Adolf Trump

[ryoder 1,590]

normiss

WTF does "not all" mean to you people with single perspectives on everything?

"What do you mean 'you people'?"

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[normiss 800]

Don't you know how racist I am?

[rehmwa 2]

yoink

It's so very, very stupid and its why the parties are becoming caricatures of themselves. As long as they identify as 'Democrat' or 'Republican', being against the other guy is a more important message than any actual policy they might stand for.

I am so thrilled to see more and more people talking like this. Including so many that never did before.
I still see the party-only zombies in play, they are getting ridiculously frantic now. But the others (IMO - more reasonable and aware types) are coming out of the woodwork.

Maybe the only really good thing that will come from this election cycle. Hopefully it's powerful enough.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

rehmwa

***It's so very, very stupid and its why the parties are becoming caricatures of themselves. As long as they identify as 'Democrat' or 'Republican', being against the other guy is a more important message than any actual policy they might stand for.

I am so thrilled to see more and more people talking like this. Including so many that never did before.
I still see the party-only zombies in play, they are getting ridiculously frantic now. But the others (IMO - more reasonable and aware types) are coming out of the woodwork.

Maybe the only really good thing that will come from this election cycle. Hopefully it's powerful enough.

One thing to keep in mind is that the "Party-Only Zombies" (I love that term) generally dominate the primaries. It's a phenomenon that has been noted before.
Primaries are usually minor elections, and a lot of "non-zombies" stay home. That means that the dedicated weirdos, zombies and idiots who make sure they vote in every election have a bit more influence.

I agree that it would be nice to see the rest of the voters make a bigger appearance. And the idiocy we are seeing now may be the impetus.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[DanG 1]

The reason I don't vote in the primaries is because I don't identify strongly with either party. In my opinion the parties should be paying for and running their own primaries, if that's what they want. These elections should be private affairs and the government shouldn't be involved. If another group of people wants to get together and nominate someone else, they should also do that without government involvement. Then, each group of like minded people just have to submit enough signatures to get their candidate on the official ballot.

I always vote in official elections (at least the national one, I sometimes skip the locals), but I don't really care what one corporate entity (RNC) and another corporate entity (DNC) decide at this point.

- Dan G

[Rstanley0312 1]

rehmwa

***It's so very, very stupid and its why the parties are becoming caricatures of themselves. As long as they identify as 'Democrat' or 'Republican', being against the other guy is a more important message than any actual policy they might stand for.

I am so thrilled to see more and more people talking like this. Including so many that never did before.
I still see the party-only zombies in play, they are getting ridiculously frantic now. But the others (IMO - more reasonable and aware types) are coming out of the woodwork.

Maybe the only really good thing that will come from this election cycle. Hopefully it's powerful enough.

This also may be a time that a 3rd party has a chance. Probably one from the right but still....

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[quade 4]

Rstanley0312

This also may be a time that a 3rd party has a chance. Probably one from the right but still....

Third parties never really have a chance and almost always just spoil the chances of whoever else is closest to them ideologically.

Put up a 3rd party candidate seen as just right of center and all he's going to do is take votes away from the right side.

Here's a great video explaining how our two party system kind of naturally evolved into being, why with our system of voting it's almost the only way it can really work, and how a third party just screws things up for the side it would have otherwise aligned with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Beyond the "Meeting House Democracy" scale, have-nots are thus the bane of attempts at pure Democracy. Switzerland works pretty well, but there are precious few have-nots amongst them.

So the solution is a huge rise in the minimum wage?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[winsor 236]

jakee

Quote

Beyond the "Meeting House Democracy" scale, have-nots are thus the bane of attempts at pure Democracy. Switzerland works pretty well, but there are precious few have-nots amongst them.

So the solution is a huge rise in the minimum wage?

It's pretty obvious that the problem with poverty is that some people don't have money. Thus, all we have to do is give them money and the problem is solved.

Of course, the worst kind of poverty is poor children. Thus, if we give people money on the basis of how many kids they have, we kill two birds with one stone.

That's how we win the "War on Poverty" (tm)!

Either that or create a culture of "Kids as a Cash Crop," I forget which.

BTW, you never lived in Switzerland, did you?


BSBD,

Winsor

[billvon 2,991]

>Bad education
>The US is not a democracy

That was sarcasm. We don't vote on historical facts, either.

[billvon 2,991]

>Put up a 3rd party candidate seen as just right of center and all he's going to
>do is take votes away from the right side.

Ah, but have TWO third party candidates - one leaning left, one leaning right - and you might even have a fair, reasonably representative election! Imagine, for example, an election with Sanders, Clnton, Trump and Cruz.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>Put up a 3rd party candidate seen as just right of center and all he's going to
>do is take votes away from the right side.

Ah, but have TWO third party candidates - one leaning left, one leaning right - and you might even have a fair, reasonably representative election! Imagine, for example, an election with Sanders, Clnton, Trump and Cruz.

Hmmmm
Now this would be interesting!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,489]

winsor

BTW, you never lived in Switzerland, did you?

Yep, and I earned a shedload of money for doing a menial job.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 2,991]

>Now this would be interesting!

