Bernie, Jill, Nader, Trump…

I’ll be voting for Stein.

That said, I don’t think there are enough leftists to be spoilers — yet. There weren’t in 2000, either, though the Democratic Party line is still that Nader cost Gore the election. No, the electoral college doesn’t work that way. It’s cumulative. It takes 50 states. No one state, much less a third party candidate in that one state, can ever be “decisive.” It’s mathematically impossible.

Bush won 30 states. Gore won 20. Flip ANY of those losses (like, oh, say, Tennessee) to wins and Gore is the president, even if you keep Florida in the Bush column. And more than 308,000 Democratic Party members voted for Bush in Florida. Exit polls say 192,000 self-identified “liberals” did. And then you have the 50% of Dems who stayed home. Nader took roughly 24,000 votes away from Gore, so even if people chuck all logic and focus solely on Florida — again, the electoral college doesn’t work that way — he’s not the main factor in the loss. Democratic Party voters for Bush would be that factor. And the folks who stayed home.

Anyway . . . . one silver lining to this year’s campaign. I see a time on the horizon when leftists will be able to form their own party and compete with the duopoly. A decade from now, or two. And then America gets a shot at real hope again. I’ll almost certainly be dead. But it makes me feel better that there is a good shot that the world will finally wake up and move on from capitalism and the legal ownership of other human beings. That it will finally choose actual emancipation for all, instead of “freedom and liberty” for business interests only.

TYT (The Young Turks for the less internet media savvy, a progressive online news channel that has recently crossed 4 Billion views on YouTube) recently ran a poll for Sanders supporters on their app and in their YouTube video. With over 20,000 responses, the verdict was 17% would vote for Hillary, 83% Never Hillary.

The hosts were shocked at the disparity. They’ve discounted the validity of the “lesser of two evils” argument over and over, but I don’t think they thought their viewers really took it to heart.

Also, a vote for Jill Stein isn’t wasted. If we can get her to 15%, that puts her on the national stage.

Zooey was noting how awful the Dem-Rep choice is this time around. But think about it — is it REALLY that different than in past years? Really? Are Trump-the-billiaire-business-man and Clinton-the-insider all that different from the McCains and Kerrys and Bushs and Bill-Clintons and Obamas and Nixons etc? I dunno. I dont think they are that different. Trump has that outsiders ‘talk-radio’ demeanor but is he REALLY worse than GW ?

Perhaps the main difference is just a matter of likability and style. The two current choices are the least likeable (on a personal level) in decades, and their styles annoy the hell out of large numbers of Americans. Prior to his election, Dubya was thought to be very (personally) likeable, for example. Gore wasn’t. Bush won largely on the strength of that, and certainly not his policy ideas. He managed to persuade millions of Democrats to vote for him, instead of Gore, etc. etc.

So, yeah, when it comes to what they actually want to do in office, and will do, it isn’t all that different from the usual. They’ll both protect the ruling class, capitalism itself, the empire, and bomb a lot of people. They’re both “conservatives,” as are pretty much all the eventual nominees from both parties (at least since the 1960s) . . . though Trump has to appeal to people to the right of “conservative” who think of themselves as conservatives still. Clinton doesn’t have that burden. She can be straight up conservative, and still fool most “progressives” along the way.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 5 months ago by Billy_T.

nittany ram wrote:

Is Trump really that different than the others? Good question.

Unlike the others he wears his racism on his sleeve, but I doubt his views on race are much different that any other republican candidate. The thing is, I don’t really think Trump really gives a shit about building a wall. I also don’t think he cares about abortion. He says he does because he’s courting the right and they are big talking points with them. What does Trump really care about? Deregulation.

I think that’s a very accurate statement. He also cares about lowering his own taxes, and will, if he’s elected. In short, he’s neoliberal on economic issues, just like Hillary. And for all of his fascist bluster, I actually think he’ll be less inclined to go to war than Hillary, though more inclined to go to DEFCON 2 if he’s in one. Or DEFCON 1 if he’s in two.

Two rotten choices, again. We get more choices with our cereals, and they’re all too much alike as well.

I get all of the arguments to to just vote Jill Stein or not vote or whatever–and in fact, I even agree with that sentiment on some level. But if bernie can get some of the progressive stuff he has been pushing into the Democratic platform. If Hillary chooses an Elizabeth Warren, there can be that subtle opening within the Democratic party.

Is Hillary still a neocon? Of course. But do I see her as reckless as Trump?

No. I don’t. Yes–she screwed up Libya. I get it.

My fear of Trump is how bad he can be?

If Gore had beaten Bush would we have invaded Iraq and set all this stuff of nightmares loose? I don’t think so. 8 years of Bush really was a disaster.

Well–Hillary is more war hawkish than Obama. It concerns me for sure.

But what about Trump? I can see us stumbling into wars and conflicts we didn’t think were possible–and not because of some neocon vision–but because he’s inept at all of that. He understands none of it.

Will he rip up the Iran deal and send nukes their way?

Who knows?

He strikes me as having no temperament for the job and his outright racism is a big warning light to me.

Am I being ruled by the same ol’ fear that always compels me to vote the “lesser” of two evils? Yes. And is she even the lesser of two evils? I can’t say I even know that for sure.

