You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Donald Trump running for President
The sad thing is, in both cases these positions represent the opinions of a vocal minority. Far from all liberals are gung-ho about climate change, and even amongst conservatives the religious nutcases are a small minority.
Ronald Reagan referred to it as "the silent majority" and they're still out there. The majority of the American people, the ones who DON'T VOTE, that are the sane ones, go about their life and they are crazies who think killing their baby fetuses is "empowering" and at the same time don't think blowing up abortion clinics is God's work. That's fanaticism.
They're in the middle somewhere. Like most normal people. Life is complicated, and we/they take it on a day-by-day basis.
It's funny, in most other developed countries climate change is predominantly the concern of non-Globalists. Liberals are typically economically conservative and ethically progressive. Just looking at the definition of the word "liberal", as-in "for personal freedom", it seems to me that the term is seriously misused in the States.
Unfortunately, even in the other developed countries, it is EVEN MORE of a concern for the Globalists, because it's a money scam. In many cases the "non-Globalist" groups are actually secretly funded by the other, and pump their agenda info into the media as well as policy. Thus the reason the UN is at the head of all this radical "progress".
They're trying to convince the masses that their lives depend on this, so they'll knee-jerk and make irrepairable decisions about the future of Earth, and primarily its economic policies. I'm not one of those economic doomsdayers, I just calls it likes I sees it.
I remember back in 2008, Al Gore making the rounds telling everyone that if immediate global change wasn't made with Global Warming (what it was called WAY back then), and that if we didn't make immediate changes that the universal temperature would be like 127 degrees Fahrenheit, people wouldn't be able to spend more than 5 minutes outside without having a heat stroke, and a gallon of Milk would cost $12 bucks or something like that (I could be mis-remembering the numbers). And he was totally SUPER SERIAL about it too!!!
Needless to say Milk is an outrageous $3.60 a gal. where i'm at and it's Raining buckets outside at about 50 degrees F. Yeah man... i'm burning up.
He's not nearly as ambitious or out there as people make him seem to be. Forget about the term socialist for a minute, no party in Europe would think Bernie anything more than center-left, he's way too moderate for that. His proposals are very likely to work well for the US, but I do agree that they will require a significant change in the way the government is run to make it more efficient and (more importantly) effective.
The problem for Bernie is he's having to embrace the Liberal/Dem class system in order to appeal to Hilary voters. Or at least that's what his advisors are telling him. Alot of his concepts are imo AHEAD of their time for America. Yes -- AHEAD.
With growing transhumanism in this country, and computers taking more and more jobs, unemployment still hasn't recovered (people are just dropping out of the system Obama, that's not LOWERING Umemployment--idiot), the U.S.A. is going to have to eventually have a serious -- ADULT -- conversation without crazy ass Neo-cons interupting or Stalin-ists from the left. An actual bi-partisan discussion about "Floor Wage".
There is going to come a time, soon, where it'll make FAR FAR FAR more sense to just pay everyone in America a flat wage, like $30,000 a year, whether they work or not. But when you get that, you get NO health care, ATF is shut down, DEA is shut down, Medicare is shut down, Planned Parenthood is shut down, the Military is BROUGHT HOME (no more Wars), drugs are legalized and massively regulated, and cut the shit out of Government to pay for, YET maintain the tax system and/or alter it.
It's going to be a problem. A REAL problem in the coming decades. It'll just be easier to do it this way. But because it involves using a Conservate "Cut Wasteful Spending" idea with a Socialist "maintain regulation & balance over state-controlled capitalism" issue mixed with a Libertarian "Legalize and swim in money" issue... It'll NEVER HAPPEN. Never.
We might even save money in the end. I don't think people grasp the TRILLIONS we waste on needless Wars and the Black Money that goes to Black projects that is just invisible money, while the rest of us Sheep keep chasing "the American Dream".
I don't necessarily agree with the exact list you're proposing here, but clearly the US would benefit from a complete retooling of the government apparatus. I think you need the following:
Start by getting rid of the electoral college, in this day-and-age the people get enough info about the elections and each candidate's platform without having to rely on state representation. Just use the popular vote.
