Tough As Texas

Ted Cruz can claim to be a lot of things, but tough is--objectively--not one of them. That ad is great, and Beto is a great candidate. Win or lose, he needs to be in the running in 2024. A Biden-O'Rourk ticket in 2020 makes a lot of sense but I'm pretty sure the same folks who convinced themselves that voting for Hillary was no better than electing Trump would scream corporate-this, big-Pharma that and war monger-whatever and vote for Stein again (or not vote, or write in Bernie or whatever the hell they did last time), allowing Trump's legacy to be as many as 5 SCOTUS justices.

When it's it down to two choices, just pick the better of the two. Please.

>but I'm pretty sure the same folks who convinced themselves that voting for Hillary was no better than electing Trump would scream corporate-this, big-Pharma that and war monger-whatever and vote for Stein again (or not vote, or write in Bernie or whatever the hell they did last time), allowing Trump's legacy to be as many as 5 SCOTUS justices.

When it's it down to two choices, just pick the better of the two. Please.

Seems easy, right?  Yet we fucked it up big time on the last go around.  Do you have faith?  I sure don't. The same dipshits still have the same dipshit talking points.  Trump 2020 signs should already be relegated to target practice.....Unfortunately each day that reality builds momentum.  

hey, it's chance!!

can you take 'ol thom out back to the intellectual woodshed, just for old time's sake?

we've sure missed your eloquence around here, chance...very nice to hear from you, and I hope all is very well with you and your family.

>When it's it down to two choices, just pick the better of the two. Please.

 while we're still being offered a choice, it's really the only sane thing to do. 

and sure, go ahead and insert the South park joke about Giant Douche v Turd Sandwich.

if you can't see the differences between the Republican agenda  and the Democrats,  then you're the joke. 

It's pretty sad - the ultra conservatives have pushed the country so far to the right that the political landscape is barely recognizable. At one time not so long ago the last election would have been the slightly left of center Democrat Sanders versus the slightly right of center Republican Clinton. Whichever won, it would have been "Ok, we'll work with these folks for 4 years, and then we'll beat 'em".

Not no more.

Seems to me you ought to concentrate on getting registered Democrats off their asses and into the voting booths rather than demanding Independents and Greens make up for the apathy of your own party members. Maybe push for a candidate who doesn't suck so much they stay home might be a start. Just stating the obvious. 

>Seems to me you ought to concentrate on..

 ‘Concentrate not on what others should do for your country, but what you can do for your country’

That's a fair point, Dise. I, however, was making a point about the time when one of two people is going to be president. At that point, if you're a liberal or progressive (regardless of party), the sensible vote would've been for Hillary. Had enough Greens voted for her, and enough Democrats (as you correctly note) voted for her, we'd be moving much, much closer to the Sanders/Stein ideal of governance than where we are now.

And I demanded nothing...I said please. Hillary's policies were incredibly in line with those of Sanders (according to Sanders himself) and I'm still unclear on how Stein's relationship with Russians is not a question that needs answering. Logically, whether you support Sanders or the Green Party, it can not be debated whether or not America would be moving more your direction with Clinton than Trump. It would be.

Seems fairly simple to me, but everyone can and should vote however they see fit. I just think Trump's policies and SCOTUS picks are godawful and Hillary's would have been preferable.

The rust belt margin was close. Why is it so close?

Hopefully, the DNC offers a candidate that doesn't repulse a large percentage of their own base next time. I mean they want to win, right? Simple enough? Run someone people want to vote for maybe?

Reasons: Stein, Russians, Hillary being a shitty candidate, Trump connecting with many voters there, Hillary taking it for granted, left-leaning voters not voting.

And Comey announcing the re-opened investigation.

lol yeah it was all Jill Stein and Russia's fault, HRC and the DNC didn't turn off millions of voters. Good one. Hillary is right-leaning, btw.

Run a better candidate. Win.

I agree with you, Willow. They need a candidate who will motivate voters.

Where I maybe disagree with you is on Bernie. I’ll be pissed if they run him as a Dem. He’s an Independent. They need their own badass.

