Support NeoGAF

[RoyaleDuke]

You sound like an idiot who knows nothing about politics.

America isn't a Dictatorship run by Corporations. Big businesses have influence, but in the end it's the people who give politicians their power.

Change isn't slow due to corporate influence. It is slow because the US government is designed to be hesitant to big change to prevent the consolidation of powers.

More like I see things for what they are, you are incredibly naive if you think the corporations don't own this country. Incredibly Naive.

I'm far from an idiot, I choose not to deal in politics because they are beneath me.

 

[rjinaz]

I don't vote, because voting is pretty much a sham.

The government is owned by corporations and private interests, things only pass that the upper echelon only want to pass and even then our effect with our votes means comparatively little.

The only way for this country to be free, is to take it back but that won't happen.

Voting is essentially pointless.

I would argue there are a lot of married gay couples that would disagree with you.

 

[PorygonVandal]

You sound like an idiot who knows nothing about politics.

America isn't a Dictatorship run by Corporations. Big businesses have influence, but in the end it's the people who give politicians their power.

Change isn't slow due to corporate influence. It is slow because the US government is designed to be hesitant to big change to prevent the consolidation of powers.

Leave it like that

It's easier to say that nothing works and complain than try to do something and sometimes lose

 

[benjipwns]

I'm saying that the Democratic Party had to moderate unfortunately in order to not lose everything. The GOP will only be put in the same position faster if more people vote for democrats.

You're missing the point by parsecs.

A socialist in 1984 didn't want the DLC to take control of The Party. Under your theory xe should vote for the Republicans to prevent this.

A libertarian in 2016 doesn't want the GOP to become even more corporatist and interventionist.

All three of the above reasons were equally at fault for why Bush won. If any one of these three things didn't happen, Gore would have won.

This is a perfect encapsulation of the thread. All of those are things Gore* had no control over. He had control over the recount demand.

*Used to mean the Gore Team.

 

[Lupin the Third]

Voting for someone you know is not going to win is the very definition of throwing away your vote.

Lots of people voted for Brexit that "knew" it would never happen.

That is all. Carry on.

 

[Kai Dracon]

More like I see things for what they are, you are incredibly naive if you think the corporations don't own this country. Incredibly Naive.

I'm far from an idiot, I choose not to deal in politics because they are beneath me.

Your user profile mentions marijuana activism. Just a guess, but I suppose politics is only beneath you except when you're personally inconvenienced?

 

[RoyaleDuke]

I would argue there are a lot of married gay couples that would disagree with you.

You know what, I voted for that too, and you know what? My vote didn't make a difference, if I didn't vote, it still would have passed.

Your user profile mentions marijuana activism. Just a guess, but I suppose politics is only beneath you except when you're personally inconvenienced?

No, but it is nice of you to assume that. I haven't been an activist for anything in years.

 

[Toxi]

Lots of people voted for Brexit that "knew" it would never happen.

That is all. Carry on.

And clearly you're going to get struck by a meteorite, because you also "know" that won't happen. Just like Brexit!

Actually, you probably have more chance of getting struck by a meteorite than Gary Johnson or Jill Stein have of becoming President.

 

[benjipwns]

And clearly you're going to get struck by a meteorite, because you also "know" that won't happen. Just like Brexit!

Actually, you probably have more chance of getting struck by a meteorite than Gary Johnson or Jill Stein have of becoming President.

So you should vote for the meteorite? Is that what this is trying to argue?

 

[TestOfTide]

More like I see things for what they are, you are incredibly naive if you think the corporations don't own this country. Incredibly Naive.

I'm far from an idiot, I choose not to deal in politics because they are beneath me.

You choose not to get involved in politics because they are "beneath you". Sounds more like your simple minded views on the political world are beneath actually learning shit like a fucking adult.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Truly, little precious snowflakes.

This is a pretty vile and authoritarian put down of democracy in and of itself. Like, my stomach is actually churning.

EXPRESSING INDIVIDUAL POLITICAL OPINION IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY.

THE.

ENTIRE.

POINT.


