My Answer To The Conundrum
The 2016 Presidential Race in the United States has devolved into this - Voting America asking in the race between Trump vs Clinton: Who presents the smaller probability of igniting national and/or global chaos? Who am I least afraid of? Who presents the best chance of survival and making it to a course correction in 2020? Who is the least corrupt? Who is influenced by foreign governments less? Who has fewer corporate bribes in their till? Who alienates me the least?
It's absurd, but those are the types of questions being debated in living rooms and blogs and on Facebook around the country. Citizens of the US seem united in one great national opinion about this election - polls show they dislike and mistrust both candidates just about equally and have approximately the same regard for the Parties and systems that spawned them.
Progressive Democrats and Independents know well why they were/are for Sanders and rejecting of Clinton and have now, in addition to policy differences, a lengthy grudge book about the tactics deployed against both their favored candidate Sanders, and themselves by the DNC.
A number of Republicans feel that in allowing Donald Trump to become their Party's standard bearer, regardless of the long catalogue of openly racist, sexist, bigoted, and xenophobic stances taken by him on their stage, that they have basically forfeited any pretense they ever had of claiming to represent some moral high ground of Middle America and have mutated into the Party of the Amoral Majority.
In addition to the issues above, the Parties have also presented voters with a Burdians Ass dilemma in that Clinton portends disaster abroad (foreign policy) while Trump portends disaster at home (domestic issues) and voters are frozen in place trying to decide which disaster alarms them least.
I have to admit that I'm pretty astonished that some former Bernie supporters are toying with the idea of voting for Trump after deciding after a thorough review that he presents less danger of triggering some kind of global holocaust based on his isolationist tendencies. According to their thinking, while it's true that he has thin skin and a hair trigger temper, there is still a better chance of him not engaging us in a chain reaction of disaster then Hillary Clinton presents who is already (according to some sources) laying the groundwork for more international misadventures. Their thinking is we can survive some internal upheaval, but at least we aren't going to nuke ourselves.
Do I agree with this thinking? No, I don't because IMO it is based on one major fallacy - that we only have two choices. This is what the Party's would like people to think and this is what the media would like people to think, but it is not the case.
Their are FOUR CHOICES in this election. There is a major Party candidate for both sides and there is a minor Small Party candidate for each side. The fight for the Main Event on the bill is Clinton Vs Trump. The under card is Stein vs. Johnson.
There is a way to both vote one's values AND send a message of disgust and repudiation to the Party's that have put us in this situation. And it doesn't even involve "lesser evil" worksheets, or at least they are much smaller. It is simply to ignore the Main Event.
Why not vote for your candidate of choice on the under card? Ignore Clinton vs. Trump and make the race between Stein vs. Johnson. Doing so would turn the political world upside down. Doing so would shock the horse-race, sensationalist media with the knowlege that we know they are full of sh*t and contribute very little of value to this process. Doing so would show to the nation and the world that the electorate will not allow its choice to be so conscribed and restricted as the media and Parties and TBTB would have it. Doing so would demonstrate by our actions we retain free will and are forever rejecting defensive, reactionary, strategic, lesser evil voting.
If any Republicans follow my reasoning, they would vote for Johnson. As a former Dem/Progressive, I will be voting for Jill Stein in the Presidential election. I can live with that. Literally.
*******************************************
Note: Your vote is yours to do with as you will, vote or not vote for the person your reasoning has led you to. This essay is strictly an analysis of my own thoughts that have led me to my personal decision.
Comments
No Johnson all Greens, but thanks I'm watching. eom
oops
Yes Green party debate. I had just looked at the 2012 and thought I had found 2016...sorry.
Here's the 2012 debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEL651ViWvc
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Voting gives consent to be governed.
Those voting for Trump (or Clinton) are consenting to be governed by Trump (or Clinton). Have fun with that. I won't be voting for Stein or Johnson. They have no chance so I don't see the purpose. To protest the top two candidates? I don't see what good it will do. To help build those parties? I'm done with political parties and believe this representative political system has to be substantially changed to achieve any semblance of democracy.
I was reading an article last night from 2012 about Jill Stein (doing my research). A lot of comments followed the article and the conversation was almost exactly like the ones being had now regarding third party voting. Most were fed up with Obama and hated the idea of Romney so they were considering third party, some for Johnson, some for Stein. In the end, we got Obama and the third parties have made little progress. This will go on for decades while the wars rage, the wealth inequality widens, poverty increases, and the police state broadens.
