Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
If you can't see the progress Obama has made in the past 8 years you are blind. Hillary will continue that progress.This is a nice generality. "Progress" can mean just about anything here. The system NCC, myself and others are referring to have brought us the choices of Hillary and Donald. If you're ok with that, that's fine. Many of us aren't and we know it's the system so we take issue with it. Not much more to it than that
So, one of 41 co-sponsors.
Republicans have been fighting against it:
In 2014:
Feinstein does e-file her reports even though it is not required.
For a good number of us, the end doesn't justify the meanscstu said:If you can't see the progress Obama has made in the past 8 years you are blind. Hillary will continue that progress.The Commish said:This is a nice generality. "Progress" can mean just about anything here. The system NCC, myself and others are referring to have brought us the choices of Hillary and Donald. If you're ok with that, that's fine. Many of us aren't and we know it's the system so we take issue with it. Not much more to it than that
Your comment is a shifting of the conversation to something else.
5/15 is just under half?cstu said:
Didn't make that number up, you guessed, right?cstu said:
Ignoring that this is two decisions, the other "real" decision is letting Washington DC know you aren't happy with either of these two dopes and voting third party. I don't know why people are so resistant to this reality.wdcrob said:
Historically?
Republicans have lost 4 out of the last 6 elections - have they changed? Getting progressive Democrats to vote Trump/3rd party is great strategic move by Republicans but a horrible move by progressive Democrats.
Define "lost" here because it appears they have made significant ground in both the house and Senate over that time, and yes, they have changed. Are you suggesting that what they are today is what they were back in the late 90s early 2000s ?? From where I stand they don't look close to the same as they did then
Gerrymandering.Define "lost" here because it appears they have made significant ground in both the house and Senate over that time, and yes, they have changed. Are you suggesting that what they are today is what they were back in the late 90s early 2000s ?? From where I stand they don't look close to the same as they did then
Been around a long time and the GOP has been gaining...seems to make my point unless there's something else you meant. Tough to deduce from one word answers.Gerrymandering.Define "lost" here because it appears they have made significant ground in both the house and Senate over that time, and yes, they have changed. Are you suggesting that what they are today is what they were back in the late 90s early 2000s ?? From where I stand they don't look close to the same as they did then
Depends on the year. Typically less than 5%, but it's been over 10% something like eight times in the nation's history. Most recently Perot got 19% of the vote in 1992 and George Wallace got 14% in 1968.
You have a pretty low opinion of your fellow Americans if you believe that a Socialist path would take you towards what happened in Venezuela vs what is happening in Sweden, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, etc.
Guilty, I do have a low opinion of socialist Americans. Don't you find it interesting that they don't want to discuss what made a socialist country implode? If I was a socialist I'd want to discuss and study these events and set some limits on my brand of socialism to make sure it didn't happen here. Ignoring it and hoping it doesn't happen here because American/white socialists are somehow more special is racist and irresponsible.
If by "they" you mean supporters of Bernie, no...I do't find it interesting simply because I am willing to bet they know exactly the differences between what Bernie's proposing and what caused Venezuela to have it's problems and that they have nothing to do with one another.
If Sanders didn't stride to the podium, say "I'm gettin' too old fuh dis ####!!!", drop the mic, and leave he did it wrong.
Aren't there any words that differentiate between socializing the means of production and socializing wealth redistribution (what we already have, btw)?
I was at this rally. Great to see Bernie so increasingly popular out here. Recent festivals have had a lot of Bernie backers floating around. Tons of stickers, signs, and general enthusiasm. Meanwhile, Hillary supporters do exist but her booths have reeked of a sad, desperate, resignation to her lack of popularity in the area, relatively speaking. It's a welcome but shocking difference from less than a year ago. Bernie just keeps climbing in both recognition and popularity. Really says something remarkable about a candidate who can do that.
Venezuela is a total mess. Basically for years it has just funneled the immense oil money it has been blessed with directly into socialist programs with little to no investment in building the countries economy. Absolutely has always been a time bomb.
That's bizarre. Part of Bernie's fight IS fighting for others and the battles they're waging. It's a major part of his appeal. Your friend is an idiot. If you want real change you need attention and people on your side. Not keeping it a secret bubble of support for a handful of folks.
NFW am I voting for a Biden/Warren ticket that steals that the nomination from Bernie.
Except the solution doesn't lie with the President. It lies with members of Congress and the state legislatures. So not voting or voting for a third party candidate for President will do next to nothing to change the system you take issue with.This is a nice generality. "Progress" can mean just about anything here. The system NCC, myself and others are referring to have brought us the choices of Hillary and Donald. If you're ok with that, that's fine. Many of us aren't and we know it's the system so we take issue with it. Not much more to it than that
Because the only third party candidate with any traction at all is Gary Johnson and his proposals would immediately throw us into a depression.
Proposals and actions aren't the same thing. But I don't think you'll find a single person on this board considering a third party vote delusional enough to think a third party will win anyhow.
It's not either/or. It's all of the above and I pay far more attention locally than I do at the national level because of the direct impacts to my life. My vote is my vote no matter how much any of you try to devalue it. It's my voice and I let it be heard at all levels of government. If the above is your way of getting to "change bubbles up" I tend to agree....it's certainly not going to change for the better top-down. That much has been proven.
Weird....I thought our economy was "booming" again
We didn't have an approved budget for most of Obama's reign, much less a balanced one. How did he sidestep that landmine?Why are we operating at a deficit right now? If the economy is doing well, this is the time to get pay down the debt with the surplus we should have. Or do you only subscribe to Keynes when we are in a recession?