I know, I know. "Yeah but Trump is so uniquely evil democracy doesn't matter this time. Only an evil person would think it does." You don't even need to respond, it's already been said a trillion times on this forum in the last month. It never stops being wrong.

 

[RoyaleDuke]

You choose not to get involved in politics because they are "beneath you". Sounds more like your simple minded views on the political world are beneath actually learning shit like a fucking adult.

I've read enough books on politics to know that I don't want anything to do with them.

I think it is funny that people are sitting around calling me an idiot, or simple minded, or implying that I do not care for the plight of others when I do.

I do care, but I don't vote because it is all a bunch of bullshit.

 

[Toxi]

You know what, I voted for that too, and you know what? My vote didn't make a difference, if I didn't vote, it still would have passed.

Did you vote for Barack Obama in 2008?

Obergefell v. Hodges was decided 5-4, with Obama's two Supreme Court nominations in that 5. If John McCain had won in 2008, we would have two different justices who probably would have been part of the dissent.

 

[benjipwns]

This is a pretty vile and authoritarian put down of democracy in and of itself. Like, my stomach is actually churning.

EXPRESSING INDIVIDUAL POLITICAL OPINION IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY.

THE.

ENTIRE.

POINT.


I know, I know. "Yeah but Trump is so uniquely evil democracy doesn't matter this time. Only an evil person would think it does." You don't even need to respond, it's already been said a trillion times on this forum in the last month. It never stops being wrong.

That sounds like Commie-talk to me:

Freedom only for the supporters of the government, only for the members of a party – however numerous they may be – is no freedom at all. Freedom is always the freedom of the dissenter. Not because of the fanaticism of "justice", but rather because all that is instructive, wholesome, and purifying in political freedom depends on this essential characteristic, and its effects cease to work when "freedom" becomes a privilege.

 

[RoyaleDuke]

Did you vote for Barack Obama in 2008?

Obergefell v. Hodges was decided 5-4, with Obama's two Supreme Court nominations in that 5.

No, I didn't.

I didn't vote because none of the candidates appealed to me, and again my vote wouldn't have mattered because Obama won anyway(and everyone knew he was going to win).

If you're asking if I did vote, who I would have voted for it would have been for Obama.

 

[TestOfTide]

You're missing the point by parsecs.

A socialist in 1984 didn't want the DLC to take control of The Party. Under your theory xe should vote for the Republicans to prevent this.

A libertarian in 2016 doesn't want the GOP to become even more corporatist and interventionist.


This is a perfect encapsulation of the thread. All of those are things Gore* had no control over. He had control over the recount demand.

*Used to mean the Gore Team.

The democrats were going to reform regardless of whether not the progressives ended up leaving them. Meanwhile the biggest thing that will motivate the GOP to reform is if the "Big Tent" of the Democratic Party becomes so big that it includes moderates.

A libertarian in 2016 is going to be sick of the GOP's socially regressive stances. And eventually that is going to turn them off so much that they vote (D) because at least the democrats are sane socially.

I didn't say that Gore could have controlled whether or not Nader ran. I am simply stating that Nader's run for president was one of 3 major factors that led to president Bush.

 

[benjipwns]

A libertarian in 2016 is going to be sick of the GOP's socially regressive stances. And eventually that is going to turn them off so much that they vote (D) because at least the democrats are sane socially.

As I said, Democrats in power didn't make the Republicans more in favor of civil liberties, sane immigration reform, criminal justice reform and turn against the drug war.

It didn't even turn them against rampant corporatism and interventionism. It made them worse.

The democrats were going to reform regardless of whether not the progressives ended up leaving them.

Right, so they didn't benefit at all by voting for Reagan-era Republicans.

 

[TestOfTide]

I've read enough books on politics to know that I don't want anything to do with them.

I think it is funny that people are sitting around calling me an idiot, or simple minded, or implying that I do not care for the plight of others when I do.

I do care, but I don't vote because it is all a bunch of bullshit.

It's only bullshit if you limit it to simply your own vote instead of an effort to get as many people voting for your preferred candidates as possible. Or in all your VAST political knowledge did you forget the importance of GOTV efforts?

You just don't get involved so you can try and claim that it's not your fault like a child.