Naturally that is your choice
We'll put you in the "not voting" category.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
I'd prefer not to be categorized,
except maybe in the anti-establishment category.
Noted. nt
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
Our Big Al, witht the cool avatar.
I am cool with that. Not that you need care. Cool with that also.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
"consent to be governed" so if I don't vote I'm not governed?
How's that work? Because I didn't vote for Obama or anyone for President in 2012 and still felt governed all to hell. I suppose because I voted partisan down-ballot pretty much holding my nose in disgust, then demexited Nov 9, 2014 briefly to Green and then No Party. Disenfranchisement goal achieved! I don't know wtf to work toward anymore. Inner peace I guess. Oom.
Edit: updated demexitday was after mid-term collapse of '14, not '12.
All in all,
we're just another brick in a wall.
I suppose its mostly symbolic, but the purpose of voting is to give consent to be governed, to be represented in government business. If you don't vote, you're not giving that consent. Simple as that.
Does anyone care, not now.
Not-votes are not counted. That is all.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
I'm such an apathetic citizen.
It doesn't work.
It doesn't work.
Voting's not about consent, it's about choice. Consent is a separate matter, and the best way to demonstrate non-consent isn't not voting, it's civil disobedience. Stop acknowledging the authority of the state you do not consent to be ruled by. Stop following its laws. And when it attempts to coerce you through force, resist. Treat it exactly like you would treat a neighbor or coworker who tried to dictate to you what rules you should follow and how you should live.
Don't sign off on what you don't want.
Sign off on what you do want. That keeps you right with yourself, and is a small (very small) stand for representative government, which is an idea not as terrible as the Thing we're living under right now.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
What is Bernie's strategy?
I met with a fellow progressive yesterday, who lives in Vermont and is well connected politically. He claims that things are not as they seem with Bernie and that he has a major surprise for us. I'm not optimistic. I am supporting Jill with my dollars and energy. If she takes off, great, otherwise I will vote for the Orange Comb-Over Character to stop Hillary.
Some of the discussion here has postulated that Hillary is better domestically. I can't see that at all. She will continue to support the 1%, she is their nominee. The middle class will shrink more. Poverty will increase and along with that crime and drugs. The 1% will get wealthier, by a lot. More companies will off-shore. Fracking world-wide will increase exponentially. We will lose more of our civil rights. She has no believable program to move towards sustainability. She will benefit by 100s of millions of dollars of donations to her family scam, the Clinton Foundation. All in all I give her an F grade domestically and a very nuclear F- for foreign policy. Why would we ever vote for that? And why would we not do everything we can to stop her?
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
so, when do we get to learn about the "surprise"? /nt
I think they mean that Hillary
doesn't support white cops murdering unarmed black people. Or white people generally murdering POC.
That's the only real difference between the two--well, the only difference that makes Hillary look better, anyway. Trump is in favor of white people, especially cops, killing POC. He's on their side. Hillary isn't in favor of white people, even cops, murdering POC. She's on the POC's side of the race war--this time.
Eight years ago she was on the other side of the race war, which essentially means she doesn't give a shit, but she's willing to play around with the race war for political gain for herself and her donors.
This election cycle is an attempt to take the race war and play it out through the Presidency. Sometimes I think the only real purpose of Hillary vs Donald is to pour gasoline on the fire of the race war. It's not big enough or horrible enough for some people's purposes yet--apparently.
That's why the idea that Donald in office is automatically worse is so suspect. Because the real threat here is obviously not Donald Trump--it's his supporters, and his ideas. It's the movement around him. Donald Trump himself is never going to light a cross on somebody's lawn nor kill anyone; it's his supporters who are dangerous.
So the question is: what is it about the defeat of Trump and the ascension of Hillary Clinton that's going to make that movement less powerful, those ideas less credible, and those supporters less dangerous?
It's a question whose answer is less obvious than you think. IMO, anyway.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
A word from your opposition by a top leader at TOP
They just don't see Climate Change as the major threat to life on earth. On our present course, some scientists are claiming we only have 20 years.
To thine own self be true.
Oh my.
I don't know what to say about that, so I won't say anything except as a writer to note the folksy vernacular.
