Bernie supporters, who are you voting for if he doesn't get the nomination?

[Daerio]

I'm sure you have examples and evidence of your assertions, correct?

Because I'm sure that that sort of evidence, were it commonly available, wouldn't be used by peoples' political opponents... They'd never stoop that low!

And if you can't prove it, how would making things you already can't prove illegal help the situation?

Can I prove people bribe politicians to get legislation passed? It's called our political system.

When the criminals are writing the laws, nothing they do is going to be illegal.

[I Push Buttons]

What does any party get out of helping the other party? Have you been absent the last 6 years? Why haven't we confirmed a Supreme Court Justice.

If there is a third party candidate? They ruin his presidency and go back to the status quo, which is them in power and third parties being irrelevant.

In the hypothetical world in which Gary or Jill have won the Presidency, they're already undermined. It's a brand new set of rules at that point.

For a single term of nothing happening... After four years of nothing happening and the establishment's money blaming the third party president for everything... No longer.

Only when you ignore the reasoning.

You seem to be the only person here immune to reason, sir.

In the hypothetical (which you put forward, by the way), they've already lost the Presidency. They've already lost the ballot-access fight. They've already lost the debates fight. There is no longer any reason for them to cooperate to keep a third-party out. Democrats would be far better served to try and marginalize the Republicans, and vice-versa.

How is there no reason to have things return to how they were for them? Your argument is counter to all logic... They have EVERY REASON to continue the fight and get back to how it was.

You're the one that put forth the hypothetical. For it to be possible, the status would have to not be quo. The game would already be changed. They would no longer have any reason to team up.

Like the fourth time you said this in your post, but once again, it is contrary to logic and the self-interest of Republicans and Democrats.

-------

And once again this is assuming the third party would have won in the first place which they never will. The closest they have or ever will get is to upset the two party race and skew its results one way or the other... THEY WILL NEVER WIN the presidency... Even if they somehow miraculously won a plurality, whoever controls the House of Representatives will simply elect their own party.

[Vizardlorde]

Still bernie fuck everyone else.

[Deleted]

This is from Full Frontal with Samantha Bee

Another one of those TV personalities who is so deep up Hillary's ass she's actually peeking through her nostrils. Also, unfortunately Sam seems to have embraced all the anti-GG bullshit as well as other feminist+ SJW propaganda fully. It's sad, because on the Daily Show, she always seemed like she had a brain. Guess not.

Married to a full blown pussywhipped beta male (Jason Jones) too.

[Lenonis]

If Congress is split, it's likely no one gets anything done.

Ohhhhhh, I see what you are saying now.

The problem is I've been operating under the assumption that the most likely outcome is some level of split government. Even if the GOP stays in control of the Senate (which is unlikely) the Dems can still filibuster, so unless the GOP gets a filibuster proof majority you're in stalemate land.

The odds of the GOP getting a filibuster proof majority in the Senate is about a likely as the Dems flipping the house -- which is to say not a snowball's change in hell.

[I Push Buttons]

Which? Sorry, must have missed the,.

Bottom of page 17.

I asked why you would waste your vote on third parties whilst yourself understanding and believing the establishment would quash any advance made by a third party.

[Felya]

Married to a full blown pussywhipped beta male (Jason Jones) too.

Yeah, what a Beta male, flying into Iran to conduct an interview with a guy Iran imprisoned shortly after. Walking around Iran, in a 'I'm with Jew' t-shirt pointing at his camera man. So... Beta...

[bergmann620]

How is there no reason to have things return to how they were for them? Your argument is counter to all logic... They have EVERY REASON to continue the fight and get back to how it was.

Except, that's not how any of it works...

The LP already has ballot access in all 50 states. That's part of what Gary Johnson accomplished 4 years ago. (Yea, I 'threw my vote away' helping to guarantee a third party future ballot access...)

The debates, as they are, are framed around polling. There's a very real chance that Gary Johnson will be on the stage with Hillary and Trump this time around, as he's already polling in the double-digits. I'll bet that picks up even more when Sanders is officially forced out.

It's not my fault you don't seem to understand the mechanics of electoral politics.

[Deleted]

First, I'm not an USA citizen.

That being said, if the USA wants a change from this system and wants to actually show the two parties how their candidates don't really represent them, they'd vote candidates from third parties. Now, until recently I didn't think something like this could happen, but recently where were elections in my home town and we also have 2 major parties. However, this time a party made by the people so to say also entered the fray. While it didn't win the elections, it got 30% of the score.

If this happened in the USA, a third party candidate or even independent getting a third of the score, no matter who truly won both major parties would start pondering why that happened. Cause, you know, what they want most is to remain in power and when someone closes so much of them it's kind of scary for them to think someone could take their power so they'd move their asses and try to do stuff for the people at least for a time, and not just bring populist candidates.

[Xeones]

Bottom of page 17.

I asked why you would waste your vote on third parties whilst yourself understanding and believing the establishment would quash any advance made by a third party.

Why would someone waste their vote on one of the two parties when the establishment will work against you?


Anyways if any of the 3rd parties is polling high going into the election I'll probably go with that, otherwise I'll just write Bernie in. I'm fed up with the establishment.

(edit: polling high being more than 10% this is a relative term)

[Felya]

So you agree that a third party would be stomped out by the establishment... Yet you still choose to waste a vote on it?

Wasting my vote is just for the R n D, as well as those who buy into their rhetoric. If people didn't buy into it, Nader would have just been the start. The next election a third party would have gotten over 5% and received federal election funding. The next election would have been post Bush and given the tea party a reason to vote for an alternative. It would have built and continued to grow, until the 2 parties changed or continued to lose. This isn't instant or magical... It's a groundswell...

What the actual fuck.