Al Franken disagrees with your childish mindset.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

That sounds like Commie-talk to me:

Man, I don't even think it's a question that Trump is awful or that Hillary is the most competent candidate. It just drives me nuts that people think votes that aren't cast for the winning team are meaningless or have no influence, or that alternative movements don't build over time. Worst of all is the bizarro-world notion that keeps getting thrown up on this forum, that one isn't entitled to their own conscience in a election, the one time it genuinely matters.

I get why people are afraid of Trump, but they need to look at the authoritarian shadows implicit in their own words.

 

[xxracerxx]

I do care, but I don't vote because it is all a bunch of bullshit.

You really don't care, that's fine but you should just own up to it.

 

[TestOfTide]

As I said, Democrats in power didn't make the Republicans more in favor of civil liberties, sane immigration reform, criminal justice reform and turn against the drug war.

It didn't even turn them against rampant corporatism and interventionism. It made them worse.


Right, so they didn't benefit at all by voting for Reagan-era Republicans.

The difference is that moderates and minorities were always the biggest bases of the Democratic Party while the Republican Party has been taken over by the crazies. Just look at what happened with the GOP platform this year. No moderate has any hope of changing the GOP from the inside.

 

[benjipwns]

Man, I don't even think it's a question that Trump is awful or that Hillary is the most competent candidate. It just drives me nuts that people think votes that aren't cast for the winning team are meaningless or have no influence, or that alternative movements don't build over time. Worst of all is the bizarro-world notion that keeps getting thrown up on this forum, that one isn't entitled to their own conscience in a election, the one time it genuinely matters.

I get why people are afraid of Trump, but they need to look at the authoritarian shadows implicit in their own words.

Look pal, you can vote how you want when this isn't the most important election in a generation/history/this year/today.

 

[RoyaleDuke]

It's only bullshit if you limit it to simply your own vote instead of an effort to get as many people voting for your preferred candidates as possible. Or in all your VAST political knowledge did you forget the importance of GOTV efforts?

You just don't get involved so you can try and claim that it's not your fault like a child.

Al Franken disagrees with your childish mindset.

Boy there is a lot of assumptions going on here.

Especially the bolded.

Thanks for personally attacking me guys for my opinion. That is really mature.

I'd argue it is more childish to feed yourself into the political machine, instead of standing on your own with your own views.

But clearly you seem to know me so well, so enlighten me, what are my views? What are my thoughts?

 

[TestOfTide]

You really don't care, that's fine but you should just own up to it.

He would rather claim that politics are beneath him because he had to face the reality of the imperfections of politics.

Instead of seeing the ongoing problems and thinking "I should get involved in fixing these things" he instead thought "fuck this it's TOO HARD to make real change".

 

[Toxi]

Boy there is a lot of assumptions going on here.

Especially the bolded.

Do you get involved?

You've said both voting and violent uprising are futile. So I'm wondering exactly how you intend to do anything.

 

[RoyaleDuke]

He would rather claim that politics are beneath him because he had to face the reality of the imperfections of politics.

Instead of seeing the ongoing problems and thinking "I should get involved in fixing these things" he instead thought "fuck this it's TOO HARD to make real change".

I think it is pretty funny that you continue to imply that I don't care for change, when posts in my past history reflect exactly the opposite.

I don't express political views and opinion most of the time here because if you don't agree with the one side of the echo chamber you are automatically labeled as someone who doesn't care for people, or their problems. You are now a racist and a fascist.

That is the farthest thing from the truth.

Do you get involved?

You've said both voting and violent uprising are futile. So I'm wondering exactly how you intend to do anything.

Freedom is an illusion, choice is an illusion.

Voting is the greatest lie of all, through it we think we can change things, and sure if enough people turn out maybe some things will change.

The larger issues in this country will not change, unless we all come together to effect that change. This country is divided, so change will not come.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Look pal, you can vote how you want when this isn't the most important election in a generation/history/this year/today.

This Atlantic article from 2012 is pretty on point:

It's Time to Retire the Phrase, 'This Is the Most Important Election ...'

I'm sympathetic to the fact that this half of GAF's first or second presidential election. They don't realize it's said literally every single election, by both sides, because the other represents views which are such anathema that the thought of living under them is intolerable.