But on a side note, I did just hop over there and the top of the rec list is topped with, I kid you not, a diary called "Top Republicans Support Clinton" which starts off with celebrating the coup of the triumvirate of Paulson, Scowcroft and Armitage supporting HRC and which then continues into a long list of Republican elites hopping on board. And the comments are all clustered into what a great thing this is and how can it be capitalized upon further, etc.
Mind blowing. There's your unification.
Bernie and any of his followers continuing with supporting the Dems are being played big time.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
1856 All Over Again
It seems to me that we are dealing with some sort of mob with cheer leaders where Hillary's campaign is concerned. Almost like Bacchantes. Thus, dealing with them on a rational basis seems doubtful. I think we should contemplate a sea change in our political alignments that has begun and perhaps is coalescing already.
Some time ago Cassiodorus wrote an essay in which he cited the history of the Whig Party's demise in 1856. The country had three parties by then: Democrat, Whig, and American (Know-Nothing). We have the chance to repeat history. We can have the Democratic Party (neoliberal Conservatives); the Green Party (Leftists); and the current Republican Party (Neo-Know-Nothings). I think this outcome is quite doable and, given the electoral climate, maybe inevitable. But it looks as if we are in a race against extinction. Therefore, we must continue what we have done with Bernie: commit our time and resources to the Greens as the best alternative available and get busy now.
This constant deliberation of strategies is a trap that the left always falls into. Herding cats has always been the best description of our efforts to be effective. Phoebe has a knack of putting situations into perspective and elucidating problems. Now is the time to stop dithering and to get busy electing sane human beings instead of life destroying neoliberals. Give the Democratic Party to the neoliberals without a fight, let Trump keep the ignorant and violent, and build the Green Party into a force for humane politics.
-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
Love your concluding sentence.
Great action plan well stated. Thanks, polkageist.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
The time is really ripe
A third party to arise, and a one to die, like the Whigs.
We really don't want one to rise and one to die.
The two-party system has failed. The reality is that if people are herded into just two groups, it makes it far, far too easy for them to be bought off. Trying to lift up both Greens and Libs and have 4 parties would make it much harder for money to buy everyone off.
All the climate models...
have under-estimated the rate of change. The constant attack on climate science has the effect of scientists erring on the conservative side. Of course their new strategy is to attack the scientists themselves in order to minimize new studies.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Locally an unheard-of, never-experienced since records 1800's
drought. Those paying attention (hi!) are scared. I am on a rather shallow marginal 62' well. The entie county is now on voluntary water restrictions. Crops are failing. The City of Ithaca has a maximum 30 day water supply (poor planning) and 10K students arrive in 3 weeks. For the City, I envision rolling water cutoffs and then colored water (already happening) for times ahead. And this is not Flint. All of the City Schools test high for lead.
Shock Doctrine comes home.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Water is the key, elect someone who realizes that!
In Saskatchewan, Canada, three towns have had the water supply stopped because a Husky Oil pipeline leaked into the river supplying their fresh clean drinking water.
Crews dig up breached Husky pipeline, cause of oil leak still unknown
This is how fossil fuels directly affect our water. It looks like many people in North America have become involved in the pipeline debates. We need to prevent them from being built in the first place. We need governments on the side of the people in these debates.
To thine own self be true.
If your city or town makes any effort to privatize your water
march, do sit-ins, attend town meetings, write letters to the editors, go door-to-door, create voter groups, set up a website, in short do anything and everything you can think of to rally people against this move. Google Bechtel and Bolivia if you want to see what this leads to.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
Hell Yes to that! Privatizing drinking water is one of the worst
idea in the RW profit bag. I don't know of one water system taken private that hasn't experienced both deteriorization of the water supply and increases in the cost of potable water.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
local ordinances
These guys pioneered local ordinances to strip corporations of their rights. local ordinance power
local governments are now getting out in front on this. Working locally, against corporate rights will become very, very important now. North Dakota just made corporate owned farms illegal. Here's a link to a very good article about the history of anti-corporate politics there.
How to start a political revolution
Also, Nebraska has elected a great anti-keystone pipeline activist, Jane Kleeb, to head their Democratic Party. State and local politics will be more and more where the action is. Thanks for a very clear and empowering article PL.
"a war against my folks" The millionaire folks!
LOL I don't know if you're quoting Markos but if you are that is some funny sock puppet he is wearing right there. Stop the war on millionaires! Cue that whistle sound, how would you write it? Kool Aid?
