I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

BTW, Mass 3rd party votes 2012 about 50,000. 2016? 180,000. The tip mattered in states that were closer, but you were not immune to the fact of it.

Always the case that it matters more; no one was immune and in other states it may have played into some of the lower ballot races. Luckily, Mass. had no close elections of any significance this election, but a little less party loyalty in NH and we could have lost a Senate and a Congressional seat, easily. Big reason why Bernie spent a lot of time in NH.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

But come on, just how dumb is it? I mean, compared to other posts Sebby's made?

Well, surely Hillary would have tried to destroy NATO, or something else equally dangerous to freedom -- it's all the same, so maybe Sebby is on to something.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

But come on, just how dumb is it? I mean, compared to other posts Sebby's made?

Meet the new boss... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsL6mKxtOlQ

It's a debate over whose oxe gets gored for four years... who exerts control for a few years. Do we let neoliberal economists with shit for brains hold the wheel (the circle jerk in Davos this week), or do we let the autocrats Balkanize us like the old days? Either way, automation soldiers forward, the math regarding the promises both parties have made doesn't work, inequality continues its inexorable rise, and we argue about who's best to steward a largely rudderless vessel.

If insanity's doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different result, is a hand grenade candidate really the end of the world? Or is it possibly just accelerating the inevitable?

The status quo can't persist. Capitalism needs to either have the mother of all resets, which allows the little guy a chance once again (and resets a far too significant advantage of capital over labor), or it needs to cede to more socialism. None of these things can happen so long as we have parties running people like Clinton and Bush, whose chief aims - above all else - were preservation of a doomed status quo. Trump might be the hand grenade that ushers in some serious socialism. Have you considered that? His failure, which is likely, might be the catalyst for the significant change the Left has desired for years, but been unable to obtain.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You asked why the Russia story isn't going away.

Do you really think we should be more scared of President Pence than President Trump? That's loopy.

Pence is a true ideologue Jesus Freak. Trump's a self-serving pragmatist with no clear beliefs. With whom would you rather negotiate? I'm taking the blank slate I can buy off every day of the week.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

No. Organize.

You think the Tea Party is organized? You, sir, don't know the Tea Party.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The 500% increase in third party voting in those states is one of the most notable things about this campaign. That is a BFD.

It is. And it's highly encouraging. Now all we need to do is create a moderate third party that can win.

[SEC_Chick]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The 500% increase in third party voting in those states is one of the most notable things about this campaign. That is a BFD.

I think that is mainly a reflection that both major parties put up terrible candidates. I don't believe it was a bunch of people so secure with a HRC victory they felt they had the luxury of a vote for Stein.

I saw as many bumper stickers asking the Sweet Meteor of Death to end it all as I did for each of the major party candidates. I think that was a one-off, not a trend.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

I think that is mainly a reflection that both major parties put up terrible candidates. I don't believe it was a bunch of people so secure with a HRC victory they felt they had the luxury of a vote for Stein.

I saw as many bumper stickers asking the Sweet Meteor of Death to end it all as I did for each of the major party candidates. I think that was a one-off, not a trend.

There was no shortage of people around here who voted Stein or Johnson thinking Hillary had it sewn up. Weld made a respectable effort to kill that thinking among his many fans, which probably helped in NH, where it mattered; I'm sure he cost the Johnson ticket a fair number of votes.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

It is. And it's highly encouraging. Now all we need to do is create a moderate third party that can win.

Third parties in America are rarely moderate.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

I think that is mainly a reflection that both major parties put up terrible candidates. I don't believe it was a bunch of people so secure with a HRC victory they felt they had the luxury of a vote for Stein.

I saw as many bumper stickers asking the Sweet Meteor of Death to end it all as I did for each of the major party candidates. I think that was a one-off, not a trend.

1968: Nixon* v. Humphrey** v. Wallace***
1972: Nixon* v. McGovern****
1976: Ford**** v. Carter****
1980: Carter**** v. Reagan*****
1984: Reagan***** v. Mondale**
1988: Bush**** v. Dukakis****
1992: Bush**** v. Clinton***** v. Perot****
1996: Clinton***** v. Dole****
2000: Gore**** v. Bush******
2004: Bush****** v. Kerry**
2008: Obama***** v. McCain****
2012: Obama***** v. Romney****

It's a trend. With the exception of Obama, Clinton, and Reagan, we've been offered lackluster shit for a long time. My suspicion is most good candidates couldn't or wouldn't run because they had some libertine proclivities which would have rendered them unqualified to the Moral Majority assholes and elderly Puritan sorts who made up a lot of the voting public.

If there's a silver lining to Trump, it's the passing grade of the Presidency's moral litmus test has dropped from the traditional 70 to about 30 percent. (In fairness, however, Bush and Obama also deserve some credit. Bush couldn't run from his drinking or coked up past, and Obama honorably owned up to the recreational activities of his life.)

_____________
* Powermad would-be dictator
** Stuffed shirt zero
*** Vile lunatic
**** Good person, but hopeless politician
***** Truly charismatic statesman with mixed record in office
****** Dangerous neocon enabler

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Third parties in America are rarely moderate.

Where most everybody's picked a side and is raving and ranting from the poles, the moderate trying to balance in the middle is an extremist.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Why is an "America First" position something to be excoriated?

I've seen a number of economists rip it as bad policy to the extent it involves tariffs, trade wars, etc. That I fully understand.

But I've also seen a good bit of non-economist criticism of an America First policy, on the basis that it's somehow wrong (unethical, immoral... it's never fully fleshed out) to put US interests first. But... isn't that exactly what we do all the time? Isn't that kind of an essential behavior of a state -- that it act first and foremost in the interests of its citizens initially, all others secondarily? Hasn't our national policy, and the national policies of every other state, been to act in its own interests?

If this seems to borrow some logic from Louis CK's "Of course, but maybe..." routine, it's intentional.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Pence is a true ideologue Jesus Freak. Trump's a self-serving pragmatist with no clear beliefs. With whom would you rather negotiate? I'm taking the blank slate I can buy off every day of the week.

If Trump were a pragmatist with no clear beliefs, that would be good trade.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Why is an "America First" position something to be excoriated?

Let's set aside this question and have you ask it again after the first of the coming wars. My prediction is Trump will pick a small country that he views as an easy victory, probably just at the point when the corruption starts catching up with him.

[Icky Thump]

And an ancient tune from this band came on.

Not a fan of the rapping but the grooves and lead singer are solid

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-F1cYvqgIVo