 

[Toxi]

Freedom is an illusion, choice is an illusion.

Voting is the greatest lie of all, through it we think we can change things, and sure if enough people turn out maybe some things will change.

The larger issues in this country will not change, unless we all come together to effect that change. This country is divided, so change will not come.

So it's not a lie, it's just hard and requires the support of more than one person.

Welcome to politics.

 

[RoninChaos]

Voting for someone you know is not going to win is the very definition of throwing away your vote.

And yes, in a two horse race, when you are not voting for one, you are voting for the other. The names on the ballot don't change that.

If you are happy with that, then I don't see the problem. So what if your vote is technically a vote that benefits trump. you can still be voting for what and who matters to you. It's still your choice.

Agreed. Minorities unfortunately do not have the luxury of waiting for the perfect candidate. And while Hilary is not perfect, voting for Johnson is a vote for Trump. And trump does NOT have your best interests in mind. You will be making things actively worse for yourself if Trump gets elected.

 

[RoninChaos]

That's the unfortunate reality, but a vote for a 3rd party candidate is 100% symbolic and without consequence.





Err, I should clarify. I meant without consequence in terms of getting whatever 3rd party candidate you voted for any closer to being elected. Obviously a vote for one of them is a vote that isn't going for one of the two main candidates

The problem is Trump voters aren't even thinking about voting for Johnson. So in that sense you are taking a vote from Hilary and trump comes out on top in that situation.

 

[benjipwns]

A Trump supporter may tell you a vote for Johnson or not voting is a vote for Hillary, but you tell them "bless your heart."

This Atlantic article from 2012 is pretty on point:

It's Time to Retire the Phrase, 'This Is the Most Important Election ...'

I'm sympathetic to the fact that this half of GAF's first or second presidential election. They don't realize it's said literally every single election, by both sides, because the other represents views which are such anathema that the thought of living under them is intolerable.

I'm dying at the Prager articles being almost literally the same. "Since the Civil War!"

 

[Toxi]

Agreed. Minorities unfortunately do not have the luxury of waiting for the perfect candidate. And while Hilary is not perfect, voting for Johnson is a vote for Trump. And trump does NOT have your best interests in mind. You will be making things actively worse for yourself if Trump gets elected.

Most of the people who are going to vote for Johnson were going to vote for Trump anyway though.

Again, this is a party who opposes the Civil Rights Act.

 

[RoyaleDuke]

So it's not a lie, it's just hard and requires the support of more than one person.

Welcome to politics.

Except that it is a lie, it doesn't work 8/10 times and it is a broken system. A system that only works sometimes, is still broken.

But what is the answer then? What do we do? Inaction does nothing, but action does very little.

There are thing that will never pass in this country, we are incredibly divided and the change that everyone wants will not come without force.

Where is the reform in the systematic abuse of minorities in this country?

It isn't coming.

Where is the reform in how we deal with mental disease in this country?

It isn't coming either.

Gun control, everything.

Where is your reform?

It is an illusion, as long as the world is owned, as long as people like you and me are on the bottom and continue to do nothing but wave signs, cast votes, and talk.

Talk is talk.

Voting in and of itself is just another form of talk.

As long as we remain divided, as long as we refuse to see reason, change will not come.

 

[Shig]

I agree . It's eye rolling how if you don't feed the political echo chamber your "wrong". No political party or candidate is entitled to my vote . And there's no such thing as a wasted vote , if your voting for candidate you believe best represents your interest then that vote is valuable to your interests.

That's kind of the problem. The OP supports and benefits from liberal policies, but to take a stand against 'having to' vote for Hillary, they're going to vote Johnson. Which, in most policy categories, is effectively saying "You wanna guilt me into voting for someone that would further my interests? Well fuck you! I don't like 'em, so I'm going to vote for this other person that represents my interests terribly instead!"

The argument that you shouldn't be compelled to choose someone you don't want to because the other candidate is worse is understandable, but it falls directly on its face if the counter-action is to petulantly adopt a third candidate you don't actually agree with, but adopted because they're not the other two people. That vote doesn't say "I want a better choice," so much as it says, "I'm not feeling Turd Sandwich and Giant Douche, could you add a Diarrhea Pâté to the roster?"

