Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Off-topic » Anything goes




 Page 1 of 2 [ 29 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next



Author Message
 Post subject: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 years
 Post Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:27 am
Posts: 2271
Location: Portland, OR
The Arizona Republic newspaper has never, in its 126-year history, endorsed a Democrat for president—until Tuesday. The staunchly conservative editorial board of the reliably red state daily stressed its “deep philosophical appreciation for conservative ideals and Republican principles” before it noted “this year is different” and declared its support for Hillary Clinton for president. “The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified,” the endorsement reads. “That’s why, for the first time in our history, the Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... inton.html


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 2:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:07 am
Posts: 2389
I believe the thinking among Conservatives (including media outlets) is that Trump is a danger to our country both economically and, more importantly, in foreign policy and national defense. HC is the much more capable option in fp and nd because of her experience and understanding of the issues in those areas. The best outcome in the eyes of the "C's" is HC as president with the Republicans retaining control of both houses of Congress in order to have some control over her domestic/economic polices and even some control over Court appointments. The "C's" see Trump as a clear and present danger as Commander In Chief. WE ALL SHOULD. Those of us that can think back to the time we practiced air-raid drills in school during the Cold War, and especially during the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis, understand.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 8:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:27 pm
Posts: 12071
Agree with the sentiments here.

_________________
It's time for ownership to stop pretending they can't afford substantial payroll increases from recent levels. They absolutely can
viewtopic.php?p=244425#p244425


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 8:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:58 am
Posts: 107
This country needs more than two political parties. You can achieve that by voting third party. No, a third party will not win this election - this is a long lead process.

What we need is a third party candidate to achieve 5% of the total vote. When that happens, they are eligible to receive federal funding for the next presidential cycle. And the more they get on top of the 5%, the more they get relative to the two major political parties.

The craziest thing that could happen this cycle is that a third-party candidate wins a state that ends up preventing either candidate from reaching 270 electoral college votes. Then the vote for president turns to the House... (and it could end up being someone besides the two nominees).

Also, if a third party candidate does receive significant votes, the major parties will have to consider their views in future election cycles.

I'm not going to tell you who to vote for or even encourage you one way or the other. But voting third party does matter, even if it doesn't apply to this election cycle. For the long term success of this country, we need more than two political parties. If you align better with a third party candidate, then don't be afraid to vote for them. Your vote won't be wasted.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 9:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:07 am
Posts: 2389
Moranall wrote:
If you align better with a third party candidate, then don't be afraid to vote for them. Your vote won't be wasted.


In a normal presidential cycle I might agree with you. In THIS cycle, however, the Republican candidate poses such a clear and present danger that it becomes imperative that he not win the Presidency. A vote for a third party candidate moves him that much closer to the White House.

Before we can discuss a multiple party system, I think the money has to be taken out of the system. Money should not equal speech. Also, there are other factors that can skew elections which can make democracy messy.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 9:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:58 am
Posts: 107
dbackfanron wrote:
Before we can discuss a multiple party system, I think the money has to be taken out of the system.


How is this ever going to happen in the current political system? Our two parties are in such a place of power that they would never let that happen.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:27 pm
Posts: 12071
I was thinking a lot along your lines Moranall....the problem is Gary Johnson is a total goofball. I actually spent a lot of time researching him, and I watched a bunch of his interviews. I don't even know how he has gotten as far as he has. If he were a more serious person, I would consider voting for a libertarian candidate, even though I am not really aligned with most of their platform, just for the very reason you said.

_________________
It's time for ownership to stop pretending they can't afford substantial payroll increases from recent levels. They absolutely can
viewtopic.php?p=244425#p244425


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 7687
Location: Tucson
Ok, I am probably the n00b since I know nothing about politics but... Why doesn't the runner up in either primary ever throw their hat in the ring? I get that that would divide the party, but for instance I know people (Sanders 2016) who would rather not vote than vote for Cninton.

Or when there is an incumbent. Is the reason that never happens solely to avoid dividing the party?