Edit: On second thought it is probably quoting someone else not kos. Lots of folks don't like Cornel West's words, too much truth I think.
OT, but Fizzies were way better. Humor insertion.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Sounds like one of the Black Bigot crowd,
possibly DEO herself, more likely one of her running dogs. They tell us black people can't be "racist", because that's a "power dynamic" - but they sure as hell can be just as bigoted as the poorest tin-roof redneck.
Bigotry is bad, no matter who it's from, no matter who it's against. If we can't get past that, and like RIGHT NOW, we're done for as a species and we deserve to go extinct.
Sad for all the other flora and fauna we will drag to burning hell with us.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
I doubt it. DEO usually sounds like the educated academic she
is, not folksy.
I see both sides of that particular point. Sure, anybody can stereotype and in some very bad ways.
OTOH, there is a difference when someone out of power does so and when someone in power does so. The latter is much more likely to be deadly.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
I once confronted DEO on the hypocrisy of her sig line
The one that pointed out that if you're comfortable in a coalition, it's not big enough. I called her out on her exclusionist, intolerant bullshit one day and told her that her sig line was a big red clown nose on every comment she wrote. She harrumphed at me a couple of times, but I just laughed at her and kept calling her a hypocrite. A friend of hers, mallyroyal, came screaming to her defense (no doubt contacted by her, given the timing and the placement of the exchange in a long comment thread) like a schoolyard bully. He told me I didn't know the woman who was the source of the quote, and I had no idea what it meant. I told him the words were written in English, and they had a clear meaning, and that that meaning clearly revealed DEO as a hypocrite. Told him his racial guilt-tripping wouldn't work on me, and to go F himself. DEO withdrew quickly when mally appeared. The exchange told me a lot about how that clique worked over there.
Wasn't long after that mally accused me of being a racist in a different thread, citing somebody else's diary which he insisted was written by me. I challenged him to produce this diary of mine, and he had to admit his error. I forced him to apologize, and he slunk away with his tail between his legs. That told me even more about how that clique worked.
Please help support caucus99percent!
Wow. Nice story - good for you. I just thought Oliver was
a boring pedant and only answered one or two of her diaries. One on Chano Pozo interested me because I liked his music and the way Dizzy Gillespie worked him into his band.
Thanks for your post - glad to read of it.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
DEO on music..
...She does write good posts on music.
I remember that episode
That bunch has an off site location where they coordinate their attacks. I used to call them the flying donut brigade. Many of them never commented, but would show up simply to throw donuts. I had a run in with Deo many years ago in which she implied that I was racist. It deeply hurt me and I almost left that place permanently as a result. After that I avoided her and her minions at all costs. Part of the reason I used my Cornel West quote as my sig line over at LOF was because of her intense hatred of Dr. West.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Don't get me started on that academic crap.
With a foot in both the Academic and Military world... I would like to think I have anti-bodies against the worst stupidity of both groups.
Nothing worse than an Academic who claims that they know BETTER than you what you are thinking. It's Freud and Yung run wild, with a political agenda driving it that makes no sense.
Same thing with the Military and the idea that unless you do things the Dogmatic Military way, you're just a low-rank, probably still civilian idiot who doesn't understand how things work.
Same mentality, different uniform.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
My first thought was that it was from that jackass BBB...
It sounded like something his ass would write.
I love it when wall street banker types call ME privileged just because I am white.
I guess he is right in a sense, I am privileged to live at the brink of poverty with a permanent progressively worsening injury that will eventually lead to paralysis barring some major advances.
But I am sure he is suffering terribly with his wall street salary and whatnot.
I guess one way I am privileged over him is that I have the privilege of not being a complete and utter bubble dwelling asshat.
But it could have been any of them over there, they are all pretty much lock step with the Republicans anymore anyway...
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
I hear he has a rolex umbrella
Never heard on one. Hell, I'm from Oregon and I don't use an umbrella, especially a "rolex" one.
"Love One Another" ~ George Harrison
Umbrellas are for tourists...
At least that's what I was told when I got here.