And something that the GOP would be VERY interested in seeing happen due to the 12th amendment.

[kallend 2,027]

rushmc

******

The founders did not want a democracy

Indeed they didn't: no votes for women, no votes for much of the male population either, an Electoral College to make sure that the wealthy elite got its way despite the wishes of the common people.

Quote

this is what happens when courts turn activists
which you usually like

It seems that you haven't actually bothered to READ The Constitution, as written, and the original intent thereof, as documented.

Actually I have
Along with the Federalist papers so I understood the intent
something you should do

OK, genius, I'll bite.

Please explain to us how "activist" courts ensured that the Article II.1 of the Constitution applied originally only to males (referred to throughout as "he", "his" etc.

Please explain to us how "activist" courts ensured that slaves only counted as 3/5 of a person (Article I.2).

Please explain to us how "activist" courts ensured that the Senate would not remotely be representative of the population (Article 1.3)

Please explain to us how "activist" courts ensured that women would be excluded from voting until 1920 (Amendment XIX).

Please explain to us how "activist" courts ensured that the Electoral College could elect a president who did not receive a plurality of the popular vote. I suppose you consider Scalia and his buddies Rehnquist and Thomas to be activist judges.

Please explain to us how "activist" courts forced Hamilton to write Federalist Paper 68 explaining why democratic election of the president was a bad thing.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 220]

jakee

***
BTW, you never lived in Switzerland, did you?

Yep, and I earned a shedload of money for doing a menial job.

And the cost of living was not comparable to the US was it?

I remember the last time I was there, a dinner was like 140 American if you wanted decent food.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[jakee 1,489]

turtlespeed

******
BTW, you never lived in Switzerland, did you?

Yep, and I earned a shedload of money for doing a menial job.

And the cost of living was not comparable to the US was it?

More comparable than than the pay.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Croc 0]

winsor

******
The founders did not want a democracy

Indeed they didn't: no votes for women, no votes for much of the male population either, an Electoral College to make sure that the wealthy elite got its way despite the wishes of the common people.

You make it sound like a bad thing.

Though attributed to de Toqueville, Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee seems to have originated the following

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world's greatest civilisations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage."

We are pretty much in the apathy to dependence stage.

Beyond the "Meeting House Democracy" scale, have-nots are thus the bane of attempts at pure Democracy. Switzerland works pretty well, but there are precious few have-nots amongst them.


BSBD,

Winsor


Not only have the voters discovered they can vote themselves generous gifts, there are hordes of politicians willing to say anything in order to get themselves a place at the Federal trough. The whole thing stinks.

"Here's a good specimen of my own wisdom. Something is so, except when it isn't so."

Charles Fort, commenting on the many contradictions of astronomy

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

winsor

You make it sound like a bad thing.

Though attributed to de Toqueville, Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee seems to have originated the following

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world's greatest civilisations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage."

We are pretty much in the apathy to dependence stage.

Beyond the "Meeting House Democracy" scale, have-nots are thus the bane of attempts at pure Democracy. Switzerland works pretty well, but there are precious few have-nots amongst them.


BSBD,

Winsor

This is an interesting article on the rise of facism and it's roots.

Basically, Trump isn't the cause, he's just the result (as in taking advantage of the people who want it). The author's take is that the underclass is sick and tired of being told to "be nice to each other" by elites who are doing the bidding of their corporate masters.

Quote

These elites, many from East Coast Ivy League schools, spoke the language of values—civility, inclusivity, a condemnation of overt racism and bigotry, a concern for the middle class—while thrusting a knife into the back of the underclass for their corporate masters.

I don't agree with all of it, but it echoes the basic premise of the post I made near the beginning of the "Are you guys crazy enough to elect Trump" thread.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[kallend 2,027]

Heil!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ryoder 1,590]

kallend

Heil!

"the silent majority STANDS WITH TRUMP"???

Really?
They want to bring back memories of Nixon?

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[ryoder 1,590]

Voters For Trump Ad - SNL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg0pO9VG1J8

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[BartsDaddy 7]

Yep it's nice we keep looking at a comedy show for political advice.

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[ryoder 1,590]

BartsDaddy

Yep it's nice we keep looking at a comedy show for political advice.

Only appropriate since the GOP has become indistinguishable from a comedy show.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Rstanley0312 1]

quade

***This also may be a time that a 3rd party has a chance. Probably one from the right but still....

Third parties never really have a chance and almost always just spoil the chances of whoever else is closest to them ideologically.

Put up a 3rd party candidate seen as just right of center and all he's going to do is take votes away from the right side.

Here's a great video explaining how our two party system kind of naturally evolved into being, why with our system of voting it's almost the only way it can really work, and how a third party just screws things up for the side it would have otherwise aligned with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

Agree with all of that. Just saying is there is a year that a 3rd party "could" win it may be this election. That is assuming Hillary/Trump. Both have insane negatives. I still do not think Trump gets the nod.

The crazy thing about all of this is, on the GOP side there are two candidates that would really battle and have a good chance against the left. THose tow candidates are at the bottom of the final four. People are not smart.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com