BK I didn't mention the DNC running Bernie in 2020...I'd vote for him if he ran again as an Independent or D, or Gabbard and Warren, since you brought 2020 up. Not that it matters, I could vote for Mayor McCheese and my state would still go blue.

Who was that guy HRC chose for VP again? lol.

Some old white guy from a middle Atlantic State. Plain gelatin, jiggly with no flavor.

Living in deep Blue states, we definitely have freedom to cash our votes for anyone.

I hope the DNC doesn't try passing Tim Kaine off as a contender in 2020. JFC. They probably will. Dude's the epitome of voter apathy sauce. 

Who was the other Dem that ran in the primaries? I liked that dude, he had chutzpah.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/12/20/heres-the-...

That "What's Aleppo?" guy? NM he's a libertarian.

Lol, not that dude. The one that made it to a few debates. O’Malley, I think.

It wouldn’t be terrible for them to run a liberal Catholic as a counter-balance to Pence Catholic.

it wasn't all Stein, Dise, but the numbers she pulled in those three key states did contribute. Two things before bedtime: a whole lot of people did vote for Hillary (the majority of those who voted at all), and if you need to be inspired by a candidate somehow to be motivated to vote for their policies (if you agree with almost all of them), you're not taking the process seriously in the first place. I found Hilkary to be repellent and hypocritical and dishonest, but I knew damn well what her policies would be and what sort of justices she would nominate for the Supreme Court. I felt the same way and knew the same things about Trump and decided to vote sensibly given my own policy preferences. 

Interesting article, Knots. Thanks for posting it. 

>>>>>Living in deep Blue states, we definitely have freedom to cash our votes for anyone.

To what purpose? To feel good about yourself? To impress your friends? (You could always lie).

When there are, as usual in our system - like it or not, only two candidates who have a chance to win, and you see even a nanometer's difference between them, why would you not vote for the one of the two you like even slightly better? Even if you know that candidate will win, why let others do the lifting for you?

Voting for president isn't an opportunity to feel good about "your" candidate - it's an opportunity to participate in evaluating the applicants for the nation's top job.

I'm a registered Independent, I don't do "heavy lifting" for other political parties. Doesn't matter, they win anyhow in this blue state. 

Great job, democrats who didn't bother to vote at all!

I’m in the “just vote” camp, which gets to Chance’s point. Most Americans are politically ignorant and/or apathetic, and they need a personality to motivate them. Sad, but it is what it is.

I guess that I’m all for a person voting their conscience, whether it be Trump, Hillary or Jerry. At least they are voting. 

Word. 

Surf makes me want to stay home. 

He can do the heavy lifting. 

That said, in 2016 I was very worried that Bernie would take Vermont in the general election (it was possible), and it could have been the swing for Trump was if it was a really close race. In that case I had to vote for Hellray. Not that it mattered in the long run...

There's still down-ticket, Knots. 

>>>>>Surf makes me want to stay home. He can do the heavy lifting.

I get to do both - we vote by mail here.

Nice to see Hillary back on the stump. Talk about a misunderstood woman.

how about a $500 tax break incentive to vote?

oh yeah, they won't do that.

I just cant except the 'run a better candidate' bs..  A better candidate??? List the qualifications please.  It's an empty argument repeated ad nauseam.  Pizzagate?  Benghazi???  She didn't show up enough in Wisconsin??  Really??    Stein or Sanders were never going to be president.  

lol jr loves hrc. we’re just a conservative country at the core......

make vote day a national holiday. give people off. that’ll help. 

also don’t run (push through) a neoliberal on the dem ticket. we all know what happens now, listen to the people. and lol at tim kaine-that was really listening to the people, right? the DNC really fucked up, badly, on many levels-epic failures and extreme shadiness/lies/cheating to get their girl in. 

 who cares what bernie is labeled as? dem, indy, socialist-what does it matter his affiliation? hrc isn’t a dem. trump isn’t a republican. y’all hyped on bloomberg registering as a dem? maybe vote in another billionaire? good times. 

bernie would’ve beat trump and trump’s people knew it. they said as much. 

