How the 'New York Times' Sandbagged Bernie Sanders - Polidicks

America truly is the pinnacle of democracy. Your political leanings aren't represented by the 2 biggest candidates? No problem, just toss away your integrity and vote [I]tactically[/I] in a kind hearted attempt at saving your country from the greater evil, while undermining the entire point in voting to begin with.

[QUOTE=kaskade700;49960356]America truly is the pinnacle of democracy. Your political leanings aren't represented by the 2 biggest candidates? No problem, just toss away your integrity and vote [I]tactically[/I] in a kind hearted attempt at saving your country from the greater evil, while undermining the entire point in voting to begin with.[/QUOTE] What makes it worse is that the Republicans and Democrats have set in place laws to prevent federal funding to 'minor parties' or rather 'third parties' unless they receive a percentage of the popular vote in presidential or other federal elections which I believe is 5%? In states you have to purchase your place on the ballots as well, and in Ohio Kasich had a third party kicked off the ballot despite having the required signatures on a petition. It's all completely rigged and people allow it to continue.

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49956855]You could go on about the "establishment" all you want. At the end of the day, we have to vote with who we got. And what Scare-mongering? Trump really would just fuck this country up to 11, you really want to live in that country?[/QUOTE] We don't [i]have[/i] to do shit if we choose not to. Also, the point of voting for Trump at this point is exactly to have him fuck the country up. The system we're living under is broken-- both in terms of the government and the economy. It's declining as is with or without Trump, and even the people who say "vote for Clinton" admit that this is true, and that if she wins, she'll be presiding over the continuing decline of the country. The difference with getting Trump into office is that he's guaranteed to run it into the ground; we're not going to decline under him, we're going to fucking crash. And that's exactly what needs to happen: this whole rotten establishment needs to be destroyed. Sanders gave us an opportunity to clean it up from the inside out, but it seems like we've pissed that opportunity away now that he's slipping behind Clinton. So that's that as far as he goes. If we can't clean it up from the inside out, let's get somebody into office who is sure to wreck it from the inside out. Once we're sunk, we can pick up the pieces and start over. A collapse is inevitable for us anyway. Nobody debates this. It was just a question of whether or not it would happen sooner or later. Trump winning guarantees it'll collapse sooner; Clinton winning guarantees later. And personally, I'd rather not wait until later to be living in hell. I'd rather we crash now, get it done and over with as soon as possible while I'm still young and while tens of millions of the American youth are still young, and then we can begin picking up the pieces and work to create something new from the ashes of the old order of things. Why postpone it? Why live foolishly under oblivious optimism that lies and says "well things might not be all that bad if we keep playing the same old game of American two-party democracy, and they might change eventually"? Things aren't going to get better. We've played this game for how long now? They haven't gotten better, they've only stagnated or at other times have actually gotten worse. Why keep deluding ourselves? It's not that we [i]want[/i] to live under hellish circumstances or that I personally want to. It's just the realization has finally struck that that's exactly what it's going to take before we can actually make any real progress. This old system we've got is useless. It must go. And beyond that, the American people really do need to learn a lesson about the responsibility they have to not be stupid in their voting decisions from now on and to actually begin taking part in their government and it's affairs. As somebody else said, they need to learn the consequences their apathy and stupidity have. They'll get what they deserve in the end when it comes to candidates, and that's exactly how it should be. If they get hurt and suffer horribly as a consequence, it's their own fault. Yeah, there's a lot of manipulation and corruption in this country's establishment that's to blame for our problems, but the people themselves are to blame for it as well-- because they tolerate it as something common, they don't think and act rationally against it, and so it just goes on being the same as ever, with nothing ever changing, and shit just getting shittier. It'll be a painful stepping stone, but we'll be all the better for it in the end. Eventually, we will have some sort of consolidation arise out of this forthcoming reckoning. It will take time to achieve, it affect the lives of every American citizen, but so what? That's how it was in the beginning, and if that tidbit of history should serve to teach us anything it's that no good thing ever comes easily.

[QUOTE=Kommodore;49956578]the ny times editing the tone of one of its own articles doesn't amount to historic revisionism, revisionist history is a completely different thing and isn't even necessarily bad. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] one of sh's most annoying buzzwords[/QUOTE] No them purposefully omitting facts counts for revisionism, but since they're SJW central, you'll just conveniently fail to catch that one, yes?