I do know that Washington, in his Farewell Address warned us against developing a two party system. Something tells me he wousln't be happy with the gridlocks in Congress, and whatnot...

Then again, Women have suffrage and we have a black President now...

_________________
Per Mare, Per Terras


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:27 pm
Posts: 12071
Sometimes the primary 2nd place finisher DOES throw their hat in the ring, but it's rare because it almost all but guarantees the other party nominee wins the election.

If Bernie Sanders ran as an independent, it would virtually insure Donald Trump would be president.

So that's Bernie's , (and the rest of us) unenviable choice. Support Clinton or see Trump elected.

_________________
It's time for ownership to stop pretending they can't afford substantial payroll increases from recent levels. They absolutely can
viewtopic.php?p=244425#p244425


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 3:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:07 am
Posts: 2389
I don't know the answer to this, but don't most parliamentary countries have multiple (more than two) parties? Has the U.S. ever had more than two ruling parties at any given period in our history? Would it work in our presidential system? Would a President elected with say less than 25% of the vote have the sense of legitimacy from the populace as a whole?

Bernie was right. Change has to come from the younger generation getting actively involved. They should start with running for and/or electing officials at the local levels to institute change. Over time, those officials move up in government, implementing changes at all levels of government along the way. As impetus, Clinton must appoint Justices that will overturn Citizens United and laws that limit voting rights, along with gerrymandering.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:58 am
Posts: 107
dbackfanron wrote:
I don't know the answer to this, but don't most parliamentary countries have multiple (more than two) parties? Has the U.S. ever had more than two ruling parties at any given period in our history? Would it work in our presidential system? Would a President elected with say less than 25% of the vote have the sense of legitimacy from the populace as a whole?

Bernie was right. Change has to come from the younger generation getting actively involved. They should start with running for and/or electing officials at the local levels to institute change. Over time, those officials move up in government, implementing changes at all levels of government along the way. As impetus, Clinton must appoint Justices that will overturn Citizens United and laws that limit voting rights, along with gerrymandering.


Correct. Most parliamentary countries have more than two major parties. The UK has about 6 major parties and several minor parties. There are two parties that took the majority of the votes (36.9% and 30.4%) in the 2015 election, but four others still received at least 3.8% of the general vote (including 12.6% for the independence party).

Unfortunately, our country would need some pretty substantial change to be more than a two-party system. With the 270 electoral college votes required for a presidential election, we're pretty much required to have at most two major parties or else the 270 electoral vote minimum will never be met. Forcing an election to go to Congress for a vote (if a candidate doesn't reach the 270 votes) would be a good start towards an election system change in this country.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 2:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:07 am
Posts: 2389
That's why it is highly unlikely that the U.S. ever becomes more than a two party system. Three might be possible. To go to any other system than the Presidential System would pretty much require scrapping the Constitution


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:27 pm
Posts: 12071
Political parties should be done away with altogether. THAT would be really cool.

_________________
It's time for ownership to stop pretending they can't afford substantial payroll increases from recent levels. They absolutely can
viewtopic.php?p=244425#p244425


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 4:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 7687
Location: Tucson
shoewizard wrote:
Political parties should be done away with altogether. THAT would be really cool.



Go to a popular vote type thing. Didn't either Bob Dole or Al Gore win the popular vote, but lost the Electoral College? I know it was an election before I was eligible to vote.

_________________
Per Mare, Per Terras


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:29 pm
Posts: 3567
Location: Katy, TX
Couldn't find another thread for this, but the idea of Donald fucking Trump walking the same hallways as Jackson, Lincoln, the Roosevelts, and Reagan makes me sick to my stomach.

_________________
Vin Scully.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:29 pm
Posts: 3567
Location: Katy, TX
Justin wrote:
shoewizard wrote:
Political parties should be done away with altogether. THAT would be really cool.



Go to a popular vote type thing. Didn't either Bob Dole or Al Gore win the popular vote, but lost the Electoral College? I know it was an election before I was eligible to vote.

