Bernie Sanders: ‘This is not the time for a protest vote’ - Polidicks

[QUOTE=The Vman;51063030]People get hostile is because your decision has the potential to affect them as well. Your vote helps decide who is going to be one of, if not [I]THE[/I] most powerful person in the world. And when the choice is as divided and as high-stakes as this one, people will be highly incredulous to someone who claims to not have an opinion in the matter. People are mad because they feel like you're [I]refusing[/I] to look at the situation from a cold, logical standpoint. That you're so entrenched in your emotional reaction that you (or more appropriately, the Bernie or Bust camp) run the risk of jeopardizing the future of the country.[/QUOTE] you're preaching to the choir since srobins already agrees with that analysis i believe srobins's point is that angry raging rants are still uncalled for; flaming does not improve the situation as it is not persuasive [editline]16th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51063039]You can't logic someone out of a belief they didn't logic themselves into to begin with. I would be an idiot to try. Many people more intelligent and more eloquent than me have explained why a Trump presidency would be terrifyingly dangerous. People from all sides of the political spectrum, people from all walks of life. If none of them could convince people that they're wrong, then there's certainly nothing I can do. So rather than waste my time trying to be diplomatic, why shouldn't I just say what I think? People are morons. People are stupid, ignorant, arrogant, selfish, and easily manipulated. History has shown it time and time again, and it doesn't look like things will be changing any time soon.[/QUOTE] people see angry rants like yours and associate [I]any[/I] pro-third-party logical arguments with the low-quality rants it isn't logical of them to do so, but that's the reality of it: you're undermining your own desires with your behavior

Just vote for Johnson.

[QUOTE=space1;51063098]Just vote for Johnson.[/QUOTE] Bernie Sanders: 'This is not the time for a protest vote'

[QUOTE=sb27;51063104]Bernie Sanders: 'This is not the time for a protest vote'[/QUOTE] How is it a protest to stand for what I believe in?

[QUOTE=space1;51063107]How is it a protest to stand for what I believe in?[/QUOTE] he's against net neutrality and for the TPP so nah

[QUOTE=space1;51063107]How is it a protest to stand for what I believe in?[/QUOTE] You're post read like you were convincing others to vote for Johnson. If it was between him and Trump I'd easily go for Johnson. Fuck I'd probably pick Johnson over Stein at this point. But Clinton aligns with my policy stances more than any other candidate, by a fair bit.

[QUOTE=space1;51063107]How is it a protest to stand for what I believe in?[/QUOTE] Because he's not gonna win.

[QUOTE=The Vman;51063206]Because he's not gonna win.[/QUOTE] You know, if everyone just like you actually voted for him, he'd win. We have a third of the millennial vote, we are very popular with the military, etc. We have a chance, but no, we should vote for either a crook who belongs in federal prison, or a billionaire who is pure scum. Luckily millions of Americans are disagreeing with that and actually are prepared to vote for better.

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;51063291]You know, if everyone just like you actually voted for him, he'd win. We have a third of the millennial vote, we are very popular with the military, etc. We have a chance, but no, we should vote for either a crook who belongs in federal prison, or a billionaire who is pure scum. Luckily millions of Americans are disagreeing with that and actually are prepared to vote for better.[/QUOTE] The third of the millennial vote only want to vote for him to fight the power. Most people don't agree with his views. At all. Also the "Hillary belongs in prison!" meme is still ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;51063291]You know, if everyone just like you actually voted for him, he'd win. We have a third of the millennial vote, we are very popular with the military, etc. We have a chance, but no, we should vote for either a crook who belongs in federal prison, or a billionaire who is pure scum. Luckily millions of Americans are disagreeing with that and actually are prepared to vote for better.[/QUOTE] lmao ask Bernie Sanders what a third of the millennial vote means.

[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51063307]The third of the millennial vote only want to vote for him to fight the power. Most people don't agree with his views. At all. Also the "Hillary belongs in prison!" meme is still ridiculous.[/QUOTE] No, it's pretty true. She's a terrible person. A whole lot more agrees than you think with his views.

I'm just spitballing here, but if Donald Trump got voted into office and did a horrible job, do you guys think there'd be a massive enough ideological backlash to elect a progressive President like Bernie?

Sanders is acting totally out of character, and I don't believe he's saying this entirely of his own free will. Pardon the tweet from Stein, but I can't find this quote anywhere else: [media]https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/status/752946922500096000[/media] The fact that he's saying "don't vote third party" now tells me one of two things: he really is a backstabbing traitor and politician after all, or someone's preparing all his speeches for him now. I'd really rather not believe the former.

[QUOTE=lavacano;51063333]The fact that he's saying "don't vote third party" now tells me one of two things: he really is a backstabbing traitor and politician after all, or someone's preparing all his speeches for him now. I'd really rather not believe the former.[/QUOTE] That quote is from 1989 and the current election is extremely unique in what a terrible alternative Trump is. You can't really blame the guy for trying to mobilize his base to prevent what might be the worst possible presidency in American history, even if it is a violation of his general principles.

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;51063291]You know, if everyone just like you actually voted for him, he'd win. We have a third of the millennial vote, we are very popular with the military, etc. We have a chance, but no, we should vote for either a crook who belongs in federal prison, or a billionaire who is pure scum. Luckily millions of Americans are disagreeing with that and actually are prepared to vote for better.[/QUOTE] Consider the following: a) To the mainstream American, Trump and Clinton are the only two candidates. The vast majority of Americans either don't know about or don't care about third party candidates. b) People who are aware of 3rd parties are afraid of the spoiler effect. They don't want to sap votes from the person more likely to win. c) Even if [I]every[/I] Millennial decided to vote third party, would all of them want to vote for Johnson? What about people wanting to vote for Stein, or write in Bernie, or vote Vermin Supreme? It has been said before, but it bears repeating: There is an enormous statistical bias against third party candidates due to the way first past the post voting works. I can appreciate your want for change, but election time is [I]too late.[/I] You need to be organizing demonstrations, mailing your congressmen, getting the word out there and getting people active if you actually want to radically affect the government, but you need to be doing this [I]years[/I] before the election is at hand.

[QUOTE=lavacano;51063333]Sanders is acting totally out of character, and I don't believe he's saying this entirely of his own free will. Pardon the tweet from Stein, but I can't find this quote anywhere else: The fact that he's saying "don't vote third party" now tells me one of two things: he really is a backstabbing traitor and politician after all, or someone's preparing all his speeches for him now. I'd really rather not believe the former.[/QUOTE] This reminds me of a big mass message I read in a stranger's email account during the primaries. Here are some snippets: [QUOTE]IT'S TIME FOR A FRIDAY rant, and what better target than the free ride given to Bernie Sanders, portrayed by adoring fans in the media as a feisty, crotchety old rebel who wants to reform a corrupt system. Wrong – he's a snarling demagogue, willing to drag down a party he never really joined, the beneficiary of an astonishing pass – until recently – from a media that never scrutinized the absurdity of his tax and spending proposals. ...Democrats face a bruising fight in Philadelphia, with Sanders pushing hard for a platform that would push Hillary Clinton even farther to the left. Sanders has convinced his army of young supporters that the party is corrupt and corporatist; he claims his campaign has been treated unfairly (even though Clinton has won 3 million more votes than him). This sense of grievance will persist long past November, even if he and Elizabeth Warren ultimately endorse Clinton. ...Sanders wants to blow up the party – he's not subtle about this – and his legacy may be that a generation of young voters will push for an activist agenda for years to come. ...will Sanders endorse Clinton this summer? Probably, but it may not be enthusiastic; he will warn that Donald Trump would be far worse for the country. By then the damage will be done – Sanders has, dishonestly, convinced his legions that the deck was stacked against his campaign, and his supporters may not vote in November; some may even vote for Trump, who also says he wants to blow up the system. MAKE NO MISTAKE: Bernie Sanders has inflicted enormous damage on Clinton and the party – and this is still another reason why Clinton, who looked like a shoo-in this winter, is in serious trouble as summer begins.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Chonch;51063328]I'm just spitballing here, but if Donald Trump got voted into office and did a horrible job, do you guys think there'd be a massive enough ideological backlash to elect a progressive President like Bernie?[/QUOTE] As much of a chance as Donald Trump doing a horrible job would push Republicans back to voting for establishment favorites along the lines of a Cruz, Rubio, or even Kasich. I've seen some nominal progressives defend their choice of Trump with similar logic, that after a disasterous Trump presidency Americans will be hungry for a progressive president but I really don't see that happening. More likely in my view point is that the right-ward shift in American politics would have Democrats nominate someone to the right even of Clinton and Republicans go with an establishment pick. It's hard to say for sure though. [QUOTE=lavacano;51063333]Sanders is acting totally out of character, and I don't believe he's saying this entirely of his own free will. Pardon the tweet from Stein, but I can't find this quote anywhere else: The fact that he's saying "don't vote third party" now tells me one of two things: he really is a backstabbing traitor and politician after all, or someone's preparing all his speeches for him now. I'd really rather not believe the former.[/QUOTE] Reminder that this is the guy that has voted along Democrat party lines for pretty much his entire career. The third scenario is that he is simply playing party politics like he has his entire legislative career and truly sees Trump as such a regressive candidate that he would favor Clinton.

[QUOTE=srobins;51063338]That quote is from 1989 and the current election is extremely unique in what a terrible alternative Trump is. You can't really blame the guy for trying to mobilize his base to prevent what might be the worst possible presidency in American history, even if it is a violation of his general principles.[/QUOTE] I'm not particularly scared of Trump because I don't reckon he's going to win. - [url=http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-millennials-pose-challenges-trump-clinton-n649046]Millenials fucking hate the guy.[/url] Last I heard, he was even in fourth place in the polls among voters under 35. You can't win an election when you're polling that badly among young people. Clinton isn't doing so well either, but... - ...even as fractured as the political landscape is nowadays, Clinton still has more solid support than Trump. Sanders supporters (especially older ones) are at least willing to vote for Clinton, if begrudgingly, and I even admit that if Stein was conveniently removed from the race somehow before election day, I'd probably vote Clinton. - Meanwhile, establishment Repubs aren't quite so happy with their candidate. [url=http://www.smobserved.com/story/2016/08/10/news/romney-mccain-bush-other-major-republicans-set-to-endorse-libertarian-gary-johnson-for-president/1713.html]Many of them, including Romney and both President Bushes are ready to endorse Gary Johnson over Trump.[/url] Combined with the fact that Johnson made it onto the ballot nationwide, and the fact that he's probably going to make it into the debates if he keeps his current momentum, and I imagine the Republicans will be a third party again soon. The possibility exists that Sanders is just not fully aware of all this, but he's a smart man, so I doubt it. [editline]16th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Chonch;51063368]This reminds me of a big mass message I read in a stranger's email account during the primaries. Here are some snippets:[/QUOTE] I feel like this is a giant scoff at the "Sanders is a traitor" thing. And honestly, I want to scoff right along with you. But this is a very real and growing sentiment among his former supporters, and something that has to be taken into consideration - people that Sanders brought into politics are now absolutely certain that Sanders is just as corrupt and corporate as Clinton, or he would not have endorsed her, never mind that whole "I'll just endorse the winner" promise he made in 2015.

[QUOTE=lavacano;51063333]Sanders is acting totally out of character, and I don't believe he's saying this entirely of his own free will. Pardon the tweet from Stein, but I can't find this quote anywhere else: The fact that he's saying "don't vote third party" now tells me one of two things: he really is a backstabbing traitor and politician after all, or someone's preparing all his speeches for him now. I'd really rather not believe the former.[/QUOTE] Wow, that's extremely harsh. He follows it up in the video though and he's saying what needs to be said. Anyone who is voting third-party and was not already going to do so before the primaries is being foolish. These people will cast their vote and proceed to give it zero meaning by burying their head in the sand for four years instead of trying to bring about change on a smaller level, or pressuring the inevitable Democrat or Republican president to live up to their promises as Bernie said. Waiting until the primaries are over and trying to boost a third-party's turnout at the last minute once every general election will do jack shit.

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;51063319]No, it's pretty true. She's a terrible person. A whole lot more agrees than you think with his views.[/QUOTE] It's a good thing we don't imprison people based on the quality of their character then? I didn't know most people were for abolishing the Department of Education. Who knew.

[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;51063398]"We need to elect Hillary instead of Trump because even if she doesn't have any redeemable qualities she'll do all the negative evil points Trump would do (To an even greater extent since she is bought out by big corporations and banks and overall disgusting people)" ??[/QUOTE] Putting aside the fact that Trump's economic plan is far friendly to corporations and banks than Clintons I think he means that even in the post-corporate takeover dystopia that people imagine both presidencies wouldn't get the baggage that comes with a Trump presidency, like killing the EPA, the FDA, disastrous tariffs, an environmental policy that accelerates climate change etc.

[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;51063398]"We need to elect Hillary instead of Trump because even if she doesn't have any redeemable qualities she'll do all the negative evil points Trump would do (To an even greater extent since she is bought out by big corporations and banks and overall disgusting people)" ??[/QUOTE] Hillary is further left than Obama and is fairly progressive. TIL she doesn't have any redeemable viewpoints, and like Trump wants to drag us back on marriage equality, cultural and religious acceptance and defeat the evil FDA and its foul safety laws.

[QUOTE=The Vman;51063358]Consider the following: a) To the mainstream American, Trump and Clinton are the only two candidates. The vast majority of Americans either don't know about or don't care about third party candidates. b) People who are aware of 3rd parties are afraid of the spoiler effect. They don't want to sap votes from the person more likely to win. c) Even if [I]every[/I] Millennial decided to vote third party, would all of them want to vote for Johnson? What about people wanting to vote for Stein, or write in Bernie, or vote Vermin Supreme? It has been said before, but it bears repeating: There is an enormous statistical bias against third party candidates due to the way first past the post voting works. I can appreciate your want for change, but election time is [I]too late.[/I] You need to be organizing demonstrations, mailing your congressmen, getting the word out there and getting people active if you actually want to radically affect the government, but you need to be doing this [I]years[/I] before the election is at hand.[/QUOTE] With what we have accomplished this year in just a few months, we've went from barely a percent supporting him, to around 10%. He would have much more if he wasn't barred from the first debate, we can still get him on the other 2. On top of that we are local, and state. Florida just had it's primary elections, and for the first time, two Libertarians ran against each other, Paul Stanton (Who I coordinate with, and am the contact in my local affiliate) and Augustus Invictus. As for the local level, in just 6 months we've grown exponentially, bringing in both Repubs and Dems who liked our party. I'm set to run for School Board next election, while in our local affiliate alone, we have 10 other people running for various things, statewide, we have far more. We won't win, but we will be a thorn in their side, while growing our party. You might not see it, but I do, as do millions of Americans, and we grow daily.

[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51063457]Hillary is further left than Obama and is fairly progressive. TIL she doesn't have any redeemable viewpoints, and like Trump wants to drag us back on marriage equality, cultural and religious acceptance and defeat the evil FDA and its foul safety laws.[/QUOTE] Even if you didn't give a single shit about marriage equality or religious acceptance or even food safety, even if you thought all of these things were worthy sacrifices on the altar to defeat Clinton, based purely on their own economic plans Trump is objectively more pro-corporate than Clinton. He would massively reduce the taxes they have to pay while Clinton is in favor of raising them, as well as raising taxes in general on people who make over one million dollars a year.