Being naive and idealistic about how this whole fucking game works isn't a good look.   

Was it the California Stein votes? 

Yes, the 1,000,000,000 Stein votes from CA were the deciding factor.  Stein is really our president.   

word. i mean, sounds like you’re in the  “hrc was the most qualified candidate ever” camp, so, good luck. 

Between Trump and Clinton -- yes she was the best candidate.  

Psss....ill let you in on a little secret --  Trump's team says a lot of made up shit.  

of course they do, who’s listening to those scumbags? nice observation? 

I'm unaffiliated so I can't vote primaries in my state but given a choice I would have voted for Bernie and I supported him until he lost the primary.  I know...FIX!  

^lol. 

>of course they do. nice observation?

But it's believable that they said Bernie would have beaten them?  

I’d like to see anyone argue that Trump was more qualified than Hillary.

(yes, I would have been glad to see Bernie win, and he got my vote in the primary. when he lost and urged his supporters to vote for Hillary, Y’all should have listened)

And yes, that was the choice. Trump  v Hillary. too hard to suck it up and choose the better of the two? boo fucking hoo. 

how do you like your country now?!  

lol at what? 

Unaffiliated?

Unaffiliated with any party.  Im not a registered dem, GOP, independent party, green etc....

you didn’t vote in the primary? 

Why not a Dem?

I can't in CT

no, you can. you chose not to. 

i agree tho, closed primaries should be open. 

>Why not a Dem?

Because I'm not a democrat and I don't believe in registering for a party just so I can vote in the primary. 

>no, you can. you chose not to. 

i agree tho, closed primaries should be open.

Did you just contradict yourself in the same post?

 nope. somebody like you complaining about the current state, didn’t even vote in the primary?

im not affiliated w/ any party either, yet i took the time to play their game, registered a dem and voted for bernie b/c i support him. 

wtf did you do? sit on your ass and wait for the greatest candidate ever to limp to the general. good job bud. 

The greatest candidate ever??   

And what did you do in the general election - voted for Stein or wrote in Sanders? Even less effective then if I registered as a dem and voted for Bernie in my state in the primary. 

Playing their game?  If you know anything about the game you know that Bernie was never going to be president. 

Why are you not a democrat?

You registered as a Dem in Vermont? Was it a super-secret initiation? We do have open primaries.

i’ve only been in vt < 2 yrs. 

So here's an idea to improve presidential elections. Along with all the other changes that need to be made - equitable district boundaries, removal of impediments to voting, standardizing voting regulations, getting rid of the EC, taking control of elections out of the hands of elected partisans - there should be open primaries all on the same day, run by the states, not the parties.

Anyone who could demonstrate an appropriate level of support could be in it - top two nationally would go to the final. The various parties could run candidates in the primaries if they could attain that level, chosen in any way they prefer - party primary, party convention, or examining goat entrails.

If you're interested in a breakdown and discussion of the significance of Stein's votes, here you go.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/3...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/jill-stein-dem...

Dismissing Stein's candidacy and vote totals as PART of the Clinton loss is to ignore the facts. Stein's connection to and support from Russian interests makes a good deal of sense as part of a Russian attempt to nudge the election Trump's way. Certainly, Green Party candidates generally seem to pride themselves on sticking it to the Democrat and using questionable sources of money to do so. Here's a reminder of Nader's Republican backing way back when:

"However, among Mr Nader's new supporters this election is the billionaire Richard Egan, who was appointed ambassador to Ireland after raising hundreds of thousands of dollars for President Bush. Campaign monitors say other big Republican donors have contributed as well. In Oregon, also poised for a tight contest, two conservative groups admitted telephoning supporters to help put Mr Nader on the ticket."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2004/aug/10/usele...

So, there you go: just a couple of ideologically pure Green Party presidential candidates representing and funded by Green Party activists and supporters sincerely running for president and not just to gig the Democrats.

What part of the green party platform do Dems dislike? 

What would Democrats have to give up to get those spoilers to come on board?

In Vermont you register as a voter. I was never given the option to register for one party or the other.