Sucks that Bernie lost. He seemed to have good support, but something went wrong with the supporters not voting, or the other candidates had a final statement that had the arguments winning. The best I can do now is vote for the more sane person for President, which in this case goes to Hilary.

[QUOTE=maddogsamurai;49960869]Sucks that Bernie lost. He seemed to have good support, [B]but something went wrong with the supporters not voting[/B], or the other candidates had a final statement that had the arguments winning. The best I can do now is vote for the more sane person for President, which in this case goes to Hilary.[/QUOTE] Not really? Maybe Hillary just had more support (as the polls showed)?

[QUOTE=maddogsamurai;49960869]Sucks that Bernie lost. He seemed to have good support, but something went wrong with the supporters not voting, or the other candidates had a final statement that had the arguments winning. The best I can do now is vote for the more sane person for President, which in this case goes to Hilary.[/QUOTE] He's behind, but going towards more liberal states so it could turn around.

[QUOTE=Reshy;49961215]He's behind, but going towards more liberal states so it could turn around.[/QUOTE] That has been being said ever since Super Tuesday. Regardless it would take landslide after landslide for him to catch up. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Govna;49960483]We don't [I]have[/I] to do shit if we choose not to. Also, the point of voting for Trump at this point is exactly to have him fuck the country up. The system we're living under is broken-- both in terms of the government and the economy. It's declining as is with or without Trump, and even the people who say "vote for Clinton" admit that this is true, and that if she wins, she'll be presiding over the continuing decline of the country. The difference with getting Trump into office is that he's guaranteed to run it into the ground; we're not going to decline under him, we're going to fucking crash. And that's exactly what needs to happen: this whole rotten establishment needs to be destroyed. Sanders gave us an opportunity to clean it up from the inside out, but it seems like we've pissed that opportunity away now that he's slipping behind Clinton. So that's that as far as he goes. If we can't clean it up from the inside out, let's get somebody into office who is sure to wreck it from the inside out. Once we're sunk, we can pick up the pieces and start over. A collapse is inevitable for us anyway. Nobody debates this. It was just a question of whether or not it would happen sooner or later. Trump winning guarantees it'll collapse sooner; Clinton winning guarantees later. And personally, I'd rather not wait until later to be living in hell. I'd rather we crash now, get it done and over with as soon as possible while I'm still young and while tens of millions of the American youth are still young, and then we can begin picking up the pieces and work to create something new from the ashes of the old order of things. Why postpone it? Why live foolishly under oblivious optimism that lies and says "well things might not be all that bad if we keep playing the same old game of American two-party democracy, and they might change eventually"? Things aren't going to get better. We've played this game for how long now? They haven't gotten better, they've only stagnated or at other times have actually gotten worse. Why keep deluding ourselves? It's not that we [I]want[/I] to live under hellish circumstances or that I personally want to. It's just the realization has finally struck that that's exactly what it's going to take before we can actually make any real progress. This old system we've got is useless. It must go. And beyond that, the American people really do need to learn a lesson about the responsibility they have to not be stupid in their voting decisions from now on and to actually begin taking part in their government and it's affairs. As somebody else said, they need to learn the consequences their apathy and stupidity have. They'll get what they deserve in the end when it comes to candidates, and that's exactly how it should be. If they get hurt and suffer horribly as a consequence, it's their own fault. Yeah, there's a lot of manipulation and corruption in this country's establishment that's to blame for our problems, but the people themselves are to blame for it as well-- because they tolerate it as something common, they don't think and act rationally against it, and so it just goes on being the same as ever, with nothing ever changing, and shit just getting shittier. It'll be a painful stepping stone, but we'll be all the better for it in the end. Eventually, we will have some sort of consolidation arise out of this forthcoming reckoning. It will take time to achieve, it affect the lives of every American citizen, but so what? That's how it was in the beginning, and if that tidbit of history should serve to teach us anything it's that no good thing ever comes easily.[/QUOTE] Dull that edge son, your cuttin ma. But really, that sounded like a bad highschool paper on some sort of liberal revolution. Electing Trump will just result in a stagnant administration. Your going to have every single Democrat in congress along with many republicans pushing back on every single thing. Many a foreign relation will be ruined. Then at the end of four years Martin O Mally will rise like a phoenix.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49961522] But really, that sounded like a bad highschool paper on some sort of liberal revolution. Electing Trump will just result in a stagnant administration. Your going to have every single Democrat in congress along with many republicans pushing back on every single thing. Many a foreign relation will be ruined. Then at the end of four years [B]Martin O Mally will rise like a phoenix[/B].[/QUOTE] Dude couldn't take care of my home state. He should not even begin to have a political seat.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49961522]Dull that edge son, your cuttin ma. But really, that sounded like a bad highschool paper on some sort of liberal revolution. Electing Trump will just result in a stagnant administration. Your going to have every single Democrat in congress along with many republicans pushing back on every single thing. Many a foreign relation will be ruined. Then at the end of four years Martin O Mally will rise like a phoenix.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49961255]My point isn't that they're the same person. My point is that "appearing" smart and having people who call you smart does not actually make you smart. Really? Trump doesn't claim to be expert on things he couldn't possibly know? He doesn't make everything about him and how great he is? He doesn't exaggerate his importance, or his accomplishments? He doesn't show a complete lack of empathy, either through petty insults or outright threats? He doesn't show a lack of remorse or gratitude? He doesn't flatter those who admire him and detest those who don't? He isn't overly sensitive to criticism or perceived slights, he isn't incapable of acknowledging that others might see things he doesn't, even when he's demonstrated to be wrong? He isn't haughty or vain? When Mitt Romney criticized Trump Steaks, he bought a bunch of steaks from a wholesaler to convince his voter base that Trump Steaks still exist. He gets in fights constantly with people who insult his appearance. He's threatened to sue people for insulting him on multiple occasions. He's claimed his book is the best book since the bible on several occasions. He said he'd be the most "presidential" president since Lincoln. He said his most important advisor was [I]his own brain.[/I] He values himself at 10 billion dollars, 5 billion of which is the value of his NAME. He has repeatedly stated that, while he hasn't bothered to yet, if he tried he could learn all of the "issues" better than anyone else in the space of a day. And despite all that, he doesn't believe climate change is real, he wants to "close up" the internet, and he was a major proponent of the birther movement. How is this not the very definition of unwarranted self importance? He's threatened to extort Mexico, South Korea and Japan. He's threatened to bully corporations with crushing taxes if they don't do as he wishes. He's threatened China with trade warfare, he's threatened illegal immigrants with illegal deportation, he's threatened enemy combatants with torture, and he's threatened the families of terrorists with collective punishment in the form of murder. And on top of that, he wants to bar 1.2 billion people from entering the country on the basis of religion, including diplomats and heads of state. He calls his competition losers and wastes, he insults people based on their appearance, beliefs, speech, and sex. Despite being a draft dodging rich kid, he believes he understands what it's like in the military because he went to a military themed private school. How is that not the definition of "difficulty with feeling empathy" and "unable to see the world from others' perspectives"? I'm not just throwing shit out there. This isn't a case of "well he kind fits those criteria". He is DEFINED by those criteria.[/QUOTE] Nope. It's going to be the Bush Administration on steroids; eight years of bullshit and erosion compressed into four. The country [i]will[/i] be run into the ground. And it's going to be hilarious, if depressing, to watch and be a part of. For what pushback there will be against him, there's going to be plenty of support for him as well-- not just popular support, but support from other politicians, businessmen, and high-profile figures as well. Carson and Christie have of course dropped out of the race and have endorsed him. As deeply as he's split the Republicans (yet one more fracture after the Tea Party emerged a few years ago), they're going to have to play ball with him if he wins if they intend to stay alive as a party. And they will eventually. A few defections have already happened here and there with more guaranteed to follow as his support grows, and certainly if he wins. If it doesn't happen out of necessity to maintain appearances, and/or on matters of principle on supporting the holder of the presidency, then it will when he buys them and offers them jobs (which is how he got Carson's support; illegal as hell, but he's not gotten in any trouble for it). It's not as simple as claiming "nothing will happen". Doesn't work that way. Oh and Martin O'Malley never had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the nomination this year, and he doesn't in 2020.

[QUOTE=Govna;49961707]Nope. It's going to be the Bush Administration on steroids; eight years of bullshit and erosion compressed into four. The country [i]will[/i] be run into the ground. And it's going to be hilarious, if depressing, to watch and be a part of. For what pushback there will be against him, there's going to be plenty of support for him as well-- not just popular support, but support from other politicians, businessmen, and high-profile figures as well. Carson and Christie have of course dropped out of the race and have endorsed him. As deeply as he's split the Republicans (yet one more fracture after the Tea Party emerged a few years ago), they're going to have to play ball with him if he wins if they intend to stay alive as a party. And they will eventually. A few defections have already happened here and there with more guaranteed to follow as his support grows, and certainly if he wins. If it doesn't happen out of necessity to maintain appearances, and/or on matters of principle on supporting the holder of the presidency, then it will when he buys them and offers them jobs (which is how he got Carson's support; illegal as hell, but he's not gotten in any trouble for it). It's not as simple as claiming "nothing will happen". Doesn't work that way. Oh and Martin O'Malley never had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the nomination this year, and he doesn't in 2020.[/QUOTE] I like how people actually think like this. Why do Trump, and anti-trump posters think the GOP will magically decide to 180 from all the denouncement of Trump and kowtow with Trump on all his ideas and pass them without any question? Why do people think its going to be like Wiemar Republic all over again? Its going to be years of bipartisan gridlock, or Trump is going to tone down his ideas a lot (he already said he's gonna be flexible or some shit so even he knows he can't pass all his crazy shit even if they magically got a super majority in both the house in the senate.) Do people think the GOP is a nebulous cabal of scheming nazi's or something? I mean they have dumb ideas these days but they're far from unified and they won't be unified under Trump in any way shape or form especially ideologically thats for sure

[QUOTE=kaskade700;49960356]America truly is the pinnacle of democracy. Your political leanings aren't represented by the 2 biggest candidates? No problem, just toss away your integrity and vote [I]tactically[/I] in a kind hearted attempt at saving your country from the greater evil, while undermining the entire point in voting to begin with.[/QUOTE] Having integrity means going with the candidate who you think will do less damage to your country, even if you don't see eye to eye. Voters have to work within the system until that system is changed. The point of voting is choosing the person who you think best represents your interests and it still exists even if it's not the preferred person. You completely demolish the idea that tactical voters undermine the point of voting by pointing out their very existence. But please keep condescending to us from your moral high-horse of superior European democracy, I'm sure that will solve the problems with the American election process. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Govna;49960483]We don't [I]have[/I] to do shit if we choose not to. Also, the point of voting for Trump at this point is exactly to have him fuck the country up. The system we're living under is broken-- both in terms of the government and the economy. It's declining as is with or without Trump, and even the people who say "vote for Clinton" admit that this is true, and that if she wins, she'll be presiding over the continuing decline of the country. The difference with getting Trump into office is that he's guaranteed to run it into the ground; we're not going to decline under him, we're going to fucking crash. And that's exactly what needs to happen: this whole rotten establishment needs to be destroyed. Sanders gave us an opportunity to clean it up from the inside out, but it seems like we've pissed that opportunity away now that he's slipping behind Clinton. So that's that as far as he goes. If we can't clean it up from the inside out, let's get somebody into office who is sure to wreck it from the inside out. Once we're sunk, we can pick up the pieces and start over. A collapse is inevitable for us anyway. Nobody debates this. It was just a question of whether or not it would happen sooner or later. Trump winning guarantees it'll collapse sooner; Clinton winning guarantees later. And personally, I'd rather not wait until later to be living in hell. I'd rather we crash now, get it done and over with as soon as possible while I'm still young and while tens of millions of the American youth are still young, and then we can begin picking up the pieces and work to create something new from the ashes of the old order of things. Why postpone it? Why live foolishly under oblivious optimism that lies and says "well things might not be all that bad if we keep playing the same old game of American two-party democracy, and they might change eventually"? Things aren't going to get better. We've played this game for how long now? They haven't gotten better, they've only stagnated or at other times have actually gotten worse. Why keep deluding ourselves? It's not that we [I]want[/I] to live under hellish circumstances or that I personally want to. It's just the realization has finally struck that that's exactly what it's going to take before we can actually make any real progress. This old system we've got is useless. It must go. And beyond that, the American people really do need to learn a lesson about the responsibility they have to not be stupid in their voting decisions from now on and to actually begin taking part in their government and it's affairs. As somebody else said, they need to learn the consequences their apathy and stupidity have. They'll get what they deserve in the end when it comes to candidates, and that's exactly how it should be. If they get hurt and suffer horribly as a consequence, it's their own fault. Yeah, there's a lot of manipulation and corruption in this country's establishment that's to blame for our problems, but the people themselves are to blame for it as well-- because they tolerate it as something common, they don't think and act rationally against it, and so it just goes on being the same as ever, with nothing ever changing, and shit just getting shittier. It'll be a painful stepping stone, but we'll be all the better for it in the end. Eventually, we will have some sort of consolidation arise out of this forthcoming reckoning. It will take time to achieve, it affect the lives of every American citizen, but so what? That's how it was in the beginning, and if that tidbit of history should serve to teach us anything it's that no good thing ever comes easily.[/QUOTE] People who support Trump seem to fall into two camps: The people who support him because he is going to be incredibly effective and essentially force his policies past Congress, the Supreme Court, and the American people and either establish a capitalist utopia or a doomed hellscape, or he won't be able to get his Crazy Stuff done making him a better candidate than Clinton because she lied a couple times, something Trump has never done, ever.

snip

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49961852]Having integrity means going with the candidate who you think will do less damage to your country, even if you don't see eye to eye. Voters have to work within the system until that system is changed. The point of voting is choosing the person who you think best represents your interests and it still exists even if it's not the preferred person. You completely demolish the idea that tactical voters undermine the point of voting by pointing out their very existence. But please keep condescending to us from your moral high-horse of superior European democracy, I'm sure that will solve the problems with the American election process. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] People who support Trump seem to fall into two camps: The people who support him because he is going to be incredibly effective and essentially force his policies past Congress, the Supreme Court, and the American people and either establish a capitalist utopia or a doomed hellscape, or he won't be able to get his Crazy Stuff done making him a better candidate than Clinton because she lied a couple times, something Trump has never done, ever.[/QUOTE] It's not just that Hillary lied, it's that she constantly acts above the law and seems to feel entitled to do so, and like she deserves to be President, despite her legal transgressions.

[QUOTE=Ridge;49961978]It's not just that Hillary lied, it's that she constantly acts above the law and seems to feel entitled to do so, and like she deserves to be President, despite her legal transgressions.[/QUOTE] The only time she seems to have acted above the law at this point is regarding the emails. Trump is actually facing lawsuits right now. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] I think both candidates are entitled to campaign for president while under investigation or, indeed in Trumps case, active litigation. I just think you need to be fair about who you are calling a liar this election. From what I can tell everyone has lied or flipped except Sanders.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49962025]The only time she seems to have acted above the law at this point is regarding the emails. Trump is actually facing lawsuits right now. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] I think both candidates are entitled to campaign for president while under investigation or, indeed in Trumps case, active litigation. I just think you need to be fair about who you are calling a liar this election. From what I can tell everyone has lied or flipped except Sanders.[/QUOTE] Her husband also violated polling place laws in several counties a few weeks ago where there was strong support for Sanders in the primaries, preventing people from voting. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] She and Bill also stole artwork and furniture from the White House when they left in 2001.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49961048]Not really? Maybe Hillary just had more support (as the polls showed)?[/QUOTE] Hillary has more support, it's more a question of why. Is it because the majority of the population, if given the unbiased facts, would have chosen her, or is it that she has in her favor name recognition, the media, the DNC's full support, funding, and the "first woman president" thing?

[QUOTE=Ridge;49962147]Her husband also violated polling place laws in several counties a few weeks ago where there was strong support for Sanders in the primaries, preventing people from voting. [/QUOTE] Come on, you really think Bill specifically stopped at a polling place to black a couple of voters?

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49957755]Again. You just deal with it for the best possible outcome, rather than keep complaining about it. Complaining doesn't get shit fixed, doing shit does. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] 1. Shut up. You're letting the Republicans win by simple being apathetic with your "Fuck everything let it all die" attitude. You want the country you're sitting in right now to burn? Yeah I don't think that'll turn out as good as you want it to be. Also remember, alot of shit in the world is tied to America. We go down, they go down with us. It won't be the country burning, the world will burn somewhat. 2. Not many people like it yes, but there's not alot that can be done to change it. Everyone voted Demo or Repub, been that way for ages. No one ever votes independent. Am I the only American that actually feels like sitting at my computer and moaning about my prodigal Santa Claus losing an election ISN'T the end of the fucking world? I've leaned since a young age that you can't just demand the world give us the best of the best. Sometimes we're going to have to pick between two things we don't like, and just pick the one we think is least worse. Plus it helps me that I understand the political structure enough to know that this is business as usual and it's not worth crying over milk that's been spilt for two days.[/QUOTE] "Shut up". What a compelling and developed argument. You really think I WANT the country to burn? I fucking live in it! Why would I want that? I'm just saying what's going to happen. Just because I'm not patronizing the two party system doesn't mean that I'm "letting the Republicans win". I'm saying that both of them are shit because [I]both of them are shit.[/I] Also, get off your fucking high horse, almost everyone knows how the political system works

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49961048]Not really? Maybe Hillary just had more support (as the polls showed)?[/QUOTE] Honestly the biggest problem with the sanders camp seems to have been at the troop level, there didn't seem to be a lot of organization at the base level in terms of orders to canvassers, phonebankers. Phonebanking is great and all but we had people calling the same people 2-3 times a day, I mean /pol/ did some brigading against Bernie using the berniepb tool so who knows how many people they reached. I would go to out to canvass neighborhoods and find the houses already hit by the grassroots for Bernie groups, or by the official Bernie office but no one ever marked it. The Bernie camp worked a lot on keeping an existing voter base but didn't really expand a lot outside that base. There wasn't too much focus on registering new voters or letting Bernie supporters know they needed to register with the Dem party in closed primaries(Florida). Like countless people would tell officials at the Bernie offices and their facebooks "Hey are we hitting retirement communities or showing our presence at events to register new voters?" But apart from a small couple of events that never seemed to have been done. I think that a lot of the supporters and volunteers are seeing where they went wrong post the most recent super Tuesday but its hard to tell if its too late.

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49957755]Again. You just deal with it for the best possible outcome, rather than keep complaining about it. Complaining doesn't get shit fixed, doing shit does. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] 1. Shut up. You're letting the Republicans win by simple being apathetic with your "Fuck everything let it all die" attitude. You want the country you're sitting in right now to burn? Yeah I don't think that'll turn out as good as you want it to be. Also remember, alot of shit in the world is tied to America. We go down, they go down with us. It won't be the country burning, the world will burn somewhat. 2. Not many people like it yes, but there's not alot that can be done to change it. Everyone voted Demo or Repub, been that way for ages. No one ever votes independent. Am I the only American that actually feels like sitting at my computer and moaning about my prodigal Santa Claus losing an election ISN'T the end of the fucking world? I've leaned since a young age that you can't just demand the world give us the best of the best. Sometimes we're going to have to pick between two things we don't like, and just pick the one we think is least worse. Plus it helps me that I understand the political structure enough to know that this is business as usual and it's not worth crying over milk that's been spilt for two days.[/QUOTE] I already told you that I think the government is broken, and it doesn't help that our economy is pretty awful too. I don't believe in America. It's not "my" country, and I don't feel proud to live in it. I think my silence is something worth more than just arbitrary voting for the lesser of two evils. If I vote for one, I'm voting for the status quo in a more liberal flavor that isn't enough or honest, or I get a political laxative. You can ring my bell when there's someone worth giving a damn about. I'm not going to vote for [I]your[/I] representative. Leave me and the non-voters alone. Oh, and I'll reserve the right to complain. Both presidential paths are awful. If I choose neither, it doesn't mean that I should just keep quiet and that I should be happy with the voted path. I wasn't happy with either choice to begin with. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Kyle902;49957798]Your entire rhetoric of "if you dont vote for hillary you waste your vote/help trump" is so ass backwards and it astounds me that you don't understand why[/QUOTE] "If you don't vote for someone awful, someone awful will take their place! Sound the alarms!"

