DescentBB

callmeslick wrote:Stein has made some recent statements that border on the seriously delusional. Long ago disqualified as a fake candidate with no real interest in the actual office at hand. Bernie had it right the other day: we need a third party, or maybe more, but those have to be raised from the ground up, not with exercises in futility every four years.

callmeslick wrote:if you are still pondering the viability of Bernie Sanders, who is both CAMPAIGNING for Clinton and not on the ballot in any state in the nation, one has to question whether you are really paying any serious attention to the Presidential race at all. Why even bother to vote if you are that uninformed or uninvolved? Stein's odd comments have gone WAY past the old vaccine/gmo positions, and she has campaigned for the most powerful position on the planet by spray painting a tractor and otherwise very little. She's a dilettente, aiming at mental lightweights who are more interested in being angry that in actually getting things done. The American system works, but only if you follow a certain path to get things done. She has shown no awareness of that fact.

So, to return to my point above: given that you are about 7 weeks from the most significant election in your lifetime, a genuine choice between a path of nationalism and xenophobia or one of compromise and inclusiveness. It should be considered the duty of the nation to reject the former, or forever regret not doing so now, when the fascists can be nipped in the bud. I can accept drawing different conclusions, but cannot understand not paying attention.

callmeslick wrote:The American system works, but only if you follow a certain path to get things done.

MD-1118 wrote: I dunno man, we're all going to hell in a handbasket anyway

and you seem to forget that the "compromising and inclusive" candidate is also a compulsive liar and a traitor to the state.

I'll admit to not paying much attention, though. I've had a lot on my plate and NASA hasn't had any real support from the oval office since Nixon.

callmeslick wrote:The American system works, but only if you follow a certain path to get things done.

And that path includes pandering, saying what people want to hear, and making empty promises, which unsurprisingly is what all 'viable' candidates do these days. Can't say I'm surprised at Stein and Sanders for joining them since they can't beat them.

callmeslick wrote:Why even bother to vote if you are that uninformed or uninvolved?

callmeslick wrote:how so, and in what ways? Please, show some evidence, if possible.

were you paying attention, you might realize that she is in no way, shape or form a traitor, nor a compulsive liar. As I said, this stuff is important enough to your future to do a bit of digging through the BS that has been slung, and find the actual facts.

how does support for NASA factor in for you? Oh, and they seem to be maintaining a pretty robust ongoing effort down on Wallops Island, from what I can see.

you seem to be confusing campaigning for office with governing. A lot of folks seem to have that in common. Now, go back and read what I was talking about, and it wasn't about running a campaign, it was about actually GOVERNING in a Federal representative republic.

vision wrote:

callmeslick wrote:Why even bother to vote if you are that uninformed or uninvolved?

As someone who echoes MD-1118's view of Stein, I think this comment is a little ignorant. MD-1118 is clearly informed. You just don't agree with him. I personally think Stein would be a much better choice than Clinton.

callmeslick wrote: we need a third party, or maybe more, but those have to be raised from the ground up, not with exercises in futility every four years.

callmeslick wrote:I chose the one who isn't both crazy and dangerous.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote: we need a third party, or maybe more, but those have to be raised from the ground up, not with exercises in futility every four years.

Except the liberal media won't allow it. We saw this with the Tea Party and how the DNC news organs belittled them and tried to show them as radicals.

callmeslick wrote:I chose the one who isn't both crazy and dangerous.