Without the electoral college, there will be a better chance of getting rid of the two-party system. Ultra-right or ultra-left wing parties are absolutely necessary, but they need to be counterbalanced by moderate parties instead of just their polar opposite. I'd say a right-wing "Tea Party", a Conservative Party, a Liberal Party, a Green Party and a left-wing Socialist Party should all be viable candidates.
With a real multi-party system, votes should not be afraid to support more nuanced positions. It almost guarantees that the rough edges of even the most extreme positions will never affect policy due to the need to form coalitions. Even is the Tea Party were to be voted in, they'd need the conservative party which would defend it's moderate positions.
I was making an example to say how getting that eclectic group together would shake it up, and be more outside the box.
I do agree that the Electoral system is entirely broken. Alot of people don't even realize that the Popular Vote -- MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Nothing. The popular vote only means something if it's in a state with massive electoral votes, such as the big swing states like Iowa, California, and Florida.
I agree the system is without a doubt -- VERY broken. Candidates don't even campaign for the goal of winning the people's vote. People in Florida don't even ask themselves why it seems EVERY DAY there's some other candidate coming to their hometown to win their vote. They don't pay any attention to it, because they are surrounded by it. The reality is they show up because they want those electoral votes, and it should by proxy, completely nullify the vote meaning anything.
What hurts America even more is that they have been indoctrinated by the state department in their high school & college history/government classes that the Electoral system is the CORNERSTONE of the American political system.
So they tie the broken system in with being the true birth rite of a Patriot. People fight to keep the system that keeps them enslaved and right where they are at.
I also wish we had a system like other countries where you could only campaign for about a month, and move on. This being able to run for President TWO YEARS before the actual election, and the media here in America, ALL THEY TALK ABOUT IS THIS for the 2 years leading up to the actual election, ad nauseum.
It's a fixed, Plato's Cave JOKE.
Re: Donald Trump running for President
He's right. I'll vote for him even if its just a 'protest' vote. I'm sick of the current political situation in this country and Trump or someone like him is the only way it's going to implode.
I wanted it to be Jesse Ventura for years. Unfortunately its not but what Trump is doing is exactly how I thought a Ventura candidacy would go down. It's going to take someone from the outside who flips a coin and runs in the two party system to actually bring on real change.
People whine about his lack of experience. GOOD. Our next president doesn't need the kind of experience these politicians have.
Lemme tell you something... there have been A-LOT of people knocking on Ventura's door to kick the tires on him running as a VP option on Trump's ticket.
The question would then become, what's a better chance to beat Hilary? Trump/Ventura for the Libertarian + Republican votes or Trump/Cruz for the Tea Party + Republican votes.
Me thinks there's more silent, non-voting Libertarians out there that would vote for Trump with Ventura on the ticket, than there are Tea Partyers that would vote for Trump because Cruz is on the ticket.
Re: Donald Trump running for President
Trump can't even handle a Fox News reporter, how the he'll does anyone think he could work with other lawmakers or sitting across the table from Putin?
If you are against Trump, he shuts down and resorts to name-calling. If you praise him, he's on your side. As easy to control as a 2-year-old or a well-trained dog. All Putin had to do was say a few nice things about him a few months back, and he was his best friend. A few more nice things from Putin and Trump would have been ready to dissolve NATO. Dude is dangerous not just for the U.S. but the entire world. He's a joke.
Re: Donald Trump running for President
Trump can't even handle a Fox News reporter, how the he'll does anyone think he could work with other lawmakers or sitting across the table from Putin?
If you are against Trump, he shuts down and resorts to name-calling. If you praise him, he's on your side. As easy to control as a 2-year-old or a well-trained dog. All Putin had to do was say a few nice things about him a few months back, and he was his best friend. A few more nice things from Putin and Trump would have been ready to dissolve NATO. Dude is dangerous not just for the U.S. but the entire world. He's a joke.
QFT
That is all... 
Re: Donald Trump running for President
I do agree that the Electoral system is entirely broken. Alot of people don't even realize that the Popular Vote -- MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Nothing. The popular vote only means something if it's in a state with massive electoral votes, such as the big swing states like Iowa, California, and Florida.
