Well, it's happening, Trump is starting to lose bad in the polls..

[Wells]

Frankly, I think the "Hillary is corrupt" thing is more or less just a result of ~30 years of "allegations" combined with a zealous protection of her privacy. Not a single indictment.

[Pangean]

Or the 2012 Democratic party platform which called for the TPP? The party that stabs its own voters in the back. The DNC Feigns left, but marches right. The party itself called for the TPP, they wanted it.

So who are you voting for then?

[Wells]

Well people who hate Liberalism is fine, but why vote for a party that openly stabs the working class in the back, works to ruin their lives and really gives no shits about Liberalism? Might as well vote for the GOP, at least I'd see the blade coming, versus the DNC who stabs you through the back.

I'd rather have genuine enemies than fake friends.

We've been over your infantile desire for ideological purity and the cost of any progress, its a boring subject.

[Pangean]

Well people who hate Liberalism is fine, but why vote for a party that openly stabs the working class in the back, works to ruin their lives and really gives no shits about Liberalism? Might as well vote for the GOP, at least I'd see the blade coming, versus the DNC who stabs you through the back.

I'd rather have genuine enemies than fake friends.

So you will announcing your support for Trump soon?

[PC2]

We've been over your infantile desire for ideological purity and the cost of any progress, its a boring subject.

Exactly, work within the system. Just be pragmatic and at least you'll get some leftover scraps once in a while.

[Theodarzna]

We've been over your infantile desire for ideological purity and the cost of any progress, its a boring subject.

We've been over your absolute love of TPP and fucking over the Working Class, yet somehow feel they should 'totes back Hillary cause?....... Idk what reason you conjectured actually.

- - - Updated - - -

So you will announcing your support for Trump soon?

There are other candidates in this world beyond Trump and Hillary. Don'cha know?

[Pangean]

There are other candidates in this world beyond Trump and Hillary. Don'cha know?

Of course I do. So who are you voting for?

[Theodarzna]

Of course I do. So who are you voting for?

Right now I'm considering Gary Johnson over Stein, mostly because she has strange ideas about medicine and such, and Gary Johnson is also Anti-TPP.

[Ripster42]

Or the 2012 Democratic party platform which called for the TPP? The party that stabs its own voters in the back. The DNC Feigns left, but marches right. The party itself called for the TPP, they wanted it.

Called for the TPP before the specifics were outlined. I also don't acknowledge your claim that it actually hurts the american working class. This whole argument has been about how they actually voted as a party. You know, against the fast track, and against nafta.

[Pangean]

Right now I'm considering Gary Johnson over Stein, mostly because she has strange ideas about medicine and such, and Gary Johnson is also Anti-TPP.

Thank you for demonstrating your pro-worker noise has been just that. Noise. Johnson is anti-union. Believes they hurt the economy and is pro "right-to-work laws". Is against raising minimum wage and in fact wants it abolished. Wants to reduce taxes on businesses to zero. On the record supporting NAFTA. Wants to raise the retirement age to 72.

Funny thing supporting a candidate like that but claiming to be pro-worker.

[Theodarzna]

Thank you for demonstrating your pro-worker noise has been just that. Noise. Johnson is anti-union. Believes they hurt the economy and is pro "right-to-work laws". Is against raising minimum wage and in fact wants it abolished. Wants to reduce taxes on businesses to zero. On the record supporting NAFTA. Wants to raise the retirement age to 72.

Funny thing supporting a candidate like that but claiming to be pro-worker.

He is also unlikely to ever win either way. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are merely votes to stop TPP, the issue is nobody can trust Trump or Hillary to be Anti-TPP.

- - - Updated - - -

Called for the TPP before the specifics were outlined. I also don't acknowledge your claim that it actually hurts the american working class. This whole argument has been about how they actually voted as a party. You know, against the fast track, and against nafta.

So standing for it in the Party platform doesn't count, the Party leaders supporting it doesn't count, Well shit if you discount all evidence to the contrary, GO FOR IT!

[Pangean]

He is also unlikely to ever win either way. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are merely votes to stop TPP, the issue is nobody can trust Trump or Hillary to be Anti-TPP.

That doesn't change the fact you would support someone so anti-worker. The next time you rant about someone or some party being anti-worker don't bother. As clearly you don't really give a shit about workers.

You may not like the Greens supposed views on medicine but they are pro-worker. Someone so vehemently pro-worker as you pretend to be would have looked at that and had no issue supporting them over Johnson.

[Ripster42]

He is also unlikely to ever win either way. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are merely votes to stop TPP, the issue is nobody can trust Trump or Hillary to be Anti-TPP.

- - - Updated - - -



So standing for it in the Party platform doesn't count, the Party leaders supporting it doesn't count, Well shit if you discount all evidence to the contrary, GO FOR IT!

Again, supporting free trade as a general principle and the TPP of 4 years ago is different than supporting the current TPP. We'll see what their platform is regarding this piece of legislation is when the convention happens. The evidence I'm counting is the majority of democratic party votes being against both nafta and the extra negotiating power granted to the pres regarding tpp. You know, what the party is actually doing and voting for instead of what you're crying about.

Edit: And I still don't grant that TPP or nafta is bad for workers.

[Kontinuum]

Republican Donald Trump said on Sunday the United States should consider more racial profiling, in response to a question about whether he supported greater law enforcement scrutiny of Muslim Americans after the Orlando mass shooting.