You believe in instant gratification and nothing else?

If your supported candidate became president tomorrow, do you not agree that both Republicans and Democrats would pass bipartisan bills to prevent any and all executive orders on their part? Do you not agree that any and all legislation put forward by said candidate would be entirely ignored? Do you not agree that their presidency would quite literally be the most do-nothing presidency in the entire history of the country?

No, I do not agree. They would vote for the bills they agree on or vote against those they do not support. If they refuse to vote, just because it's a third party president, guess what happens in mid term elections? If they ignore the will of the people, they will not be elected again. That's how groundswell works...

Yes or no to all of those.

It's not that simple...

If you answer yes, then once again I ask, why are you willing to waste your vote?

Either way I am not wasting my vote. I am a Knicks fan, the fact that they have done squat in 37 years, has not lead me to support Labron James... What you are describing is not wasting my vote, but having integrity.

[Xeones]

No, I do not agree. They would vote for the bills they agree on or vote against those they do not support. If they refuse to vote, just because it's a third party president, guess what happens in mid term elections? If they ignore the will of the people, they will not be elected again. That's how groundswell works...

It isn't that simple, if they pass a bunch of bull shit that gets vetoed they can then blame the president. The average voter isn't educated on the issues or what is really happening in washington.

[Felya]

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

-Margaret Mead

- - - Updated - - -

It isn't that simple, if they pass a bunch of bull shit that gets vetoed they can then blame the president. The average voter isn't educated on the issues or what is really happening in washington.

It's not simple at all and takes more than one election. They will blame the president for veto of bullshit? I don't see that as a problem or hurting the president.

The issue isn't even the average voter, but the average that doesn't even vote.

[urasim]

Believe it or not, Hillary is pretty progressive.

http://www.ontheissues.org/images/s080_010.gif

Click the link above for exhaustive list of source material and detailed methodology.

She was against gay marriage only a couple years ago. Then she flipped flopped because she knew public opinion was shifting. I wouldn't take that image as proof of anything when she's been caught lying about so many things.

She's also admitted to being moderate and not progressive, and then later, when questioned about it, denied being moderate and proclaiming herself to be progressive. She'll say anything to get public favor. You're just another sap that fell for her lies.

[Jinpachi]

In what universe would Bernie or Gary Johnson get 70% of the popular vote?!?

The 12th amendment requires that the president get a majority of electoral college votes. That doesn't necessarily translate well to popular vote, but in theory if we lived in a system where everyone votes who they wanted to, you'd likely not see any candidate get a majority of electoral college votes. That's way, way, WAY more likely than someone getting 70% of the electoral college votes.

Hypothetical situation: Candidate X gets 70% of popular vote, and STILL loses because of electoral college nonsense? You can guarantee another civil war.

[Felya]

She was against gay marriage only a couple years ago. Then she flipped flopped because she knew public opinion was shifting. I wouldn't take that image as proof of anything when she's been caught lying about so many things.

You know the differance between:

Hillary switched her position to align with changing public opinion.
Hillary switched her position along with a large portion of public opinion.

She's also admitted to being moderate and not progressive, and then later, when questioned about it, denied being moderate and proclaiming herself to be progressive. She'll say anything to get public favor. You're just another sap that fell for her lies.

She was also the first freshman in her college to be president of young republicans. The problem? Current democrats are closer to republicans of that time, then republicans are now. If she is standing next to Trump, she is the progressive one. Next to Bernie or Jill Stein, not even close. But, Trump or GOP? Absolutely...

[I Push Buttons]

You believe in instant gratification and nothing else?

No I believe in long term slow change brought about by the progressive party, whoever they may be at the time. Currently it is the Democratic Party.

If anything it would seem the Bernie/third party group are the instant gratification lot. "We're fed up with the establishment it needs to change RIGHT NOW!"

I recognize that both parties favor the rich, obviously, as all of the money in politics comes from the rich... But you people are going on and on about fixing this and changing that... NOTHING is going to change until it absolutely must change. We rarely preempt anything in this country... We react after the fact.

As bad as things may seem currently, they are not that bad yet.

[netherflame]

I don't think he'll be running third party. Could make him seem like a bit of a sore loser.

Unless he gives some ultimatum like "remove the superdelegate system or I run third party" but I don't see that happening.

That'd still make him a sore loser.

[Daerio]

As bad as things may seem currently, they are not that bad yet.

With the 2008 crashes and the nightmare that is Obamacare, the fact that we're still paying billions of dollars every year to the very people who caused the crash... what exactly is the sign for "bad enough"?

Rioting in the street? Well, we've had a lot of peaceful protesting and a little bit of violence. Hints here and there, and with the election looming and misdirected anger everywhere, tension is rising.

The spark that ignited the revolutionary war was government monopoly on the tea industry. We have so many laws instituting monopoly on "private" industry these days, we're way behind that red line.

What's a bridge too far, to you? The mainstream media telling you the revolution has begun? The next revolution will not be televised.

[I Push Buttons]

With the 2008 crashes and the nightmare that is Obamacare, the fact that we're still paying billions of dollars every year to the very people who caused the crash... what exactly is the sign for "bad enough"?

Rioting in the street? Well, we've had a lot of peaceful protesting and a little bit of violence. Hints here and there, and with the election looming and misdirected anger everywhere, tension is rising.

The spark that ignited the revolutionary war was government monopoly on the tea industry. We have so many laws instituting monopoly on "private" industry these days, we're way behind that red line.

What's a bridge too far, to you? The mainstream media telling you the revolution has begun? The next revolution will not be televised.

There isn't going to be a revolution buddy, quit being melodramatic. Mentioning shit like another civil war and violent revolution literally removes all legitimacy from everything you say.