I agree the system is without a doubt -- VERY broken. Candidates don't even campaign for the goal of winning the people's vote. People in Florida don't even ask themselves why it seems EVERY DAY there's some other candidate coming to their hometown to win their vote. They don't pay any attention to it, because they are surrounded by it. The reality is they show up because they want those electoral votes, and it should by proxy, completely nullify the vote meaning anything.
What hurts America even more is that they have been indoctrinated by the state department in their high school & college history/government classes that the Electoral system is the CORNERSTONE of the American political system.
So they tie the broken system in with being the true birth rite of a Patriot. People fight to keep the system that keeps them enslaved and right where they are at.
I also wish we had a system like other countries where you could only campaign for about a month, and move on. This being able to run for President TWO YEARS before the actual election, and the media here in America, ALL THEY TALK ABOUT IS THIS for the 2 years leading up to the actual election, ad nauseum.
It's a fixed, Plato's Cave JOKE.
I agree with all of this. I maintain that the current system is a huge contributor to the ever-increasing polarization between the parties and electorate.
Re: Donald Trump running for President
Wilders is more like a European Nader or Paul. Hitler put an end to the Trump type characters in politics over here.
What you have is Trump like parties. Progress party in Norway, Swedish democrats, UKIP UK etc. In those you'll find plenty of Donald characters, but none with the leadership qualities to mount anything based on their personas.
Paul and Nader are much more affluent and civilized than Wilders, but I'd agree that they fulfill a similar role (I would say Wilders actually has had more impact than those two). I take your point though, given that European politics are more focused around parties than individuals, you're right that we don't have Trump-like candidates as such (nor would they stand a real chance). The closest personality-driven parties in Europe are probably Marie Le Penn from Front National in France, Nigel Farage from UKIP in the UK and Bart De Wever from NVA in Belgium. I voted for that last guy, by the way, so although I've been defending Bernie in these discussions, I actually do lean towards the (non-religious) right on most issues. But the amount of crazy on the right in the US is just too insane for me, and it needs to be counterbalanced by a moderate like Bernie for a couple of years. More than that, the US needs Bernie to take money out of politics before any real change can happen. Axlin16 says the US isn't ready for that yet (and he might be right), but there's a huge opportunity right now with the momentum he has amongst younger voters, and it'd be a friggin' shame if it got wasted.
Re: Donald Trump running for President
Then you should all welcome a guy like Trump. If anyone is to crash the system, it is him. Me I'd vote for the neighbor's dog if meant no more establishment.
I'd prefer a clean reboot of the system instead of a crash (less collateral damage that way), by someone who actually knows what he's talking about and means what he says. I like the comparison between Trump and your neighbor's dog though... 
Re: Donald Trump running for President
Then you should all welcome a guy like Trump. If anyone is to crash the system, it is him. Me I'd vote for the neighbor's dog if meant no more establishment.
The system is already run by billionaires. How is another billionaire gonna change that. If anything, Trump is the one the establishment could control the easiest. He has no firm beliefs; he can be swayed by simplistic compliments, ala Putin.
If he gets the nomination, watch who his VP is. It'll be an establishment dude who will be the one to really run things if Trump were to win. The same way Cheney was picked for George W.
Re: Donald Trump running for President
polluxlm wrote:Then you should all welcome a guy like Trump. If anyone is to crash the system, it is him. Me I'd vote for the neighbor's dog if meant no more establishment.
I'd prefer a clean reboot of the system instead of a crash (less collateral damage that way), by someone who actually knows what he's talking about and means what he says. I like the comparison between Trump and your neighbor's dog though...
I think most would prefer that, but I don't see it as realistic. Historically changes are less than clean.
So better to nip it in the bud early.
The system is already run by billionaires. How is another billionaire gonna change that. If anything, Trump is the one the establishment could control the easiest. He has no firm beliefs; he can be swayed by simplistic compliments, ala Putin.
If he gets the nomination, watch who his VP is. It'll be an establishment dude who will be the one to really run things if Trump were to win. The same way Cheney was picked for George W.
Probably he won't. I'm just waiting for the collapse and real change. In the meantime I'd prefer a President I can laugh at, and on the slim chance Trump's lies aren't just lies he at least has the potential to fulfill some of my policies. The rest of the candidates are just spouting the usual generic crap, their only intent being to maintain the status quo and look good doing it.