"I think profiling is something that we're going to have to start thinking about as a country," Trump told CBS' "Face the Nation."

"You look at Israel and you look at others, and they do it and they do it successfully. And you know, I hate the concept of profiling, but we have to start using common sense," he said when asked if he supported increased profiling of Muslims in America.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN0Z50PV

[Theodarzna]

Again, supporting free trade as a general principle and the TPP of 4 years ago is different than supporting the current TPP. We'll see what their platform is regarding this piece of legislation is when the convention happens. The evidence I'm counting is the majority of democratic party votes being against both nafta and the extra negotiating power granted to the pres regarding tpp. You know, what the party is actually doing and voting for instead of what you're crying about.

Edit: And I still don't grant that TPP or nafta is bad for workers.

Its bad for people in general.

For example the TPP allows for and demands a right to create useless patents, but beyond the little things that fuck people over, these are not even trade agreements, barriers to trade have been at rock bottom for decades, the agreements don't focus on trade in goods because we've had free trade in goods, and the benefits that come with it, for decades. These are better understood as Investment Agreements as they have jack shit to do with Trade. These agreements merely hand power over to Capital and allow free movement of Capital. People buy capital but they do not automatically make real investments into any particular country as NAFTA has shown. Since Capital can now move as it likes it can extort governments and people in said nations to make bitter concessions on workers rights or taxation or special "gimmies," in order to even consider staying. This is sometimes called the "Race to the Bottom."

[Hey There Guys its Metro]

My polls are showing the complete opposite. Do you have any proof?

[Vash The Stampede]

I wonder if Clinton's lead will grow as more people give up on Bernie and finally face reality and move into her camp.

Neva! We will rebuild Bernie, make him faster, younger, and stronger. Or find someone who's running for president with the same core values. I like cyborg Bernie idea though.

[Bollocks]

Which is completely negated by the ISDS.

EDIT:

To add, The “low emissions” language in the text is not so much weak as artfully non-specific. It says parties to the TPP recognise “each party’s actions to transition to a low emissions economy should reflect domestic circumstances and capabilities”. That could mean fuck all anything. and qualifies it all with “as appropriate” making the various commitments totally meaningless. More over the very real concerns over fracking and fossil fuel industrial language and concerns raised by such groups as the Sierra Club

We already discussed, ISDS cases are only won by companies when the government applies laws that greatly disfavour companies and when it comes to public health it needs a scientific backing. Though I agree the wording is somewhat vague.

Also the nafta benefited the us economy

[Ripster42]

Its bad for people in general.

For example the TPP allows for and demands a right to create useless patents, but beyond the little things that fuck people over, these are not even trade agreements, barriers to trade have been at rock bottom for decades, the agreements don't focus on trade in goods because we've had free trade in goods, and the benefits that come with it, for decades. These are better understood as Investment Agreements as they have jack shit to do with Trade. These agreements merely hand power over to Capital and allow free movement of Capital. People buy capital but they do not automatically make real investments into any particular country as NAFTA has shown. Since Capital can now move as it likes it can extort governments and people in said nations to make bitter concessions on workers rights or taxation or special "gimmies," in order to even consider staying. This is sometimes called the "Race to the Bottom."

When you call one of the main benefits of the deal "the right to create useless patents," it's hardly worth having a discussion. The US is one of the biggest innovators. That right to create patents and have the recognized internationally without the bribes and other baggage is a huge boon for the US economy. This also gives US companies a legal framework to enforce their patents on companies in other countries that won't be corrupted by that country's politics.

You might not like it but this also gives the US a lot of leverage on essentially every other country involved. Once our economies are better integrated it becomes a huge bargaining chip for the US in essentially every trade dispute we have in the future because leaving TPP once it's in place will have a much bigger negative effect on those countries than ours. You sound like your parent got laid off and had them bitch about it being because of NAFTA and democrats, so you're biased, not because of reality, but because of an attachment of worth to their anecdotal, myopic viewpoint.

This "race to the bottom" is only true when you ignore what's happened to worker's rights once they start to supply US factories and we embarrass them. Compare the rights of workers in bangladesh/china/india to what they were even 20 years ago, the change that came because of integration with our economy and our morals being applied to them. If you want better conditions for workers here, they need to be better everywhere in a global economy, which is part of what TPP is supposed to do.

Edit: And maybe you should direct your anger towards the party that is actively fighting to reduce the power of unions, and not the party that tried to recall the politicians that did it.

[Ghostpanther]

Independent candidates do not even get 5% in most elections. If they got 30%, we would no longer have a 2 party system, as at worst a third party would be 4.4999...% from one of the main 2.

All they need is 5% popular vote to gain the same federal funding as the main 2 parties. They also get on ballots in states they are blocked from being on. They also do influence the way parties function, if the groundswell is large enouph. If it were not for third parties, there would be no Republican Party. If there were no third partys, Lincoln would have stayed a Whig.

By the way... Garry Johnson is polling at 10% vs Hilary and Trump:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...p-and-clinton/

Perot got 18% if I remember right. And if he had any impact on the GOP or Democratic party, it was not a good one, as if I remember right his platform was reducing the federal debt. :P. But as I have asked before, what did he or any independent within the last 60 years do which impacted the parties specifically? And I am aware of the political scene back in Lincoln and before him. The issue is now.