So do I.

tunnelcat wrote:Now if Sanders was still around instead of the poor "choice" the Dems forced upon all of us liberal voters, it would've made it easier to go out and actually vote and not hold our noses doing it.

callmeslick wrote:the quoted comment by me was in response to the incredible statement that he seemed to holding out some sort of idea that Bernie Sanders was still running for the office.

callmeslick wrote:My comments about Stein were separate, and I stand by them. She is an intellectual lightweight, fond of hearing her own voice, and offering ZERO by way of an actual path forward and getting a single thing in her agenda made a reality.

tunnelcat wrote:
The tea party is and was nothing but an extreme right wingnut extension of the Republican Party. Woody, you're so far right that anything center looks liberal to you.

vision wrote:She's definitely not an intellectual lightweight, Jesus, I'm pretty sure you got that idea from heavily curated sound-bytes.

callmeslick wrote:...proposed utterly impossible to pass legislation...

callmeslick wrote:Until then, a feel good exercise with little political impact of a positive nature.

callmeslick wrote:To illustrate my point regarding broad embrace of Stein's positions, she had an hour and a half on CNN, with decent viewership, to have an impact. Her numbers have remained unchanged. Nowhere NEAR a critical mass of the electorate is ready to embrace even a fraction of her platform.

callmeslick wrote:oh, and as a separate point, which came to me as I was typing that last post.......note my reference to platform. Platforms matter, because they reflect the 'wish list' goals of a proposed administration.

callmeslick wrote:Her numbers have remained unchanged. Nowhere NEAR a critical mass of the electorate is ready to embrace even a fraction of her platform.

callmeslick wrote:The President merely executes what the legislature mandates

Jeff250 wrote:

callmeslick wrote:Her numbers have remained unchanged. Nowhere NEAR a critical mass of the electorate is ready to embrace even a fraction of her platform.

It's ironic that you're arguing that people should not vote for the person they think has the best platform and then in the next breath use the fact that people don't plan on voting for Stein as evidence that they disagree with her platform.

Jeff250 wrote:

callmeslick wrote:The President merely executes what the legislature mandates

You're not voting for Hillary Clinton then because of the Republican controlled congress, or does this rule only apply to third parties? One of the most important roles of a president is being commander and chief of our military, and it happens to be one of the areas where both Hillary (a neocon) and Trump (a narcissist) fare the worst.

callmeslick wrote:

Jeff250 wrote:

callmeslick wrote:Her numbers have remained unchanged. Nowhere NEAR a critical mass of the electorate is ready to embrace even a fraction of her platform.

It's ironic that you're arguing that people should not vote for the person they think has the best platform and then in the next breath use the fact that people don't plan on voting for Stein as evidence that they disagree with her platform.

I think I pretty much broke down the fact that she has no real platform if one digs a bit.

callmeslick wrote:I was talking about broad changes to the status quo. Your point here is fair, but, seriously, you think Stein would be superior as a COC? Or, Johnson? Share what you are smoking, because doing glib offhands like 'neocon' shows you really are willing to vastly oversimplify a rather complex resume, willing to give the nod to unproven quantities. I'll pass.

woodchip wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:
The tea party is and was nothing but an extreme right wingnut extension of the Republican Party. Woody, you're so far right that anything center looks liberal to you.

Glad to see the media sucked you into that idea. Look at any of the rallies and see everyday people. Of course if all you saw were the optics the press wanted you to see, then be happy with the nose ring.

Wikipedia wrote:In the United States, the term hard right has been used to describe groups such as the Tea Party movement and the Patriot movement. The term has also been used to describe ideologies such as Paleoconservatism, Dominion Theology and White nationalism.

Jeff250 wrote:

callmeslick wrote:I was talking about broad changes to the status quo. Your point here is fair, but, seriously, you think Stein would be superior as a COC? Or, Johnson? Share what you are smoking, because doing glib offhands like 'neocon' shows you really are willing to vastly oversimplify a rather complex resume, willing to give the nod to unproven quantities. I'll pass.

Do you ever realize how hypocritical you are when you write your posts? All over this thread you used glib offhands to try to dismiss a candidate.

Hillary Clinton is without a doubt a neocon. She has always been a huge proponent of regime change in the Middle East:

1. She supported the war in Iraq
2. She advocated increasing our troop presence in Iraq
3. She advocated increasing our troop presence in Afghanistan
4. She was a proponent of the overthrow in Libya
5. She wanted us to strike against Assad in Syria

It's ironic that the same people who railed against Bush's foreign policy for so long are now happily reelecting him.

