Moiraine Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 This takes me to something I've been thinking for years now. A downside to democracy is the leaders don't necessarily do what they think is right. They do what they think will get them elected. 1 Link to comment
zoogs Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Enough with this "Dems don't have goals" drivel already (sorry -- but not sorry). Nobody with any interest in finding out can be blind to what the political fights of the day are, why they're happening, and who wants what. It's plain as day, too, that throwing rhetorical barbs all around is rewarding and self-satisfactory. Opposing Republicans and Trump without committing to action; there's a lot of that going around. And no, bitching about the Democrats ad nauseam isn't "action". And no, bitching ad nauseam about the Democrats isn't "action". It's not even clear that the leftists who do have any well-defined, articulated, coherent policy goals of their own, outside of patting themselves on the back for being pure enough to vaguely oppose "the Dems, too" wholesale. Stopping Trump requires organization. Activate the base. Turn out in special elections -- as we have, with considerable success so far. Turn out this November. Flip the House, take back the Senate. There's a long way to go from there, and divergent goals within the anti-Trump coalition, sure, but you don't fly before you can even crawl. 2 Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 If we're past the point where we trust our elected officials to do what's right instead of what's good for them, what is the point? We're through the looking glass at that point. Well said, zoogs. I like to have these reasoned discussions about what the Dems could do better. But the prevalence of "both sides" frustrates the hell out of me. These are not equal & opposite sides we're discussing here. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 6 hours ago, zoogs said: Enough with this "Dems don't have goals" drivel already (sorry -- but not sorry). You can talk about the evil Republicans all you want, but that doesn't have any impact on what the Dems goals are or how they message them. I can simultaneously oppose Trump and the Republicans, turn out for elections, AND be dissatisfied with the Dem party. And that's not a "both sides" or "equal & opposite" position either. 1 Link to comment
zoogs Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Yes, you can. Turning out for elections means voting, by the way. And not for Jill Stein. Link to comment
Landlord Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 19 hours ago, RedDenver said: I can simultaneously oppose Trump and the Republicans, turn out for elections, AND be dissatisfied with the Dem party. And that's not a "both sides" or "equal & opposite" position either. Drivel I tell you. 1 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 19 hours ago, zoogs said: Yes, you can. Turning out for elections means voting, by the way. And not for Jill Stein. I'm guessing you can't see the contradiction in the bolded part. You want democracy except when it doesn't suit you. 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 4 hours ago, RedDenver said: I'm guessing you can't see the contradiction in the bolded part. You want democracy except when it doesn't suit you. He stated it in the context of opposing Trump and Republicans. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, Moiraine said: He stated it in the context of opposing Trump and Republicans. So my only option, according to @zoogs, is to not vote for Trump or Republicans and not vote for 3rd parties... therefore, by logical deduction, I must vote for Democrats. That isn't democracy. Link to comment
deedsker Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, RedDenver said: So my only option, according to @zoogs, is to not vote for Trump or Republicans and not vote for 3rd parties... therefore, by logical deduction, I must vote for Democrats. That isn't democracy. Most of the Europe would say, first past the post voting system is undemocratic, as well, but here we are. Edited February 22, 2018 by deedsker Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 40 minutes ago, deedsker said: Most of the Europe would say, first past the post voting system is undemocratic, as well, but here we are. Yes, that would fix the basis of the issue @zoogs and I disagree on. I'm completely in favor of ranked choice or another voting mechanism that allows for more than 2 parties. Right now I'm stuck between voting for the Republicans whom I strongly disagree with, the Democratic party whom I disagree with, or a third party whom I mostly agree with but is almost impossible to get elected. I'd probably vote Democratic but then that party gets elected and thinks they don't have to change (because they won the election after all). So I'm left picking how to navigate between these options. And voting for Jill Stein in the last election was my attempt to both not elect Trump and send a message of change to the Dems (Hillary was going to win Colorado, so my vote didn't help or hurt her). And if Stein could have gotten to 5% of the vote, then the Green Party would have gotten additional funding. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 1 hour ago, RedDenver said: So my only option, according to @zoogs, is to not vote for Trump or Republicans and not vote for 3rd parties... therefore, by logical deduction, I must vote for Democrats. That isn't democracy. I agree that it isn't democracy. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 12 minutes ago, Moiraine said: I agree that it isn't democracy. Especially when the Dems put up a pathetic candidate too. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said: Especially when the Dems put up a pathetic candidate too. It's not so much that the candidate was bad (I agree), but that they don't elect their party's representative democratically. Neither does the GOP, but both are stupid. I've said it multiple times, it's their right to do it however they want, but when 2 parties have such a strong grip on the country, including financially and even in who gets allowed on TV, maybe it shouldn't work that way. Edited February 22, 2018 by Moiraine 1 Link to comment
zoogs Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 (edited) That’s not your only option — it’s just the one that fits the “you can be anti Trump and *turn out*, and also just want Democrats to move in a certain direction on this area of policy” stance. It’s fine if the stance is actually stand on the sidelines and opt out until some party achieves idealism, or to shake things up until Some Third Party gets federal funding, but then say so. If that is the overriding priority, then the simple fact is that policy is not. Tens of thousands of people around the country were dissatisfied and wanted to send Democrats a message. They stayed home, voted third party, and argued to those around them that this was a good thing. This curious means of attempting to not elect Donald F*cking Trump as President did not succeed, to put it mildly, and in any honest examination that was not the goal. Edited February 23, 2018 by zoogs Link to comment
Recommended Posts