Page 2 of 4 [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

ApricitiousRory
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 14
Location: New Mexico

01 May 2019, 2:43 pm

I think it's far too early in the primary process to settle on any one candidate, but lately I've been favoring Elizabeth Warren. So far, she's the one whose record and proposals line up with my preferences. But it's anyone's game at this point. I've already been sick of the media's premature "horse-race" approach to the election cycle. My primary is more than a year away, so I've got time to thoughtfully decide. But really, to me, any of the Democrats running are worlds better choices than the current president.

Mainly my approach for years to elections is the old saying, "fall in love in the Primary election, fall in line for the General election."


_________________
RDOS:Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 156 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 80 of 200
You are very likely neurodiverse (Aspie)
AQ score = 36
AQ-10 score = 9.0
Systemizing Quotient = 94
Sensory Perception Quotient = 47
Friendship Quotient = 49


Last edited by ApricitiousRory on 01 May 2019, 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,235
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 May 2019, 2:43 pm

ollychan wrote:
ollychan wrote:
ollychan wrote:
america is too corrupted.. and i dont see populism fading anytime soon no matter who wins.



its too corrupted, out of touch, delusional to succeed in the future. the entire structure of the country has been distorted to an utterly grotesque shape that no man however talented could resolve.


I think what fuels liberals and neoliberals delusions is that as long as it triumphs over conservatives ( one day .. nobody knows when .. does anyone expect biden could change anything .. ) it doesn't matter how rampant their own corruption or nepotism is .. what its prolongated own corruption and nepotism does is nothing but insidious harm to the general health of its own society as shown as during the past mere short period of time that was 30 years a society seemingly completely lost in the course of history .


I for one don't care about triumphing over the conservatives, I recognize there are liberals more focused on that than anything else but they don't represent us all. I care about the planet that is my motivation and it seems even with all the flaws and corruption of the democratic party....of the two parties, they'd be more likely to take action on it and design policies with the environment in mind even if it is more to do with social pressure than out of the goodness of their own heart. It is a matter of having to pick the lesser evil.

It would be nice if any kind of third party had any chance whatsoever, but in the current election process they never do..I've already tried the 3rd party route and I have little faith in that currently.

Also we should be using tech on the border, not a medieval wall that will destroy the ecosystems along the border. As it stands the wall could put the Rio Grande river at risk by causing blockage. I suspect that could increase the flood risk of land upstream of the border whilst potentially drying it out downstream. Granted its possible lawsuits will stop the wall through some key habitat areas and the river, but it has yet to be seen.


_________________
Welcome to hell, this is the end.


Arganger
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2018
Age: 18
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,694
Location: Colorado

01 May 2019, 5:49 pm

ApricitiousRory wrote:
I think it's far too early in the primary process to settle on any one candidate, but lately I've been favoring Elizabeth Warren. So far, she's the one whose record and proposals line up with my preferences. But it's anyone's game at this point. I've already been sick of the media's premature "horse-race" approach to the election cycle. My primary is more than a year away, so I've got time to thoughtfully decide. But really, to me, any of the Democrats running are worlds better choices than the current president.

Mainly my approach for years to elections is the old saying, "fall in love in the Primary election, fall in line for the General election."


I'd mostly agree accept I find Biden extremely sketchy and would feel highly conflicted with him.
Currently, I'm liking Yang.


_________________
Diagnosed autistic level 2, ODD, anxiety, dyspraxic, essential tremors, depression (Doubted), CAPD, hyper mobility syndrome
Suspected; PTSD (Treated, as my counselor did notice), possible PCOS, PMDD, Learning disabilities (Sure of it, unknown what they are), possibly something wrong with immune system (Sick about as much as I'm not) Possible EDS- hyper mobility type (Will be getting tested, suggested by doctor) dysautonomia


Arganger
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2018
Age: 18
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,694
Location: Colorado

01 May 2019, 5:49 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
ollychan wrote:
ollychan wrote:
ollychan wrote:
america is too corrupted.. and i dont see populism fading anytime soon no matter who wins.



its too corrupted, out of touch, delusional to succeed in the future. the entire structure of the country has been distorted to an utterly grotesque shape that no man however talented could resolve.


I think what fuels liberals and neoliberals delusions is that as long as it triumphs over conservatives ( one day .. nobody knows when .. does anyone expect biden could change anything .. ) it doesn't matter how rampant their own corruption or nepotism is .. what its prolongated own corruption and nepotism does is nothing but insidious harm to the general health of its own society as shown as during the past mere short period of time that was 30 years a society seemingly completely lost in the course of history .


I for one don't care about triumphing over the conservatives, I recognize there are liberals more focused on that than anything else but they don't represent us all. I care about the planet that is my motivation and it seems even with all the flaws and corruption of the democratic party....of the two parties, they'd be more likely to take action on it and design policies with the environment in mind even if it is more to do with social pressure than out of the goodness of their own heart. It is a matter of having to pick the lesser evil.

It would be nice if any kind of third party had any chance whatsoever, but in the current election process they never do..I've already tried the 3rd party route and I have little faith in that currently.

Also we should be using tech on the border, not a medieval wall that will destroy the ecosystems along the border. As it stands the wall could put the Rio Grande river at risk by causing blockage. I suspect that could increase the flood risk of land upstream of the border whilst potentially drying it out downstream. Granted its possible lawsuits will stop the wall through some key habitat areas and the river, but it has yet to be seen.


I'd go third party but this time around seems limited on options


_________________
Diagnosed autistic level 2, ODD, anxiety, dyspraxic, essential tremors, depression (Doubted), CAPD, hyper mobility syndrome
Suspected; PTSD (Treated, as my counselor did notice), possible PCOS, PMDD, Learning disabilities (Sure of it, unknown what they are), possibly something wrong with immune system (Sick about as much as I'm not) Possible EDS- hyper mobility type (Will be getting tested, suggested by doctor) dysautonomia


ApricitiousRory
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 14
Location: New Mexico

13 May 2019, 10:58 am

Voting third party in a presidential election is effectively throwing your vote away. I agree that more than two viable parties is greatly needed but the way to build one is by committing to state & local elections to essentially build a caucus that will eventually make federal third party candidates viable on a national level. However, the political system status quo in the USA makes a third party extremely hard to grow over time, especially if nascent third parties just run a handful of candidates in primarily federal elections only. IMO.


_________________
RDOS:Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 156 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 80 of 200
You are very likely neurodiverse (Aspie)
AQ score = 36
AQ-10 score = 9.0
Systemizing Quotient = 94
Sensory Perception Quotient = 47
Friendship Quotient = 49


VegetableMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,988
Location: Illinois

13 May 2019, 11:11 am

ApricitiousRory wrote:
Voting third party in a presidential election is effectively throwing your vote away. I agree that more than two viable parties is greatly needed but the way to build one is by committing to state & local elections to essentially build a caucus that will eventually make federal third party candidates viable on a national level. However, the political system status quo in the USA makes a third party extremely hard to grow over time, especially if nascent third parties just run a handful of candidates in primarily federal elections only. IMO.


Actually, I think voting for corporate politicians from either party is throwing our votes away, since it only maintains a broken system ruled by corporatists. We have been bamboozled into believing that there is a difference between Dems and Pubs, when that hasn't been the case for well over 30 years.

The narrative you're pushing is being driven by the corporatists. "Hey, don't bother voting for third-party and independents, they can't win! Ya gotta pick one of the two major candidates selected for you, via a rigged primary process!"

I guess we're f****d either way, eh?


_________________
If you embrace your inner child any harder, you'll suffocate the little bastard!


ApricitiousRory
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 14
Location: New Mexico

13 May 2019, 11:51 am

True, both major parties are beholden to varying degrees to corporate interests. However, that's the system we currently have and voting for third party Presidential candidates does nothing to change it. And there is clearly a difference in policy positions and focus for the two major parties - saying there is no difference is simply promoting a false equivalency.

I'm not saying to not vote for third party candidates - I'm saying build a third party at the state & local levels if you're really serious about creating one. Simply casting a vote every four years for a spoiler Presidential candidate does nothing to challenge the status quo, other than making some voters think that's what they're doing. Down-ticket offices are key to building party support, as Republicans have clearly accepted for a while and Democrats only sometimes remember.


_________________
RDOS:Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 156 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 80 of 200
You are very likely neurodiverse (Aspie)
AQ score = 36
AQ-10 score = 9.0
Systemizing Quotient = 94
Sensory Perception Quotient = 47
Friendship Quotient = 49


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,651
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 May 2019, 2:18 pm

So far, I like Pete Buttigeige, as he's by far the most provably intelligent candidate out there, and as a minority (gay) he understands the need for empathy when it comes to others who have been been given the short end of the stick. Otherwise, I like Kamala Harris. I'd even vote for Biden as long as it's anyone but Trump.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,369
Location: Reading, England

13 May 2019, 2:48 pm

VegetableMan wrote:
ApricitiousRory wrote:
Voting third party in a presidential election is effectively throwing your vote away. I agree that more than two viable parties is greatly needed but the way to build one is by committing to state & local elections to essentially build a caucus that will eventually make federal third party candidates viable on a national level. However, the political system status quo in the USA makes a third party extremely hard to grow over time, especially if nascent third parties just run a handful of candidates in primarily federal elections only. IMO.


Actually, I think voting for corporate politicians from either party is throwing our votes away, since it only maintains a broken system ruled by corporatists. We have been bamboozled into believing that there is a difference between Dems and Pubs, when that hasn't been the case for well over 30 years.

The narrative you're pushing is being driven by the corporatists. "Hey, don't bother voting for third-party and independents, they can't win! Ya gotta pick one of the two major candidates selected for you, via a rigged primary process!"


I guess we're f****d either way, eh?

The bolded section is obviously and demonstrably false. There are few countries in the West with as radical a divide between the two biggest parties as the USA. In the 70s the system was much less polarised, but these days there are very few moderate Republicans and very few conservative Democrats (at least, in power).

I would suggest you are either unfamiliar with American politics, or perhaps you place an unusually large amount of weight on one of the issues that they do agree on to the extent that you ignore the huge and meaningful differences between the two parties. Your life and your country would be much better if a few hundred people in Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida had voted for Hillary Clinton.

I would, however, agree with you that voting outside of these two parties is rarely a waste. Indeed, if you live in a safe state like Illinois then you should vote with your conscience. But in a marginal state like New Mexico, you should choose between the two candidates running for the big parties.



VegetableMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,988
Location: Illinois

13 May 2019, 2:49 pm

Voting is a meaningless, f*****g exercise if we don't have anyone worth voting for. I voted for Jill Stein in the last election with the hopes of pushing her to 5%, which would give the Green Party more leverage cycle. There's no way I'd vote for any other candidate in the Dem field besides Tulsi Gabbard. Corporate media shills like Maddow will always try to shame third-party voters, but they can shove that s**t straight up their elite asses. I no longer respond to their propaganda.


_________________
If you embrace your inner child any harder, you'll suffocate the little bastard!


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,434
Location: Houston, Texas

14 May 2019, 12:27 am

Hickenlooper or Klobuchar, maybe Inslee.

Any moderate Republican who can give Trump a run for his money in the primaries will also be considered.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,686
Location: The Berkshires

14 May 2019, 8:55 am

I am going to vote for former Massachusetts govenor Bill Weld who is running against Trump in the republican primary


_________________
Idiotic savantism forever


ThePerfectionist
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 10 May 2019
Age: 19
Posts: 31
Location: Deep within the depths of my vast mind

14 May 2019, 10:15 am

I am voting for Donald Trump because he is doing a good job on the economy and I support capitalism.



Arganger
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2018
Age: 18
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,694
Location: Colorado

14 May 2019, 11:20 am

VegetableMan wrote:
Voting is a meaningless, f*****g exercise if we don't have anyone worth voting for. I voted for Jill Stein in the last election with the hopes of pushing her to 5%, which would give the Green Party more leverage cycle. There's no way I'd vote for any other candidate in the Dem field besides Tulsi Gabbard. Corporate media shills like Maddow will always try to shame third-party voters, but they can shove that s**t straight up their elite asses. I no longer respond to their propaganda.


Jill was an open antivaxxer :eew:


_________________
Diagnosed autistic level 2, ODD, anxiety, dyspraxic, essential tremors, depression (Doubted), CAPD, hyper mobility syndrome
Suspected; PTSD (Treated, as my counselor did notice), possible PCOS, PMDD, Learning disabilities (Sure of it, unknown what they are), possibly something wrong with immune system (Sick about as much as I'm not) Possible EDS- hyper mobility type (Will be getting tested, suggested by doctor) dysautonomia


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,434
Location: Houston, Texas

14 May 2019, 11:20 am

The_Walrus wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
ApricitiousRory wrote:
Voting third party in a presidential election is effectively throwing your vote away. I agree that more than two viable parties is greatly needed but the way to build one is by committing to state & local elections to essentially build a caucus that will eventually make federal third party candidates viable on a national level. However, the political system status quo in the USA makes a third party extremely hard to grow over time, especially if nascent third parties just run a handful of candidates in primarily federal elections only. IMO.


Actually, I think voting for corporate politicians from either party is throwing our votes away, since it only maintains a broken system ruled by corporatists. We have been bamboozled into believing that there is a difference between Dems and Pubs, when that hasn't been the case for well over 30 years.

The narrative you're pushing is being driven by the corporatists. "Hey, don't bother voting for third-party and independents, they can't win! Ya gotta pick one of the two major candidates selected for you, via a rigged primary process!"


I guess we're f****d either way, eh?

The bolded section is obviously and demonstrably false. There are few countries in the West with as radical a divide between the two biggest parties as the USA. In the 70s the system was much less polarised, but these days there are very few moderate Republicans and very few conservative Democrats (at least, in power).

I would suggest you are either unfamiliar with American politics, or perhaps you place an unusually large amount of weight on one of the issues that they do agree on to the extent that you ignore the huge and meaningful differences between the two parties. Your life and your country would be much better if a few hundred people in Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida had voted for Hillary Clinton.

I would, however, agree with you that voting outside of these two parties is rarely a waste. Indeed, if you live in a safe state like Illinois then you should vote with your conscience. But in a marginal state like New Mexico, you should choose between the two candidates running for the big parties.


Actually New Mexico is a solid blue state.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!