Anyone you write in has just as much chance of winning as Johnson or Stein, so if you're going to cast a protest vote, at least have the decency to make it for someone that you actually do support.

 

[Clefargle]

I'm far from an idiot, I choose not to deal in politics because they are beneath me.

With a name like that, what isn't beneath you? LOL

 

[RoyaleDuke]

With a name like that, what isn't beneath you? LOL

And what is my name?

You realize it is a reference and partial anagram of Hunter S. Thompson's alter ego Roul Duke.

Has absolutely nothing to do with aristocracy.

 

[benjipwns]

Again, this is a party who opposes the Civil Rights Act.

No, it's not. Of all the Civil Rights Acts (there has never been just one not even titled that), most libertarians actively oppose only Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

They booed Johnson's position that he would force, with violence, Jewish bakers to cater Nazi's.

He's still better than Austin Petersen though.

Anyone you write in has just as much chance of winning as Johnson or Stein, so if you're going to cast a protest vote, at least have the decency to make it for someone that you actually do support.

In many states unless a write-in candidate is registered on a list it is not counted as a vote.

 

[thetrin]

I'm brown. If you vote anything other than Democrat, purely based on numbers, you are putting my parents' life in danger. Voting Johnson or Stein is the very picture of throwing your vote away.

Don't pretend you're being righteous, because it won't do anything.

 

[benjipwns]

Neither will voting Democrat.

Politics is more than a single ballot at regular intervals.

 

[Plumbob]

Neither will voting Democrat.

Politics is more than a single ballot at regular intervals.

If you're volunteering for Democrats and voting third party I have even more questions

 

[Toxi]

No, it's not. Of all the Civil Rights Acts (there has never been just one not even titled that), most libertarians actively oppose only Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Which is one of the most important parts of said act when you consider how much of our everyday interaction is with businesses. Title II is the reason most establishments can't put up "whites only" signs. Don't play dumb when you know exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[RoninChaos]

Most of the people who are going to vote for Johnson were going to vote for Trump anyway though.

Again, this is a party who opposes the Civil Rights Act.

That's not been my experience. Every Bernie Voter I know wants to vote Johnson to spite Hilary and the democrats. A scenario the op said he was thinking about. I truly do it believe there are a lot of people who were in the Trump camp and now want to go to Johnson. Trump has his voters on lock, Hilary doesn't and that's why the idea of democrats voting for someone other than Hilary to "teach them a lesson" is crazy. Any minority or someone in the LGBT community voting for trump is voting against their own self interests. Hilary may not be the first choice for them but she's not going to shit on their rights and make their lives harder either.

 

[benjipwns]

Which is one of the most important parts of said act when you consider how much of our everyday interaction is with businesses. Title II is the reason most establishments can't put up "whites only" signs. Don't play dumb when you know exactly what I'm talking about.

No, the most important of the 1964 Act by far was the rest of it that attacked institutional racism within the state (and States) itself. Especially in regards to the justice system.

Title II is fodder for civil action even with the Act in place.

Hilary may not be the first choice for them but she's not going to shit on their rights and make their lives harder either.

I wouldn't be too hasty to pretend Hillary is going to end the drug war or "war on terror" or...

 

[Clefargle]

And what is my name?

You realize it is a reference and partial anagram of Hunter S. Thompson's alter ego Roul Duke.

Has absolutely nothing to do with aristocracy.

Easy buddy, just a joke. Maybe stop taking yourself so seriously. Saying an entire system of democracy is beneath you might be a bit much.

 

[Shig]

In many states unless a write-in candidate is registered on a list it is not counted as a vote.

If you say you can't vote for someone in good conscience, and then vote for someone else you also couldn't vote for in good conscience but suddenly can justify because they're the only available measuring stick for the "no, fuck you" option, then what the fuck did your conscience even matter? You've defeated your own conceit.

If you say you want to vote for someone you believe in, then vote for someone you believe in. Fuck whether it shows up in a graph on the news.