I have been old enough to vote in 5 presidential campaigns, and in that time, the Republicans have won 3 elections while having actually received more total votes only once. So I totally get why they like it. I would, too.

And before anybody spouts off with some geographical bullshit, ONE PERSON ONE VOTE. How unfair is that? It shouldn't matter whether you're in Los Angeles or Kansas. All the electoral college does is make all of our votes of different value, not the same. And have you ever tried explaining the electoral college to somebody not from here? It's impossible. There's a really good goddamn reason why not one democracy founded after us has chosen to implement the same system.

_________________
Vin Scully.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:27 pm
Posts: 12071
dirtygary wrote:
Justin wrote:
shoewizard wrote:
Political parties should be done away with altogether. THAT would be really cool.



Go to a popular vote type thing. Didn't either Bob Dole or Al Gore win the popular vote, but lost the Electoral College? I know it was an election before I was eligible to vote.

I have been old enough to vote in 5 presidential campaigns, and in that time, the Republicans have won 3 elections while having actually received more total votes only once. So I totally get why they like it. I would, too.

And before anybody spouts off with some geographical bullshit, ONE PERSON ONE VOTE. How unfair is that? It shouldn't matter whether you're in Los Angeles or Kansas. All the electoral college does is make all of our votes of different value, not the same. And have you ever tried explaining the electoral college to somebody not from here? It's impossible. There's a really good goddamn reason why not one democracy founded after us has chosen to implement the same system.


FWIW Trump has actually come out in favor of doing away with Electoral College. How ironic

_________________
It's time for ownership to stop pretending they can't afford substantial payroll increases from recent levels. They absolutely can
viewtopic.php?p=244425#p244425


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:07 am
Posts: 2389
The question is could they get 38 states to ratify an amendment to the Constitution. I would think Montana, Idaho, No. Dakota, So. Dakota, and Wyoming are definite no votes. Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Arkansas, Louisiana, and West Virginia are probably no. I'm guessing the small states in the NE are probably yes.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 10:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:29 pm
Posts: 3567
Location: Katy, TX
It would certainly be difficult to navigate that issue,,, but at least as it appears for the POTUS elections, we are not 50 states. We are Urban, Rural, and Suburban, and that has a far greater influence on voting than the state boundaries.

_________________
Vin Scully.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: AZ Republic endorses first Dem for President in 126 year
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 10:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:09 am
Posts: 766
Location: San Tan Valley
shoewizard wrote:
Political parties should be done away with altogether. THAT would be really cool.


Both parties should die of embarrassment. Seriously. The red team got shanghai'd by a reality TV star (nevermind that he's a disgusting human being) and the blue team laughed and laughed at their demise. Then the blue team lost not just the POTUS, but all 3 branches of gov't because they're just as dysfunctional as the other team. And the red team laughs and laughs.

It's not like there is a viable 3rd party out there that anyone should get behind. They all lack direction. A new party is needed that uses facts, logic and acts only in the interest of the people. An anti-politics party. Politics is just a big game, but unfortunately the game has huge stakes. We need a party that doesn't play the game.

The current polarity on every known issue is mostly caused by misinformation from both sides. They each present the case that only supports their views. Actions of a government are never going to have unanimous support. Any two people can take different sides on an issue, but if there's a grown-up discussion and a look into the real implications of the issue we can arrive at a consensus. It would take earnest work from everyone involved, so it'll never happen in the current climate.

All I know is every single time I've lost an argument about anything, it's always been much easier to accept when the other side presents valid facts and shows that the decision is better for the majority rather than just holding their breath and stomping their feet until they get what they want. I can know that I didn't get my way, but now I understand how or why the decision was made. I know it's a fantasy land after this election, but it's not an impossibility.

_________________
"Tomorrow is not promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett


Top 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
 Page 1 of 2 [ 29 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next




Board index » Off-topic » Anything goes


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: