-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
wearechange.org asks Obama supporters about "Romney's" kill list, Patriot Act, NDAA
- Thread starter Rentahamster
- Start date
- Status
Ideals are meaningless if the other side gets in and destroys all the good we have done in the last 4 years. And good has been done in the last 4 years. A lot of good, some great liberal achievements. More than anyone in the green party has ever done for America.
Deified Data
Banned
The only scenario where such a sentiment isn't reasonable is in a battleground state. Anywhere else is fair game. Voting for Obama in Indiana isn't going to do him any good, while voting for a third party candidate holds the possibility, however small, of pushing them over that next threshold - be it in terms of votes, funding, credibility, what have you.
The only reason I can think of for voting for Obama in a non-swing state is if you want to help him win the popular vote, which isn't really an important enough reason to justify voting tactically over voting your conscience. Unless you just so happen to agree with the majority of his policies and stances, which is possible, though I don't know any self-respecting liberal for whom this applies.
Henchmen21
Banned
The green party hasn't been allowed to do much because the big 2 keep them from gaining any sway.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
our voting system doesnt lend itself to 3rd parties being serious contenders for the president. not to mention if one of the 3rd parties swelled to that point, they would be stealing from one of the existing two, at which point that party would probably become nonexistent before there were actually 3 "equal" parties.
3rd parties make more sense for congress.
3rd parties make more sense for congress.
Unhandled Exception
Member
lol
And it isn't changing this year.
Want change? Force the democrats to be more liberal, look what the tea party did to the republicans. They played within the system and won. The two party system was here long before you were born and will be here long after you are dead.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
They have had decent contributions to society as private citizens. As for public office, they can't do much if no one votes for them.
Greens got shit on Obamacare, ending don't ask don't tell, two great liberal supreme court nominees, the lilly ledbetter act, etc.
Obama has earned the vote of the liberal base of America, and then some.
timetokill
Banned
But wait he's a Democrat there's no way he would do those things!
VOTE 'D' OR WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE
VOTE 'D' OR WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Not the "kill list" specifically, but during the third debate, when they were talking about drone strikes, Romney pretty much agreed with what Obama is doing.
Unhandled Exception
Member
Yep, and he's done so dropping one bomb at a time. And taking away civil liberties all at once. He's a stalwart of liberation and freedom.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
Most third parties have crazy ideals/policies as well, so you're never going to have someone to fully agree on.
And the civil liberties chicken-little scene is getting old. Just like inflation and/or deficit hawks.
And the civil liberties chicken-little scene is getting old. Just like inflation and/or deficit hawks.
Care you explain how Obama is taking away all the civil liberties ever?
elrechazado
Banned
Taking away civil liberties != taking away all civil liberties. l2read.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
No, but he signed it. Albeit with a veto proof majority.
And he made a statement disagreeing with it. But he still does the things he disagrees with.
I think the "all at once" meant that BOTH the bombing AND the curtailing of particular civil liberties are happening "all at once".
Ideals won't mean shit when the other guy gets in and takes everything away.
Wafflecakes
Member
Pretty much. Not only is it impossible to have a 3 party system with the way our elections work.....or 3rd parties are shit. The only possible way one could ever gain power is by coming at the electorate from the middle. Tea party Libertarians and Green party supporters are all nobody's who are going nowhere.
I personally have more liberty today than I did before Obama (DADT repeal among other things).....so why should I vote against him on that issue again?
What civil liberties has he taken away that you had in 2008 but now don't?
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
TP has made some inroads in the Republican party, so that's an accomplishment for them. Can't say the same for OWS, though.
Do you feel that Bush took away some aspects of your civil liberties during his two terms?
Wafflecakes
Member
Idealists are like concept cars....they are nice and fun to have around....keeps you up to date on the trends....but they never go into production and no one ever would actually be able to afford one so who cares?
True though I was more referring to the Constitution party folks (they bounce between that party and GOP constantly....I have a brother who does it).
I mean. What exactly has the Tea Party accomplished by gaining influence in the party? It cost the GOP the Senate last election. Nothing they want is actually getting done. Sounds like a massive flop to me.
True though I was more referring to the Constitution party folks (they bounce between that party and GOP constantly....I have a brother who does it).
I mean. What exactly has the Tea Party accomplished by gaining influence in the party? It cost the GOP the Senate last election. Nothing they want is actually getting done. Sounds like a massive flop to me.
Unhandled Exception
Member
In 2008 it was still illegal to indefinitely detain American citizens based on incredibly vague labels believe it or not. It's perfectly legal now. Funny how you only focus on the civil liberties part. Can't play semantics about bombings? Shame.
Arrowgigantic
Member
Everybody who thinks America would somehow be magically better with a voting process that encourages a multi-party system has not looked at how countries with multi-party systems actually get along in practice. The naivete is astounding.
Just as an example, the parliament in Greece has 300 seats, and a party that runs on a platform of open, unabashed neo-Nazism holds 18 of them. Let's bring that to America, sure.
Third party in practice is a distinction without a difference at best. Not being D or R doesn't make you somehow more noble, it makes you rigidly ideological and useless.
Just as an example, the parliament in Greece has 300 seats, and a party that runs on a platform of open, unabashed neo-Nazism holds 18 of them. Let's bring that to America, sure.
Third party in practice is a distinction without a difference at best. Not being D or R doesn't make you somehow more noble, it makes you rigidly ideological and useless.
This is sadly true. The big difference between then and now is that people know that they're subject to these actions. Ignorance was bliss.
I'm not a fan of manipulating the facts to make people look foolish, but people should educate themselves on the issues.
I'd be interested to know just how much of the electorate would vote green if "the man" wasn't "keeping them down".
You don't? The Patriot Act, TSA, warrantless wiretaps, forcing ISPs to give over information without a court order... Just off the top of my head. Don't forget renditions and covert prisons.
Actually it was legal. I won't argue that the wording in the NDAA didn't vague it up more, but you could still be held for providing support to terrorists and that could be as broadly defined as they wanted it to be.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Same reason progressives wanted to replace the blue dogs with "real" liberals.
Wafflecakes
Member
It wouldn't be better necessarily. It would be more open though...and fairer.
I think being fairer is a good enough reason in and of itself....even if it doesn't fix the main problems.
Oh yeah I get that. My point was that these side groups on both sides are flops who never accomplish anything.
Henchmen21
Banned
The Tea party was not a 3rd party. It was a movement started from within the republican party that has now pretty much taken complete control of the republican party.
Way to go.
I also love the "Romney would do it too" meme.
We as a people need to STOP giving a fuck whether one side or the other does it and not put up with it no matter who does it.
I kind of miss the hysteria of 5 years ago. This complacency is fucked up. I almost feel like if McCain had won enough people on the left would be more critical of all this drone, Patriot Act, NDAA shit going on.
Deified Data
Banned
We've been having the same discussion for weeks now. From now on I propose attaching the following disclaimer to the OP of all threads discussing third party politics:
Am I missing anything?
That said, when indefinite detention was challenged in court and the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Obama had the ruling appealed. So regardless of your stance on NDAA, he owns at least that much of it.
- Yes, we know the current electoral system favors only two parties and that if a third party grew large enough to become viable, they would simply replace the other as one of the major two parties. Massive electoral reform is needed before true third parties can become viable, namely the installation of an instant-runoff voting system. This is one of our aims.
- Yes, we know that voting for a third party in a swing state technically aids the "enemy" and acts against our best interests. This is why such a course of action is rarely encouraged by any of GAF's third party supporters, while opponents batter this strawman into the ground.
- No one here expects their chosen third party candidate to win the 2012 election. We vote for third parties as an investment in their future and/or as a protest to the current electoral system and its chosen duopoly. We are not flakes who wants Jill Stein to swoop down and solve all of the nation's ills. We recognize how deeply ingrained the corrupting influence of corporate money is in Washington. We vote third party despite this.
- The Tea Party is a sham political movement bought and paid for by corporate interests and not something any true third party movement should aspire to. What works for them would not work for the Green party, for example. Nominate candidates with a vested interest in seeing the rich get richer and the poor get poorer? Anyone who believes this took any serious degree of political finesse and acumen are delusional. The Tea Party did not "reform" the system, or bend it to its will. The Tea Party is the system, disguised as a grass roots movement.
Am I missing anything?
That said, when indefinite detention was challenged in court and the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Obama had the ruling appealed. So regardless of your stance on NDAA, he owns at least that much of it.
I read perfectly fine, he made it a separate sentence. He should learn to use punctuation properly.
Wafflecakes
Member
You don't know many hardcore Tea Partiers then.....the ones I know have very little to no all allegiance to the GOP. The ones I know are voting constitution party this cycle.
I am just talking the extreme ones mind you.
Either way. Tea party is still a massive flop. For all their "influence" they have hurt their causes way more than they have helped. Just like the green party would if they took off.
Henchmen21
Banned
Doesn't matter. It's still a fact that it was started from within the republican party has a way of taking control of said party.
I doubt the TP around here even knows what the constitution party is...
Wafflecakes
Member
I think we are off track a bit....lol....
Not sure how we got here.
Not sure how we got here.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
"Just words"
You're wrong. The drone attacks are well received by the American public as a much more clean tactic of a larger 'war on terror'. This isn't because a Democrat is in office, it's because it IS a better way to take out targets.
The Patriot Act will, at this point, be a staple of governmental power. No President will be in a position to do anything about it because in addition to empowering the Federal Branch it also grants some pretty appealing powers to the Congressional Branch. In practice, the Patriot Act has very little impact on individual American's lives and will continue to have very little impact.
NDAA, while scary sounding, is just an extension of the powers granted in the Patriot Act and were rammed through by congress. Obama was able to, at the very least, get language changed in the bill to be more specific about what it would allow the government to do. For that you should thank him, instead of setting up his more ignorant supporters in a game of Republican-style 'gotcha' politics.
elrechazado
Banned
but signing statements!!!1
Wafflecakes
Member
Well....there are the "Tea Party" come lately's who jumped on board after it got popular ...bandwagon and shit. Then there are the TEA PARTY. Not really the same deal. I am talking full on libertarian...legalize drugs....make people pay for their own education....flat tax....full on crazy Tea Party folks that are the driving core.
Pft take you reason and logic out of this thread.
THIS THREAD IS ABOUT OUTRAGE AND DISGUST DAMMIT!
Deified Data
Banned
You're doing it wrong! The Tea Party is supposed to be the shining beacon of how to enact change in one of the two established parties and proof of why third parties are meaningless...
Green Party folks should work within the Democratic party to get their policies adopted. Start a grass roots campaign, get your candidates elected in primaries, get them elected into office. Sham movement or not, that's what people who believe in the Tea Party and voted in all of those representatives two years ago did.
The benefit of the two party system is that is curtails radicalism and forces people to work together within the auspices of one of the two parties to get their policies adopted. The American government system was designed to make it difficult to do anything. It moves slow. But that's part of the reason it has been such a stable democracy thus far.
The benefit of the two party system is that is curtails radicalism and forces people to work together within the auspices of one of the two parties to get their policies adopted. The American government system was designed to make it difficult to do anything. It moves slow. But that's part of the reason it has been such a stable democracy thus far.
Arrowgigantic
Member
It's never going to be a settled matter until the Supreme Court rules on it, and Obama knows this.
polyh3dron
Banned
The Patriot Act has been use on people in the inner cities to basically give them much worse sentences for crimes than they would've had before. People that have nothing to do with terrorism.
Wafflecakes
Member
Why can't I believe both are equally stupid?
(I am a fairly moderate guy so have a lot of contempt for the fringes in general on both sides....whether they be 3rd parties or just movements)
It's nice living in a country where you don't have to vote tactically. You guys need some Hare-Clark up in yo shit.
elrechazado
Banned
The administration has no duty to defend what it feels is unconstitutional legislation. See: doma
I don't think it's that it's a better way of taking out terrorists. They're not incredibly effective. Rather, I think the public approves of them because they're tired of our troops dying "over there" when a lot of people are tired of constant fighting.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
I dunno know about that.
http://www.salon.com/2012/02/08/repulsive_progressive_hypocrisy/
Repulsive progressive hypocrisy
A new poll shows deep support among liberals for the very Bush/Cheney policies they once pretended to despise
By Glenn Greenwald
Wafflecakes
Member
Thing is....DOMA is unpopular.
No one gives a shit about NDAA except neogaf.....can't be high on their priorities (plus if they tried to NOT defend it republicans would be ALL OVER them for being weak on defense).
- Status