And they're right, jackets are better, and rain in your hair looks AWESOME.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
The fact that we don't know for sure who it is
... is the pertinent point. It is a coordinated talking point, meant to shut up people who don't buy into the Identity Politics scam Democrats use to keep their voters in line. Bernie's message about the 99% directly challenged this micro-targeting approach to politics so favored by the Clintons, and which gives voice to impostors like DEO and BBB to speak for "their people." We saw it starkly during the primaries when Bernie was appealing to AA voters, and his arguments were met with uniform faux-outrage like "AA voters aren't smart enough to know what's good for them?" It's a traditional method of mind-control, identical to the way Republicans try to keep evangelicals and white racists on board.
Please help support caucus99percent!
great video that speaks to celebs shaming Berners .
https://youtu.be/yKYabKpEZ64
So many of them have been idiotic in their comments.
All it really shows is how little they don't get it.
They want to chock it up to youthful disappointment for why we won't back Clinton. Or a plethora of shit that isn't even close to realistic. (Bill Maher has been even more dickish then usual for example.)
It's about her policy and practices, and the fact that so many of us find them reprehensible.
Nothing more and nothing less.
The bubble dwellers will keep repeating the reality that they want rather than the one that exists...
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
The one percent are living in the City on a Hill. The 99%
live in an insecure world of ever shrinking opportunities. How can the 1% comprehend our world? They're too far removed.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
Dr. Cornel West's words
This is exactly why I have used his words as my sig line since Jan 2012 when I heard him speak them to Occupy Tallahassee. I used to think of it as a poke in the eye of the establishment over at Little Orange Footballs.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
No it's from Professor D e n i s e
To thine own self be true.
It's clear that the Democrats are the patriotic party...the
party of real Americans - is part of what Markos M. is said to have tweeted yesterday.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
"Real Americans" = the top 1%. Like Kos.
The rest of us, the 99%? We're just dumb beasts to be used and abused and led to slaughter (or worse, left to die) when our usefulness is ended.
Think I'm kidding?
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Kissinger has infected em...
Course he said that about Military folks...
Looks like you just got drafted folks. And the draft is slavery.
Nothing like American Traditions, eh?
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Why does "patriotism"
always have to mean an eagerness to go to war? I could be patriotic, in a sense, but for so many Americans, it's closely identified with wanting to kill people. We're used to this from Republicans, but now we get from the Democrats as well? I think I was born in the wrong country, my patriotism is more along the lines of Switzerland's... a certain pride and affinity for the cool place that we have created and maintain, but absolutely devoid of a desire to bother anybody else.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Sounds like BBB to me. Who is paid to write what he does.
Follow the money.
It makes no sense. Jill has adopted Bern's progressive platform. Why wouldn't President Stein improve the Supreme Court? She would promote all the above things he rants about. Of course she would. I saw her speak (I think to TYT) and she said she supports decriminalizing marijuana (she may have even said legalize, I'm not sure) and eliminating for-profit prisons. Hill wants marijuana kept on the dangerous-drugs list. Or she did last I saw. She's always "evolving".
In addition, the last thing on Earth Jill would do is take money from corporations to let climate change continue. Her stance and activism on her core issues would protect a whole lot of minorities, including black folks, all around the globe, many of the poorest of which live in marginal areas that will either be underwater or in terminal drought if we don't go green and fast.
Jill is better than Hill. I don't see how any rational person can have any question about that. The only question is whether a third party candidate can win this year, given the media, the money, the organization, etc.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
LoL! I should have scrolled down Elena! Now I am really curious
to see if we are both correct.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
LOL back atcha! It IS Dee Oliver!
It's in this diary (not even a comment!) from last Sunday, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/07/24/1542701/-The-black-and-brown-fi...
The paragraph that starts, "I also don't want to hear crap from the PoC 'left'"
I guess she was on a tear, channeling her inner BBB that day!
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
I thought it would be so obvious
it's her true self coming out. What she really thought of us all along; those of us who disagreed with her on Obama's broken promises. Together with her boss, they divided and conquered the site and now it's half of what it was. Congratulations!
To thine own self be true.
Well, the opinion and the tone sounded like her, but the
language sounded more like BBB.
It doesn't really matter, I suppose. The politics for the whole site have become boring. Not to mention out of touch with reality.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Woah, so I was right the first time! :-O
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Yep, you nailed it. Better instincts than mine, apparently.
And I have read them both quite a lot!
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
I saw the "Stein won't
I saw the "Stein won't improve the Supreme Court" comment as saying that a vote for Stein is wasted because she can't win so she won't be making any SCOTUS selections.
