January 30, 2016 at 5:54 am #46966
Freedom, I think we’re in more agreement than you might think. Sure, the banksters own the politicians … through corporations, unions and trade organizations. The bankster wants power without fanfare — the pol wants the appearance of power and the adulation that goes with being able to buy love (or at least, votes) with other peoples’ money. The bankster has lots of O.P.M., thanks to the pols, who passed uncountable laws making it possible for him to steal it by taxes, usury, and inflation — a “marriage” truly made in Hades.
But the parties have found many profitable ways to sell their rank and file membership out, and most of the membership still hangs in, even if they don’t contribute much $$. (They don’t need to — the banksters and their subordinate businesses and organizations take care of that.) And most of the membership still holds their noses and votes, anyway. Besides, the RINOs are happier in second place, as long as they are getting paid off, and their donors are getting their screw-the-public laws. After all, that way, they get to blame the sucky state of affairs on the mean ol’ majority DINOs. Ain’t that how it worked, at least until the voters double-crossed them and voted them into the majority hot-seat? A lot of them are already hoping to crawl back into peaceful political minority, where their voters will no longer be able to demand the government’s boot off their necks, and mess up their sweet, profitable little gig.
I’m still expecting the 2016 presidential election to be a prearranged contest between the Hildebeast, and Jeb, because they’re who the banksters want. By whom do you prefer to be shafted? Or will you “throw your vote away,” by voting for someone else, by voting, indeed, at all? I’m pulling for “None of the Above.” My vote’s already been thrown away many times, occasionally by those I voted for.
January 30, 2016 at 1:41 pm #46971
- This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by L Tecolote.
No matter who the Presidential candidates are, the reason to vote anyway is so as to help the Republicans hold Congress. That will at least stop the Hildebeast or Bernie from killing the gun industry by making gun manufacturers subject to lawsuits every time someone gets shot. Here in VT there is a real chance that a Republican can take the Statehouse. It came very close to happening this last time except some idiot ran as a 3rd party candidate. He didn’t get many votes, just enough to stop the Republican candidate from getting 50% plus 1. None of the 3 had a majority and it went to the Democratically controlled legislature to select a Governor. The makeup of our Statehouse also shifted more to the right which helps when Bloomberg’s folks try to force gun legislation on us. This is why I will vote no matter what.January 30, 2016 at 2:40 pm #46973
It’s never a coincidence that there is a third party candidacy when a Democrat needs to pull votes away from the Republican candidate. They know the probable vote count from the registration rolls and make adjustment’s.January 30, 2016 at 3:16 pm #46975
I concur with 74, at least in most cases. I doubt Ron Paul’s candidacy as a 3rd party presidential candidate in 1988 was calculated to help the Democrats, but generally I’d agree that it’s no accident. Similarly, I believe some of the candidates still in the race (including O’Malley) that clearly have zero chance of winning the nomination, could well be there by direction – in order for the RNC or DNC to use their delegates as bargaining chips at the conventions as needed. Politics is VERY scientific, and researched to the nth degree. Almost nothing at the national level, and generally even at the state level of any significance, is by accident.
One must always remember that, particularly now days, it’s all political theater. But the consequences are anything but entertaining.January 30, 2016 at 4:26 pm #46977
GS, To answer your question of “So – are you going to stick by your “if they do a brokered convention I will not vote” pledge? Will you REALLY sit back and not do anything at all to avoid a Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren presidency,”
I would not vote since it would mean that the two sides are a dictatorship/communist parties at this point. The GOP would be saying We the People vote doesn’t count and they know what is best for the people, WHAT!! What has the GOP done for the people since they have the power of the Congress? So a Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren presidency maybe the same as a dictatorship pick by the GOP. We the People pick the next president and the GOP needs to except that. I see many Republicans staying home if the GOP does pick a Bush. The GOP does not like Trump but they do not like Cruz ether. The GOP would only pick one that they know for sure that they can control. That would not be acceptable. Understand that you can call it Socialism, Communism, Dictatorship, or any other name IT IS ALL THE SAME! Control of the people.
If this happens I see the Democrats winning.
GS, There is no way in hell that the GOP would pick Rand Paul, they see him as more of a problem then Trump or Cruz. But if they had to pick they will pick Trump over Cruz. They know they will still have problems dealing with Trump but think that they can make some deals with him. I do not like this but would take it.
I also like many of what Paul and Cruz stand for but I am a realist and know that they can’t get the independent vote. No one has been elected president without the independent vote. By all the polls I have studied Trump is the one that gets the independent vote and this is why the MSNBC, CNN, ABC and even FOX want to take Trump down.