It appears to me, after observing several elections involving Green Party candidates, that the policies of the Green Party resonate with a minuscule number of voters. So, it's hard to make a case the Democrats--whose policies resonate with an enormous number of voters--should be the ones to adapt. The truth is that Green Party presidential candidates don't expect to win and, indeed, don't want to win since they've been pulling fewer and fewer votes each presidential election since those halcyon Nader days of 2000 (and his number was still a pittance). Such an observable pattern would seem to suggest--with stunningly simple obviousness--the need to adapt to the stated desires of the electorate you're ostensibly trying to win over. Yet, the Green Party just keeps chugging along with same incredibly unpopular platform, riding that Republican & Russian campaign gravy train in the process.

Evidence suggests that the Green Party platform is enormously unpopular and ill-suited for electoral success at the national level. Why would any party think it a good idea to emulate all or any of that platform?

why don't people like the planet?

What part of the platform do people dislike? 

I don't know, I just know that 15-20 times more people vote Democrat than Green; therefore, it seems silly to expect Democrats (the demonstrably more successful party) to adapt substantively to the Greens (the demonstrably less successful party). Particularly not after Gore tried and Nader refused.

An interesting question would also be: what is it that Greens see as so apparent and egregious a difference that they can't stomach supporting Democrat policies?

https://www.cnbc.com/heres-a-map-of-the-us-counties-that-flipped-to-trum...

> what is it that Greens see as so apparent and egregious a difference that they can't stomach supporting Democrat policies?<

the subservience to the military industrial complex and wall st?

Great point, Turts.

The Green platform isn’t the issue. The fact that we have a 2 party system is. It leads to any 3rd party candidate “taking votes away from the lesser of two evils.” Three is a crowd. However, if there were 4 or more viable candidates, it would be a game changer. Imagine if, in 2016, the Dems ran Hillary, Reps ran Cruz, and both Trump and Bernie ran as Independents. That’s what should have happened, and damn, it would have rocked the system.

The debates alone would have been awesome!

Understood. Do you consider the other policy differences between Democrats and Republicans (tax policy, SCOTUS appointments, women's health/choice, health care, homosexual & transgender rights, voting access, criminal justice, minimum wage, public education policy, among others) insignificant to affecting an otherwise Green vote when the general election is down to the two major parties? Like, is the fact that Democrats are not AS progressive or free from corporate/military influence enough to not vote Democrat? (I'm thinking particularly of swing states, like Nader insisted on focusing on in the last stages of the 2000 election).

That's a real, not rhetorical, question. I've made it clear what I think, but always been genuinely perplexed at folks who lean liberal or nudge left not voting Democrat (in a tight state) when it gets down to nut-cuttin' time and it's either the Democrat or Republican.

^^y’all hyped on bloomberg registering as a dem? maybe vote in another billionaire? good times. 

Bloomberg loves the stop and frisk.

He would make Trump look like a choir boy.

If I was in a tight swing state, there’s no way in hell I’d vote for a 3rd party.

The Mexico wall sold in those tight states. Do Dems have any way of going into those swing states and honestly winning back those voters? 

The WWE fans are a bigger block than third party spoilers. 

Hispanic candidate?

Coal is what sold in Pennsylvania and Michigan. That and Trump being Trump. Like him or not, he’s an enigmatic SOB.

"Resist"

https://truthout.org/articles/schumer-rubber-stamps-15-more-right-wing-j...

I continue to be sickened by the selling out of our future - my grandchildren will have to live with the terrible decisions these judges make. Truly short-sighted deal by Schumer.

Thanks for the link, Dise.

I hate to let pessimism into my mind but God dammit the Dems are snakebit.

Even when they win they lose. 

Remember progressive Obama and the do nothing regressive repub congress ? Got a Bill, well we got a filibuster.

Repubs wrote the book on fucking the middle class.

And now this administration's stratospheric level of ineptitude and dollar worship, combined with the  brain dead retard mob who somehow support it

fuck me but it'll be decades before progressives gain a foothold

Axis Of Evil of today is our legislative executive and judicial branches