Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Lawrence O'Donnell on third parties and "wasting your v

Page 1 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Berlin
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 93
Location: Canada

28 Oct 2012, 12:33 am

Very good indictment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neWrOGccZrM



nominalist
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)

28 Oct 2012, 1:00 am

The problem is the presidential system and the electoral college. The entire system should be replaced with a parliament.


_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute


VIDEODROME
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,691

28 Oct 2012, 1:08 am

Thanks for that.

I should watch that debate. I'm most likely going to vote 3rd party again.



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

28 Oct 2012, 1:26 am

I can't support a third party candidate because none of them are ever neocons on foreign policy, the libertarians want to gut government to levels I do not agree with, the lefties want to pursuit justice that I disagree with.

I'll check that debate out, thanks.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


Berlin
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 93
Location: Canada

28 Oct 2012, 1:39 am

nominalist wrote:
The problem is the presidential system and the electoral college. The entire system should be replaced with a parliament.


He's quite scathing of the electoral college.



Noodlebug
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jul 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 127

28 Oct 2012, 1:43 am

MarketAndChurch wrote:
I can't support a third party candidate because none of them are ever neocons on foreign policy, the libertarians want to gut government to levels I do not agree with, the lefties want to pursuit justice that I disagree with.

I'll check that debate out, thanks.


So being a neocon on foreign policy is good?



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

28 Oct 2012, 1:56 am

MarketAndChurch wrote:
I can't support a third party candidate because none of them are ever neocons on foreign policy, the libertarians want to gut government to levels I do not agree with, the lefties want to pursuit justice that I disagree with.

I'll check that debate out, thanks.


Sounds like you're well represented by the GOP and Democratic parties then. Neocon? Yeesh...



Berlin
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 93
Location: Canada

28 Oct 2012, 2:06 am

I'm Canadian so I don't have a vote...but in terms of who I'd back I'm torn between Jill Stein, Rocky Anderson and Stephen Durham of the Freedom Socialist Party.

Any thoughts on Jill vs. Rocky in particular?



Berlin
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 93
Location: Canada

28 Oct 2012, 2:09 am

Here's the third party debate moderated by Larry King:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoNPO4h2quk



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

28 Oct 2012, 2:40 am

Noodlebug wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
I can't support a third party candidate because none of them are ever neocons on foreign policy, the libertarians want to gut government to levels I do not agree with, the lefties want to pursuit justice that I disagree with.

I'll check that debate out, thanks.


So being a neocon on foreign policy is good?


I'll go further:

It's Moral.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

28 Oct 2012, 2:49 am

Well, voting for third party candidates in the US *is* basically wasting one's vote...



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

28 Oct 2012, 2:50 am

Jacoby wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
I can't support a third party candidate because none of them are ever neocons on foreign policy, the libertarians want to gut government to levels I do not agree with, the lefties want to pursuit justice that I disagree with.

I'll check that debate out, thanks.


Sounds like you're well represented by the GOP and Democratic parties then. Neocon? Yeesh...



No, I think Romney and McCain has always represented me more then anyone else running for the GOP ticket. They understand our role in the world, they understand the struggle and why we must continue to police the world. The best ally that peace will ever know is a strong America.

Beyond those two, even if the other candidates maintain military spending, or get involved in foreign conflicts, they don't fully understand what this struggle is about, and that I cannot support. From Roosevelt, Wilson, Truman, Johnson, Kennedy, Reagan, there has been a liberal continuity that continues today, with the Republican party now the bearer of that interventionist tradition, with the Democrats and libertarians the bearer of our tradition, isolationism.

I don't have too much qualms with the isolationists(beyond their attempts to distort history) I actually feel that we need a balanced approaches, a few less Iraq's, but a more active role patrolling the south china sea, strengthening our ties with Israel, getting all members of our alliances to commit at least 2% of their GDP to Defense spending, etc.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


Noodlebug
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jul 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 127

28 Oct 2012, 3:03 am

MarketAndChurch wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
I can't support a third party candidate because none of them are ever neocons on foreign policy, the libertarians want to gut government to levels I do not agree with, the lefties want to pursuit justice that I disagree with.

I'll check that debate out, thanks.


Sounds like you're well represented by the GOP and Democratic parties then. Neocon? Yeesh...



No, I think Romney and McCain has always represented me more then anyone else running for the GOP ticket. They understand our role in the world, they understand the struggle and why we must continue to police the world. The best ally that peace will ever know is a strong America.

Beyond those two, even if the other candidates maintain military spending, or get involved in foreign conflicts, they don't fully understand what this struggle is about, and that I cannot support. From Roosevelt, Wilson, Truman, Johnson, Kennedy, Reagan, there has been a liberal continuity that continues today, with the Republican party now the bearer of that interventionist tradition, with the Democrats and libertarians the bearer of our tradition, isolationism.

I don't have too much qualms with the isolationists(beyond their attempts to distort history) I actually feel that we need a balanced approaches, a few less Iraq's, but a more active role patrolling the south china sea, strengthening our ties with Israel, getting all members of our alliances to commit at least 2% of their GDP to Defense spending, etc.


And with America being in so much debt, how do you propose we pay for that?



Noodlebug
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jul 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 127

28 Oct 2012, 3:05 am

GGPViper wrote:
Well, voting for third party candidates in the US *is* basically wasting one's vote...


I'd rather "waste" my vote on someone I believe in rather than Obamney.



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

28 Oct 2012, 3:28 am

Noodlebug wrote:

And with America being in so much debt, how do you propose we pay for that?



I stated in the statement you quoted: requiring our allies to commit 2% of their GDP to defense.

That would alleviate the pressures on America to provide all of the world's security, strengthen regional allies, and provide the same measurement of containment in the case of China, provide better security for the continent of Europe, and lower our commitment on many fronts so we can manage the big picture and be more flexible when we are needed to battle tyranny.

We need to be ready to go to war on a moments notice, and the current setup is inefficient. Be it the former soviet states which are in Putin's orbit, the middle east, or to support Taiwan or South Korea, or nations in the South China Sea. We need to be ready to back up our allies in our own hemisphere as well, including Colombia and Central America in case a conflict breaks out.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


Berlin
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 93
Location: Canada

28 Oct 2012, 3:33 am

GGPViper wrote:
Well, voting for third party candidates in the US *is* basically wasting one's vote...


Aren't about 40 states pretty much a foregone conclusion?