Understand me, I believe that America needs someone stronger on the Constitutional law to become president but in my heart I know that this will not happen because the media will call them a right wing nut and the independent voted will run to the other side.
The GOP better play this well because if they do not and go with what the people do not want the GOP will end as a party.January 30, 2016 at 5:30 pm #46978
At this point I hope Trump is elected and he goes bat shhit crazy on everyone in both parties. Just leave us little people alone……..ya right, like that will happen.January 30, 2016 at 9:28 pm #46979
Freedom, we’ll have to disagree on this one. I wouldn’t give you 2¢ for my congressman, but at least he’s not going to be coming after me (through legislation, not physically, of course). Yes, he affects me greatly because of his cave-in votes when it really does matter, too many times (including this massive Paul Ryan budget deal that was just rammed through). Relatively speaking only, I’d much rather not have a Democrat opponent replace him, than the degree to which I wish he’d be gone. I have no use for the Republican Party, and have not had for many years. But I’ll still do what I can to slow down the process of dismantling this country, and that means keeping Democrats out at all costs. So, whether it’s Hillary, Bernie, or Liz, I’ll vote for anything that lies and at least claims to be a conservative, just to delay the inevitable a bit longer.January 30, 2016 at 10:08 pm #46980
GS, The problem is that if we let the GOP pick what they want and not what the people voted for then this would be a dictatorship on the people so just a little better than a Socialist Democrat. Once we the people have lost the right to vote and pick the person that we want to be president it is over for the country. We would not be buying much time.
For example what is the difference between a communist and a dictator, not much. In Cuba the Fidel brothers are called communist but I am not sure about that, I see them as dictators. They love to eat well, live like the rich, drive the best cars but give the people the least possible so the people only think about were and how to find enough food to live to the next day.
So my thinking is we need to be very careful to except a dictatorship pick of the GOP and not the peoples pick. There is very little differences between Communist and dictators.
GS, I do understand your point but understand that what I am saying will have many Republicans staying home and not voting and will be the end of the GOP. The people will not trust them much. As it is now We do not trust them to do anything so this would be the end of any trust.January 30, 2016 at 10:13 pm #46981
All the talk of preference for this candidate, or that, reminds me of the final lines of a comedy shtick i saw probably four decades ago, in my cold war, TV-watching days. Bill Dana as José Jiménez, Civil Defense Director, and Louie Nye as the straight-man/interviewer, had been talking of preparations, shelters, and warning broadcasts (“Tune to Comrade.” “Don’t you mean Conelrad?” “No, Comrade gets it first.”)
The finale, as I recall:
Nye: “One last thing, Mr. Jiménez — What is the best thing to be doing, when the bomb falls?”
Dana: (in the well-established José Jiménez style, repeats the question: “What is the best thing to be doing, when the bomb falls?” (Long pregnant pause, then with a shrug) “Ehh … It doesn’t matter.”)
That’s where I think I am — my ability to affect the outcome of the election, despite all the campaigning I might do, is effectively nil. I’m one solitary, medium-sized buffalo, standing in the midst of a vast herd, as the great quadrennial stampede is about to begin, direction unknown. If I can still walk off the field, under my own power, after the stampede has chosen its direction, and run off, I’ll be okay.
January 30, 2016 at 10:23 pm #46983
- This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by L Tecolote.
GS, Also know that on this forum everyone knows from my passed post that I am one to attack any communist post on here which has happen. I am the biggest anti-communist here! I am a American Cuban. Born in Cuba came to America at age 4 and am 58 years old. Communism destroyed my father and mother’s family, properties and freedoms. But I see not much of a difference between a dictator and a communist since before Castro there was a dictator which the people wanted out. They got a communist which was just another word for a much worse dictator.
I love America for the life America has given me. We need to keep the controls of the people, our freedoms and liberties. I love the freedom to be able to post here and you post back your opinions. I read every word you post. Many of my post are one to two sentences long. But I am reading everything. I only post what I have an opinion on. But I say that 90 to 95% of what you write I agree on so we are on the same side. Just need to let you know that if the GOP does this it will have many not vote and may make us lose.January 30, 2016 at 10:30 pm #46984
L Tecolote, interesting reply. That is what the commy’s are counting on. They try to make us think that we are only one vote so stay home because you will not make a difference in the outcome. It reminds me of what my father told me that Fidel Castro told the people after he got in power, we do not need guns anymore, we the people have a leader that will bring freedoms and elections from now on. Turn in your guns because you will not need them any more. Well my friend it has been 55 years since he said that and Castro is still there.