Could be. I presumed the whole comment was saying what
would happen if she won. Like all she would do is fix climate change, she would ignore every other issue. Of course "just" fixing climate change would be the biggest accomplishment ever, saving life as we know it on this planet!!
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
If the best revenge is living
If the best revenge is living well, the second best comeback to assholes like this is surely voting other than how they want you to. (The best comeback is voting your way and winning.)
That strikes me as an incredibly arrogant and self-centered
thing for them to say. It's all about everyone else being more privileged than they are and their immediate needs, nothing else. It demonstrates a total lack of empathy, not just for other people, but other perspectives. It's divisive tribalism. The problem is that Obama was right in 2008: we are in a time that highlights, as MLK noted, "the fierce urgency of now." Climate change is something that needs to be addressed immediately, otherwise all human life is at risk. There will be a collapse of the global economy if we do nothing about income inequality. We may face the threat of nuclear annihilation if we elect a war hawk to the White House.
The problem with folks like the one you cited at TOP is that they are self-appointed neoliberal representatives who claim to be speaking for underprivileged communities when they really aren't. Nobody asked them to be the voice of their "folks." If you mentioned their comments to a random person on the street, they wouldn't have any idea what you're talking about, much less accept the idea that they can't speak for themselves. There is such arrogance and privilege in the idea that they feel they even have the ability to do that when most of the community has no idea who the hell they are. Then, as soon as people challenge them, those with opposing opinions, like Cornell West, aren't legit or they're some kind of inauthentic fringe, which is basically what their entire comment was about.
Additionally, they can't see the forest from the trees and refuse to acknowledge how issues of race, class, gender, and sexuality are interconnected. In other words, they do not ascribe to intersectionality or interrogate issues in a productive way that would actually address systemic problems. Instead, everything is only about race or class or gender, which creates more divisions, masking the real problem and blinding them to how all of the things they claim to care about relate to global issues, like climate change. I remember how people at TOP were literally saying that fixing income inequality wouldn't do anything to address racism and sexism, and my eyes rolled at the astounding ignorance of that statement.
I've stopped arguing about climate change
In the next decade it's going to be in everybodys face. By 2025 if there is anybody in denial , check their pulse.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
If we haven't addressed climate change by 2025
arguing about it will be moot.
“What the herd hates most is the one who thinks differently; it is not so much the opinion itself, but the audacity of wanting to think for themselves, something that they do not know how to do.”
-Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
I'm confused
So does the author believe Hillary is going to
I take it back. It's the author who's confused.
@ MarilynW - edited - can;t find the comment to which
this should be in response. Forget it.
Love the disclaimer footnote,
but on this site at least, it shouldn't be necessary. As to the essay itself, absolutely! Ignore the 'Title Fight' and go for the undercard. Don't 'give' them anything. If they don't earn your vote, then fuck 'em. Stein ain't perfect but then, no one is. Neither is Bernie and I have some very real disagreements with a couple of his stances(gun regulations, drone strikes), but they pale in comparison to anyone else(except maybe stein). We have other choices, people, let's avail ourselves of them!
Ya got to be a Spirit, cain't be no Ghost. . .
Explain Bldg #7. . . still waiting. . .
If you’ve ever wondered whether you would have complied in 1930’s Germany,
Now you know. . .
sign at protest march
I'm glad you mentioned the disclaimer.
I put it there because of my horror of the groupthink, dogma and conformity that can arise on a website. Although I have decided to support Jill Stein, this place does not have candidate or party specificity, and I just wanted to make clear I wasn't attempting to change that. I want to have civil productive discussions with everyone, regardless of their candidate or their strategy.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
Nice diary! Never before in
Nice diary! Never before in my lifetime have the two major party candidates have 60 plus percent of the voters mistrust the the two major party candidates. Even though we do not know what Trump will do as President, I still think he was a plant by Bill Clinton, we cannot elect either one of them. If the voters wake up to the fact there are four choices, it will be a game changer. Even if they fall short, a 10-15% showing by Stein and Johnson will put the election in the House of Representatives. No one with the obsession for power like Hillary should ever come close to the White House.
Let's all dig and donate to Stein today and close out July.
They'd need to take at least one state each
Johnson might be able to nab Nevada and/or Idaho, maybe Utah, possibly Alaska. Jill's best chances are in Maine (she might grab off one of the congressional districts if she can't get the whole thing), possibly Oregon, maybe New Hampshire if she can get on the ballot.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
I think it is too soon to commit to any candidate or strategy,
other than "anyone but Hillary".