 

[LizardKing]

This is a pretty vile and authoritarian put down of democracy in and of itself. Like, my stomach is actually churning.

EXPRESSING INDIVIDUAL POLITICAL OPINION IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY.

THE.

ENTIRE.

POINT.


I know, I know. "Yeah but Trump is so uniquely evil democracy doesn't matter this time. Only an evil person would think it does." You don't even need to respond, it's already been said a trillion times on this forum in the last month. It never stops being wrong.

I'm assuming you are specifically talking about voting with the term participatory democracy. Voting is not about expressing an opinion. Stop thinking that you are making some kind of statement or voicing some kind of opinion through your vote. The only thing that matters is who wins or loses. That's it. If you want to express your political opinion go make a petition, protest or write a letter.

Factually you have a binary choice for who you would rather win. It's really that simple. Would you rather have candidate A or candidate B. That is your only consideration. Candidates C and so on do not matter. Not for a statement, not as an opinion, not as a protest. Voting for C has no tangible affect on anything except for possible harming your second favorite candidate. Voting for C is literally voting against your best interests as your vote did not matter and you didn't vote for your favorite of A and B. The only thing it provides is good feelings for you, which will probably reverse when your most hated candidate wins. A and B are your only real choice.

 

[benjipwns]

If you say you can't vote for someone in good conscience, and then vote for someone else you also couldn't vote for in good conscience but suddenly can justify because they're the only available measuring stick for the "no, fuck you" option, then what the fuck did your conscience even matter? You've defeated your own conceit.

If you say you want to vote for someone you believe in, then vote for someone you believe in. Fuck whether it shows up in a graph on the news.

All I'm saying is that if they aren't registered write-ins they do have less of a "chance" to win than Johnson or Stein. At least those two will have their votes counted.

I'm assuming you are specifically talking about voting with the term participatory democracy. Voting is not about expressing an opinion. Stop thinking that you are making some kind of statement or voicing some kind of opinion through your vote. The only thing that matters is who wins or loses. That's it. If you want to express your political opinion go make a petition, protest or write a letter. Factually you have a binary choice for who you would rather win. It's really that simple.

But factually you don't decide who wins.

 

[Ekai]

You know what, I voted for that too, and you know what? My vote didn't make a difference, if I didn't vote, it still would have passed.

It only passed because society has collectively moved on in the matter. Even then Republican fear-campaigns successfully passed Prop 8 and other garbage. Not to mention Tennessee or Indiana which have some of the most notorious anti-LGBT laws in the country. And Republicans are running a fear-mongering campaign now along with a platform that is the farthest right-wing it's ever been. Hell, there's literal torture for LGBT-Americans in their platform/most desired policy goals. It's something Pence is largely for. And Trump has openly said quite recently he wants his VP to handle all domestic and foreign affairs. Not to mention with the SC at stake they'd roll back same-sex marriage and many other civil rights for decades.

Things don't just pass because you expect them to whether you participate or not.
That's not the way the electoral process works.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Stop thinking that you are making some kind of statement or voicing some kind of opinion through your vote.

What am I even reading.

 

[Ekai]

That's not been my experience. Every Bernie Voter I know wants to vote Johnson to spite Hilary and the democrats. A scenario the op said he was thinking about. I truly do it believe there are a lot of people who were in the Drumpf camp and now want to go to Johnson. Drumpf has his voters on lock, Hilary doesn't and that's why the idea of democrats voting for someone other than Hilary to "teach them a lesson" is crazy. Any minority or someone in the LGBT community voting for trump is voting against their own self interests. Hilary may not be the first choice for them but she's not going to shit on their rights and make their lives harder either.

So you've talked to basically no Bernie supporters then? Cause they're overwhelmingly for Hillary by all measureable means. Hell, they're more for Hillary than Hillary supporters were for Obama.

For the record, tho I'm sure I've made it to clear to most people who read my posts: I'm a minority who isn't happy with Hillary on some fronts that are very key to me. I'll still vote for her cause the other option is voting for something that has no chance of winning or voting for a party that is pretty happy to wish death on me and threaten people on a global scale. That said I'm none too happy with my voice being silenced due to the two party system.