We all need to vote but our vote needs to be counted.January 30, 2016 at 11:58 pm #46985
Freedom, I didn’t mean to say I wouldn’t vote, I always do, though I rarely help elect the candidate, or pass the measure, I voted for. Heck, I’m in San Fran-commie-cisco (though working on extricating myself and my wife.) But when the majority of voters vote for the Left, a respectable counter vote that loses, only looks like victory to them. (Though I suspect that many of them are so minded to rebel against “the establishment,” that if the counter-votes effectively disappeared, they might switch, just to retain their self-image of brave-rebels-against-“the-Man.”) I only recall my vote helping to elect three presidents — LBJ, in my young-and-dumb phase, Tricky Dick Nixon in 1972, because he wasn’t Hubert Socialist Humphrey, and Duhbya, in 2000 because he wasn’t Swiftboat Kerry. Considering how they worked out as guardians of America and our rights, I’m not too proud of any of them.
From what I’ve seen, the best you can say of the RINO party, is that instead of driving the nation off the cliff at max-throttle, like the DINOs, they’ll hold the same course at a sedate, conservative 55 mph, proudly claiming that that’s as good as reversing direction. Same result, only slower. D’ya s’pose it might be because both parties get their $$, publicity, and endorsements from mostly the same sources? Who wins?
I don’t know how to force-educate a buffalo herd getting ready to stampede. But because I’d like to frustrate those who want to scarf up my life, and spit out the bones, for as long as possible, I usually hold my nose and vote for the RINO, on the hope that they’ll eat someone else first, and dine more slowly. Still, that only seems to encourage them.
Cry, "Treason!"January 31, 2016 at 12:55 am #46986
Freedom, you have far better cause to appreciate what we had and lost in this country than most. And I appreciate that more than you would probably guess. So please don’t think I’m trashing you personally, I just come to a different conclusion, based on different circumstances – but with the same love, even reverence for the Constitution of the United States. I don’t like adulterants added to my steaks, my chocolate ice cream, or my Constitution – leave ‘em all as-is (with the final item in that list being massively more important than the previous two, of course).
Keep in mind also that the Constitution which we both love and revere, says NOTHING about parties or primaries. Those are concocted methods of herding the people, as L Tecolote masterfully chose for his metaphor. That fits perfectly. We don’t even choose a president. Each state, per Constitutional direction, sets up its own system of choosing the “electors” that go to the Electoral College, and THEY choose the president. There is not even anything in the Constitution that says the electors must vote in line with the results of their state primaries – because primaries are a later invention.
So in a very real sense, as disgusting as it seems (and has become), what the RNC or DNC do at conventions has nothing to do with the Constitution, and the way in which they do it also has no basis in the Constitution, so long as it meets the basic criteria of age, “natural born citizen” (whatever that means!), etc. You and I are both incensed at how the RNC (and for that matter, the DNC) have operated, and may yet operate this time around. Yet we’re really only upset because they are changing THEIR own rules. We’ve been forced into playing THEIR game ever since power party politics took over the “rules” of how presidential CANDIDATES are selected. And Congress, the FEC, and other government entities have been the ones to “fix” the system so not just anybody can run for the presidency of the United States. They’ve even effectively shut out the likely possibility of a 3rd party being on all 50 state ballots – even though it’s a federal election.
Thus for me, I look at it as a rigged system from the very start, EVEN if primaries run smoothly and legally, vote counts are accurate, and nobody gets really squirrely when the Electoral College sits down to vote. In theory, we could all have someone elected by a landslide, winning almost all the state primaries, and yet something could happen at the Electoral College, and a different president could emerge. If I’m wrong, I’ll take my stripes, but I find nothing that disallows a hijacked Electoral College vote, at least at the federal level. Apparently there has never been a federal court challenge on the subject, because more than 99% of Electoral College votes have been according to the electors’ various state laws that govern the process.