Everyone should be able to vote "FOR" a candidate. It is what we tried with Bernie, and we had our votes and voices stolen. Our approach turned out to be pretty idealistic and naive because once again, we brought a knife to a gun fight. Voting "for Jill" instead of "against Hillary" could be just another excursion into folly and a waste of our vote.
What I think of Trump matters a lot less than how to stop the corruption and oppression that permeates and controls our politics. Norquist and his bunch were very effective at seizing power by voting against instead of for the Republican. He and his group were always quite prepared to pay the price of making sure their message wasn't going to be ignored.
We have two strategies for reform: within the party and from outside the party. The Norquist model for within the party was a huge success. I see no recent model for outside of the party that had any modicum of success. My goal is to make Hillary lose and to destroy the neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party. I am totally open as to how.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
The neo-liberal wing is coalescing and growing stronger
right before our eyes with the absorption of a number of Republican elites who will no doubt make up a large part of the new, unified, PTB now under the Clinton umbrella. I think your dreams of change from within just lost any shot of probability or possibility. Just my opinion, of course.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
When Bill Clinton threw in the Dems' lot with Rubin, Rahm, and
big finance and turned the party's back on workers who have only their labor to sell, the political situation has been headed in this direction. I think it's important to those who control the political economy to keep two parties, both for the appearance of democracy and as an electoral safety valve, but I agree that right now, Big Finance is oozing its slimy way to the Democrats of Clinton, Schumer, Vilsack, Arne Duncan et al.
This is Obama's legacy.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Here's my only quibble with your logic...
If HRC wins, those Rs will vote against her next time once they have an R to their liking, as they surely will. Also, what are the chances she would still be serving (if ever) due to upcoming wikileaks, impeachment and the like. I don't see another powerful neolib those Rs would support over any other R except perhaps Cruz. Since "HER" backing coalition will depend on them for victory if it ever happens, there goes a second term...all else being stable, which it won't be of course.
IMO we need movements both within the party and with the GREENS for a two pronged statement of insistence on true progressive values. I don't want to sacrifice good people like Gabbard (she will be primaried hard for sure) and others. They deserve support to continue the fight from inside.
As for me, I'm ready to vote FOR Jill. How dare anyone say my vote is wasted when it expresses best my values and hopes for our nation!
I agree with this, but only to a point....
I think we need to make it apparent to REAL progressives that the Democratic Party isn't the party they should be running with.
My personal goal is to make that (D) just as toxic to progressive candidates as the (R).
Why would a true progressive run with the Republicans? They wouldn't, because it doesn't make any sense since their ideals and the partys are in opposition.
This is the exact same case with the Democrats now too. They do not, nor will they ever, really support progressive change.
They are not a progressive party.
They are the Republican Party Lite "Now, with less racists!". Ideologically they are one in the same in all other aspects. (And I strongly suspect they don't give two shits about racial equality either, that is just a useful wedge issue. If they did, they would be enabling voters, not disenfranchising them.
The only color both parties care about is that almighty green dollar.
It's not about race anymore, it's about full blown class warfare.
And currently at least we are getting are ass handed to us in this war.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
I think we need to make it
Replying because I can't upvote this enough.
The neoliberal wing of the Democratic party
is enemy number one in my book. As I've said elsewhere, the Republicans will stab you in the front, but the Democratic establishment will stab you in the back. No meaningful change can occur as long as they remain in power. Tactics and methods will vary, but the basic idea is to give no money and no support to the party, and support worthy candidates directly. It's crucial to deny them the Presidency.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Voted for Jill in '12 and will again in '16
But I have the luxury of living in a blue state.
If I were living in a purple state, however, this would be a very compelling argument.
Let's face it, as much as most of us want Jill to win, I for one am more concerned that Hillary loses, and a half vote against the Clinton's for Jill is not as effective in making sure that happens.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
Any vote against Swillery sends a message
the question is what that message is.
But a vote for Swillery in 2016 is a vote for fascism in 2020, while a vote for Trump in 2016 is a vote for sanity - or at least someone other than Trump or Swillery in 2020.
On to Biden since 1973
Do I agree with this thinking
It's not based on the number of choices; it's based on the number of plausible outcomes. And there are only two of those. You can vote for whoever you want, but barring an act of God, the winner of this Presidential election will be either Hillary or Trump.