[QUOTE=bitches;51062894]not insane just naive of political cause and effect most americans (and beyond) have no idea how to use their democratic power effectively[/QUOTE] Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, an ochlocracy, if you will. Sometimes it's arguably a plutocracy. [QUOTE=Raidyr;51063479]Even if you didn't give a single shit about marriage equality or religious acceptance or even food safety, even if you thought all of these things were worthy sacrifices on the altar to defeat Clinton, based purely on their own economic plans Trump is objectively more pro-corporate than Clinton. He would massively reduce the taxes they have to pay while Clinton is in favor of raising them, as well as raising taxes in general on people who make over one million dollars a year.[/QUOTE] So, from an economical standpoint, can you prove that higher taxes somehow impacts the economy positively? Suppose these taxes go to government programs, do you have any guarantee they won't be massive money sinks for corrupt politicans, like how many already are these days(Education namely)?

I still might not vote for her, but in my opinion hillary has a better chance of being a good president than trump does. I can't give numbers but she has less than ideal odds, but still way better than trumps.

[QUOTE=space1;51063538]Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, an ochlocracy, if you will. Sometimes it's arguably a plutocracy. So, from an economical standpoint, can you prove that higher taxes somehow impacts the economy positively? Suppose these taxes go to government programs, do you have any guarantee they won't be massive money sinks for corrupt politicans, like how many already are these days(Education namely)?[/QUOTE] Yeah I guess Canada is just throwing all of it's money into a pit so politicians can do whatever with it, we're certainly not able to fund programs that help people in all sorts of ways and provide all sorts of different services. No one can tell the future, but higher taxes don't destroy economies, we know that because the US isn't the sole country on the globe, and isn't so unique that another tax situation can't be at least theorized to a fairly strong degree. No one can tell the future so we don't know if corrupt politicians will take the money or not but we can be fairly certain that without any social nets or programs a country isn't going to be better off.

[QUOTE=space1;51063538] So, from an economical standpoint, can you prove that higher taxes somehow impacts the economy positively? Suppose these taxes go to government programs, do you have any guarantee they won't be massive money sinks for corrupt politicans, like how many already are these days(Education namely)?[/QUOTE] I wasn't even arguing that higher taxes = better economy, I was saying that of the two Trump is markedly more beneficial to corporations than Clinton based purely on what they have announced as their platform.

I'm not voting for either because both of them represent two versions of the antithesis of my political beliefs. I'd more willing to sell my body for some radiation testing near a nuclear station than vote for Trump or Clinton, that's how much I hate them.

[QUOTE=lavacano;51063400]I'm not particularly scared of Trump because I don't reckon he's going to win. - [url=http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-millennials-pose-challenges-trump-clinton-n649046]Millenials fucking hate the guy.[/url] Last I heard, he was even in fourth place in the polls among voters under 35. You can't win an election when you're polling that badly among young people. Clinton isn't doing so well either, but... - ...even as fractured as the political landscape is nowadays, Clinton still has more solid support than Trump. Sanders supporters (especially older ones) are at least willing to vote for Clinton, if begrudgingly, and I even admit that if Stein was conveniently removed from the race somehow before election day, I'd probably vote Clinton. - Meanwhile, establishment Repubs aren't quite so happy with their candidate. [url=http://www.smobserved.com/story/2016/08/10/news/romney-mccain-bush-other-major-republicans-set-to-endorse-libertarian-gary-johnson-for-president/1713.html]Many of them, including Romney and both President Bushes are ready to endorse Gary Johnson over Trump.[/url] Combined with the fact that Johnson made it onto the ballot nationwide, and the fact that he's probably going to make it into the debates if he keeps his current momentum, and I imagine the Republicans will be a third party again soon. The possibility exists that Sanders is just not fully aware of all this, but he's a smart man, so I doubt it.[/QUOTE] It doesn't sound like you actually follow the polls - Clinton and Trump are tied right now (or pretty close to it). Sure, Clinton has been in front on average, but you are seriously underestimating how shitty a candidate Hillary is from a popularity perspective. Trump is a very disliked candidate, but so is Clinton - Sanders is just being realistic. If Clinton leads the polls by 15 percent on election day, or your state is extremely safe, vote for who you want. But if you live in a battleground state, you should [i]really[/i] follow Bernie's advice - or at least what the actual polls are saying.