SO, just as the wise old owl said, I’m just a microscopic spec in the process, and therefore can do little more than maybe get in the corner of somebody’s eye and cause them a bit of brief irritation before being flushed out. It really doesn’t matter what I do. But my own code of conduct dictates (maybe even the words “moral code” fit here) that I always do SOMETHING. And sometimes that “something” may amount to voting for the slowest possible progress toward destruction, rather than sitting back and allowing the herd to determine both the direction and the speed, to use Tec’s metaphor. Even if I just get in one other buffalo’s way and cause him to veer just a tiny bit one way or the other, his movement will trigger a response with another one or two, and so on. Will the impact be large enough to change the approximate eventual outcome? No – not just from me. But if I can slow it down even imperceptibly, or influence the direction – even just for a few moments – and it benefits me and those I care about for just a tiny bit longer, I’ll never have to look back and acknowledge that I consented to the worst possible outcome.
Silence, after all, is still a response – and it becomes consent.January 31, 2016 at 2:52 am #46988
L Tecolote, My wife was born in San Fran-commie-cisco but she votes GOP and now live in Miami, Florida. So you can say I know were you live well, been there and seen it all.
GS, I do agree with you, the Electoral College is unconstitutional. We know that even tho I didn’t vote for Al Gore he did get more of the popular vote but not the Electoral College so Bush became president. I think Al Gore is nuts but wonder what would have happen if he would have been president. Would we have elected Obama? maybe not since Al Gore may have done so many crazy things. Who knows. But yes the Electoral College is a problem we need to get it to the courts. I also think term limits need to happen.
L T and GS, another thing that Castro did was cancel the Cuban Constitution even tho it was not as good as the U. S. Constitution. I am seeing the U. S. Constitution being cut up bit by bit and the GOP in Congress not doing anything about this. My father which is 86 tells me that we have no were to go. We need to fight to keep our freedom. You guys know that Rubio is a Cuban American, his mother and father are Cuban. Cruz is part Cuban on the father’s side, Mother is American. The two have a passion for freedom. Rubio’s wife is Colombian and this is why he may have tried the amnesty with the building the wall and now has backed down from that.
Cruz is very Constitutional. I know personally why they are running and trying as hard as they are but think that they will not make it. You guys see that I think Trump will be the one but he is not my first pick. I have liked Rand Paul and Cruz but think that they will not be what the GOP will pick. Trump is not liked by the GOP ether but he is pushing there buttons so hard that he may make it throw.January 31, 2016 at 4:04 am #46989
GS, I do agree with you, the Electoral College is unconstitutional.
Freedom, I’m not sure where you got the idea that anything I said implied the Electoral College is unconstitutional. In fact, it is the ONLY piece of the existing process that does come from the Constitution (Article II, Section 1). It is the method for choosing the president and vice president – as specifically written into the Constitution originally. Do not be too quick to discard the Electoral College. When the Constitution was first constructed, it was a pretty nicely tuned piece of machinery, designed such that each (and all) of its parts meshed and worked with all of the other parts toward a grand end. Then people started messing with it, particularly as it pertained to the states’ portion of the balance of power. The 17th Amendment is relatively unknown to most Americans, who just assume senators were ALWAYS elected by the people. On the contrary – they were, as originally specified by the Constitution, selected by their respective states (not by popular vote), thereby keeping a good balance of power, and keeping the central federal government from getting too much power while also avoiding mob rule. The 17th Amendment really, truly, was a major piece in the undoing of the beauty of the constitutional republic called the United States, along with the 16th Amendment (income tax) and the creation of the Federal Reserve, all in 1913 under
Comrade– ooops – President Woodrow Wilson.
The Electoral College is also part of that balance of power. “The People” get their portion of the balance through their elected representatives. But now BOTH houses of Congress are directly elected by the people. And the masses can be swayed, as you well know from your own family’s history – the great reformer, Fidel, was going to come in and “free” the people. Ooops! His popular support suddenly turned out to be badly misplaced. Too much power entrusted to the masses is not a safe thing – particularly unsafe for minorities within those masses. The Electoral College, is actually not a meeting in Washington or somewhere, where they all get together and vote in the new president and vice president. It’s actually done within EACH state, according to rules set up BY each state – thus helping (again) to preserve that portion of the balance of power. The constitutional government is (or should be) a very delicate, balanced and protected process, and it was designed – though imperfectly – as the best man-made system ever put into writing anywhere. (Some might argue, with some success, that some American Indian tribes had an even better version of it, but that’s a whole ‘nother argument, and I’m not going there.)
There are probably better references out there, but this is at least one I just found on a quick search that seems to give both sides as well as some history and mechanics:
In my strong opinion, the Electoral College is not something to be thrown out. Too many people want to do just that, without having a clue how it really works, or more importantly, why it was put in place in the first place. Those framers didn’t suddenly get psychotic when they wrote that section of the Constitution.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.