Was Bernie "plausible" initially?
Wasn't he in the low single digits? Did anyone ever think an old Jewish Socialist with bad hair from Vermont and a Brooklyn accent would ever be plausible?
I would hope that we could retain one important take-away from this whole experience- not to allow our aspirations to be defined by the limitations of others, particularly when those others are manipulative, self-serving hand-maidens to the 1%. *
*I give Melania Trump the right to quote me
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
Was Bernie "plausible"
I thought so. I followed his campaign from the beginning, having known who he was long before he announced.
The "it is technically possible for Jill to win, therefore she can" argument is an appeal to ignorance. It requires the believer to pretend to know nothing (or, perhaps, to actually know nothing) about American politics.
It is rather like saying "you could flip a coin onto a hard surface and have it come to rest on the edge!" Sure, you could. But let's see you actually do it. If I gave you a million tries you couldn't do it.
A few months from now, remember I told you so, and have fun trying to figure out how I guessed right.
I was clear to say that the chances of Jill winning were remote
so that is hardly "an appeal to ignorance" as you say.
To go back to my basic premise, she is the only candidate running who offers any chance at all of not ending up with either Clinton or Trump and there are other tangible benefits to voting for her:
*retaining the clout of Progressives as a voting bloc
*showing Democrats Progressives will not be gamed and penned while the Party moves right
*demonstrating that Progressive values will not bow to fear of Trump
*building a base for a true Progressive Party of the future
*retaining individual self-respect by not donning a clothespin on one's nose to vote
*experiencing the pleasure of voting FOR an agenda and not defensively against one
*rejection by action and not just words the unethical behavior of the Democrats in the primary
That's enough for me, even if Jill Stein does not win. You'll have to decide what works for you.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
How do you explain
Bernie polling less than Stein at the beginning of the primary and ( as far as I'm concerned) winning it? His poll numbers shot up as the primary progressed even with the dirty tricks perpetrated against him.
People like us propelled Sanders into a major threat to the status quo. People like us can propel Stein to the White House. Never give in, never give up.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
Bernie had a vastly more
Bernie had a vastly more impressive record, running as a Democrat gave him credibility and exposure he wouldn't have gotten as a third party candidate, and I'd argue he even had more name recognition than Jill from his time as a Representative and Senator.
Here's the thing. Yes, if most Americans voted for her she'd win, but they won't, just like they didn't in 2012 when our duopoly choices were Obama and Romney. And all the wishing in the world won't make them do it. You can shout her name to the heavens until everyone knows it and they won't vote for her, because they don't vote third party.
I think she'll do better this year. But last time she got 0.3% of the popular vote and not a single electoral vote; she can "do better" and still make an utterly pathetic showing.
But the thing that's different this year
is that there is a Progressive collective of passionate voters that was put together by Bernie which is looking for greener pastures and new barns. And, large numbers of this group are actively and adamantly rejecting both Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. This is a completely new dynamic. If we are smart we will recognize it and capitalize on it. It's not same old, same old.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
My favorite
line from Galaxy Quest! Always makes me smile and dig in more ; }
Ya got to be a Spirit, cain't be no Ghost. . .
Explain Bldg #7. . . still waiting. . .
If you’ve ever wondered whether you would have complied in 1930’s Germany,
Now you know. . .
sign at protest march
Bernie was certainly a hell of a lot more plausible than Jill,
and he was still a long shot. Even if the billionaires in both parties are willing to play fair (not steal the election), Jill Stein is not going to win in 3 months. A vote for Jill Stein is a feel good vote that we all hope to hell turns her or another third party candidate into a real threat against the two-party establishment some day.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
People aren't actually thinking she can win are they?
I wonder how many know about the Green party, how many elected officials it has, how many its running. Running someone for president every four years doesn't do a thing. I've spent the last couple days researching the Green party and Jill Stein. Hope everyone does that prior to "voting".
I think it's too early to say Jill can't be President
There are still 3 months left for Jill to campaign. At least give her that for the benefit of all of us.
Beware the bullshit factories.
then it comes down to
Either voting your conscience or voting strategically. And I will admit that I have wrestled with this issue. My conscience is the better choice for me. For others strategic voting may be the better choice. If the outcome is pre-ordained between two evils, does it really matter?
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Pages