But I do live in one of those big swing states. And Pennsylvania is key to Trump’s strategy of winning the electoral votes. It’s a big key. I have to vote Clinton in my mind. Trump will give the right wing whoever they want on the court as long as it doesn’t hurt his own interests. He’ll give them most anything that doesn’t conflict with his interests.

I get the “Bernie or Bust” movement. I respect it and I think everyone must vote their conscience. But I have to follow my own conscience on this one. And that means a vote for Clinton. Or should I say a vote against Trump? Someday I suspect I will also hit that “Bernie or Bust” movement and I thought this was the year–to be honest. I really did.

But I’m not there yet.

bnw wrote:

Good to know your conscience can vote for the racist influence peddling war mongering rapist enabling candidate.

Okay.

I’m also in a swing state and I can’t do it, PA.

I’ve voted for the “lesser of two evils” all my life in one way or another, except for Obama the first time when I THOUGHT I was getting a Progressive. I know… you guys warned me, but I really wanted to believe…

I’m just not doing it again.

The NUMBER ONE issue is CLIMATE CATASTROPHE. If the NOAA paper is right, and I think it is, they estimate NINE FEET of global sea level rise in just 34 years.

Nine feet without any massive contingency plans gives us 12 Fukushima level disasters on the East coast of the US alone. Maybe more if a big storm pushes storm surge or flooding to the 8 more that are relatively close to the coast.

Hillary Clinton is all in on fracking and Natural Gas as the “bridge to tomorrow” which means building a bunch of new Natural Gas power plants and thousands of miles of NG pipelines. That requires a commitment of decades, during which, the investment simply won’t be there, nor will the impetus be there to develop the next gen of green tech while cheap NG is powering what people want.

No. Hillary Clinton is our guaranteed doom. Guaranteed doom. She won’t be a racist xenophobe. She’ll make the occasional rational decision like fixing the disparity for stay at home moms/dads and Social Security benefits.

And, honestly, that may have to be the ONLY reason to choose her, because, frankly, the scale upon which to weigh each candidate was crushed under the massive weight of each candidate’s negatives. And we know Trump won’t exactly embrace anything greener than coal…

But Hillary is doom. Period. Her embrace of fracking means the end. That’s the math. Fracking as a bridge means the end. NINE FEET in 34 years.

How much more carbon will be in the atmosphere in 2050? How much bigger will the storms be as the water is warmer and the seas rise?

Now, I had a bad number in my head and got ahead of myself and thought we’d already gotten to 450ppm CO2, but we HAVE crossed 400ppm and are on track to cross 450 in LESS THAN 20 YEARS.

From: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/13/carbon-dioxide-levels-in-atmosphere-forecast-to-shatter-milestone

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that CO2 concentrations must be stabilised at 450ppm to have a fair chance of avoiding global warming above 2C, which could carry catastrophic consequences.

“We could be passing above 450ppm in roughly 20 years,” Betts said. “If we start to reduce our global emissions now, we could delay that moment but it is still looking like a challenge to stay below 450ppm. If we carry on as we are going, we could pass 450ppm even sooner than 20 years, according to the IPCC scenarios.”

It’s clear. We hit 450ppm, it’s gonna be game over.

If we go forward with fracking and build out our fracking “bridge to tomorrow”, it’s game over.

Hillary Clinton’s Climate Catastrophe denial is… GAME OVER.

So, no, I really don’t give a shit about SCOTUS picks which I increasingly don’t care about because I think McConnell will decide after the election if Hillary is elected to simply NOT allow any appointments of any import to go forward, anyway. It won’t be any different from now and the SCOTUS will simply function with 8 justices until another retires and then they’ll have 7 and they still won’t appoint any justices.

Existential threats are by far the most important and the fate of the planet is paramount.

That means I have to fight like hell to get everyone to understand EXACTLY how close we are to potential extinction.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 5 months ago by Mackeyser.

The first casualty of man-made climate change?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/14/first-case-emerges-of-mammal-species-wiped-out-by-human-induced-climate-change?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet

Of course, it makes sense that PA Ram would vote for Hillary. If ocean levels rise he’s going to possess some prime beach front property there in Reading, PA.

Dr. Stein is by far the candidate most in-line with my beliefs although I don’t like it when she panders to the crystal-wearing, holistic anti-vaxxer, Gaia-worshiping segment of the Green Party. Unfortunately, it’s a big segment so she has to. That element has been the only reason I didn’t become a card-carrying member years ago.

PA Ram wrote:

I can’t even begin to imagine the harm he might cause. What might he do?

There are those who believe he can be no worse than Clinton–I get that.

I’m just not sure I agree with that.

Well for the record you are not alone. I feel the same way.

I am not even debating it, and regard the discussion as an extended “informal poll,” not a debate per se.

People have to act within the terms of their own conscience on this.

As it happens, for me, when it comes to that, I share your view.

PA Ram wrote:

Of course I’m joking–I love these leftists. We’re just going to have this disagreement, obviously. And that’s okay.

Well for the record I identify as a leftist.

Just, this time, not as a purist.

For reasons you state well yourself, which I won’t repeat.

…

President Trump!