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49956545]That's a fucking stupid thing to say. "I'm going to just abstain and allow the worse of the two to get in, fuck everyone else and the country." Shit sucks I know, but I'm not going to just throw my hands in the air and say "fuck it" and just watch my country get burned again. I'm going to vote, I'm going to vote for Hiliary, because writing in Sanders, or abstaining myself is just allowing Donald "I'm coo coo for Cocoa Puffs" Trump. Yes she's shady, but she is a Liberal Democrat, she did promise the continuation of the Obama administration, which is a quiet and STABLE administration. Let's be honest here, worst that'll happen, we'll get four years of a mediocre President where year one is just her bathing in the lime light of "FURST WOMAN PREZ" before we then vote for a better president later.[/QUOTE] Yeah woo tactical voting Fuck off, if you dont wanna choose either candidate then dont. Period. Fearmongering for votes is hilarious

You know what my problem is? Where is all this anger about the two party system for the multiple year gaps inbetween elections? Every time an election comes along, people start complaining about the two party system and how we need to change it. People decry tactical voting and say they're either going to spoil their ballot or vote third party. If you want to change the political system, why don't you try doing in non-election periods, when the future of your country isn't at stake to the same extent. Also, I don't get why people seem to assume that the person who is president really matters so much. The party is what matters. The main problem with America is that it's too big. When I lived in England, I voted green. And England is small enough that a few people here and there voting for third parties can actually give those parties some strength. Obviously the Greens are still relatively powerless, but it's going to be multiple levels more difficult in a country with that kind of population

[QUOTE=Kyle902;49958202]Of course I'm not saying we should stand by. But at the same time you shouldn't be helping to continue a flawed shitty system be flawed and shitty.[/QUOTE] And have we not done a great deal to improve the system? Whether he wins the primary or not, Bernie's a success story. It's becoming very clear that the establishment is losing its grip and people are fed up with it, but there might just not be a whole lot more action we can take as far as voting this election cycle. We can still do all kinds of other stuff in the meantime and work towards unfucking the system, but that doesn't mean we can't vote for the least oppressive candidate. It's like the country is a slowly sinking ship, and this election is a matter of steering into the unknown or towards dry land. [editline]19th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=strayebyrd;49968140] If you want to change the political system, why don't you try doing in non-election periods, when the future of your country isn't at stake to the same extent. Also, I don't get why people seem to assume that the person who is president really matters so much. The party is what matters. [/QUOTE] This. Do the political action in the lull between elections so that by the time an election does come around, more people are motivated to support the actual system-changing candidate. [QUOTE=strayebyrd;49968140]The main problem with America is that it's too big. When I lived in England, I voted green. And England is small enough that a few people here and there voting for third parties can actually give those parties some strength.[/QUOTE] I think that's part of what the electoral college was meant for, but it accounted for a relatively small population without much space to accommodate a range of opinions

Either way, I am guessing, nothing much will happen with either Hilary or Donald, seeing as Bernie could and would make a difference in some root causes of major problems like healthcare, education and economics and push those forward as a president. Neither party or even senate and congress will let either president run anything into the ground so I don't sweat it, power is not divided without reason. The "system" is robust enough to tank a 4-year-horrible-president-term, though it may accelerate some problems even more. Before anything to drastic happens I fear more of a presidential assassination. I wish the best for my American FP pals, that they withstand the next president and maybe see a revised political system in the near future. Hope dies last. [img]https://facepunch.com/fp/flags/us.png[/img]

[QUOTE=wauterboi;49958651] You choose not to opt for silence because you think that silence isn't valuable.[/QUOTE] The establishment [I]loves[/I] when you're silent, voter apathy and low youth turnout is what they count on You should honestly vote for Hillary if only for the fact that she understands that climate change is real. Trump would do literally nothing about it and it's honestly the biggest problem the world is facing right now.

[QUOTE=kaskade700;49960356]America truly is the pinnacle of democracy. Your political leanings aren't represented by the 2 biggest candidates? No problem, just toss away your integrity and vote [I]tactically[/I] in a kind hearted attempt at saving your country from the greater evil, while undermining the entire point in voting to begin with.[/QUOTE] Didn't IDENTICAL shit happen in France where the other 2 parties grouped up (one dropped out of the race so their people would vote for the other one) so Marine Le Pen wouldn't win?

[QUOTE=Dzonintz;49970369]Didn't IDENTICAL shit happen in France where the other 2 parties grouped up (one dropped out of the race so their people would vote for the other one) so Marine Le Pen wouldn't win?[/QUOTE] I understand the Danish and American Parliament, I actually don't know how the French do it. Many National front like parties are seeing a rise in popularity lately in Europe, as the refugee questions gets more and more spun in our media. So I wouldn't lump trump in with European parties like Front national.