Jeff250 wrote:You made that argument too. But you also spent a lot of time in this thread arguing that people shouldn't vote for the person they think has the best platform. Later, you ironically cited low poll numbers as evidence of a rejection of someone's platform when you must be aware more than anyone here that most people don't just vote for the person they think has the best platform.

callmeslick wrote:I'd love to see a Senate that was, for random example, 40 Dem, 40 GOP, 7 conservative, 4 libertarian, 9 Greens. Then, you'd have real compromise, consensus building and coalition building that actually results in legislation.

callmeslick wrote:What is WRONG with that platform. A lot. But, central to my point, are you seriously thinking anywhere near a national plurality supports half of that crap?

callmeslick wrote:...oh, and that isn't a platform, it is a collection of lame platitudes, not even developed by Americans for an American system of government.

OUR POSITION

Greens will crack down on political corruption and strengthen the voice of the people at all levels of government.

Everyone deserves the opportunity to influence the governmental decisions that affect them. But the defining characteristics of modern politics in the United States are a corrupt campaign finance system that enables corporate and wealthy elites to purchase political outcomes; and an abundance of anti-democratic electoral, ballot access and debate rules designed to minimize participation and choice.

To achieve genuine citizen participation, citizens must share in the power of governing. Greens seek to bring vibrant grassroots democracy to every part of the United States.

Greens seek to repair U.S. electoral system, from how elections are financed, to conducting them in more fair and representative ways, to ensuring accountability and transparency on all levels of government. In particular, Greens believe that the U.S. winner-take-all voting system is fundamentally flawed, resulting in low voter participation, little choice or competition in countless elections, and far too few women and minorities in elected office.

The failure to fulfill the promise of democracy leaves millions of people in our country too discouraged to vote and others who chose to vote seemingly trapped among false and limited choices. A system that promotes full and fair representation would draw millions of people in the United States into civic life and could revive democracy in this country.

GREEN SOLUTIONS

1. Electoral reform

Enact proportional representation voting systems for legislative seats on municipal, county, state and federal levels. Proportional representation systems provide that people are represented in the proportion their views are held in society and are based on dividing seats proportionally within multi-seat districts, compared to the standard U.S. single-seat, winner-take all districts. Forms of proportional representation include choice voting (candidate-based), party list (party-based) and mixed member voting (combines proportional representation with district representation).

Enact Instant Run-off Voting (IRV) for chief executive offices like mayor, governor and president and other single-seat elections. Under IRV, voters can rank candidates in their order of preference (1,2,3, etc.) IRV ensures that the eventual winner has majority support and allows voters to express their preferences knowing that supporting their favorite candidate will not inadvertently help their least favored candidate. IRV thus frees voters from being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils, and saves money by eliminating unnecessary run-off elections.

Provide full public financing of federal, state and local elections, including free and equal radio and television time on the public airwaves for all ballot-qualified candidates and parties.

Prohibit corporations from spending to influence elections, preferably by constitutional amendment abolishing granting corporations constitutional rights guaranteed to natural persons, or as a condition of receipt of a corporate charter by federal chartering of corporations.

Eliminate all ballot access laws and rules that discriminate against smaller parties and independents, and otherwise place undue burden on the right of citizens to run for office.

Abolish the Electoral College and provide for the direct national election of the president by Instant Runoff Voting. As a step in that direction, support National Popular Vote legislation which would guarantee the Presidency to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia), which would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538).

Create a new publicly-funded People's Commission on Presidential Debates, and open its presidential debates to all candidates who appear on at least as many ballots as would represent a majority of the Electoral College and who raise enough funds to otherwise qualify for general election public financing. Any candidate who refuses to participate in such debates would lose general election public financing for their candidacy. Amend federal law to remove the non-profit tax exemption status that allows corporations to fund the existing Commission on Presidential Debates and other such exclusive privately controlled debate entities.

Amend the Federal Election Campaign Act to change the percentage of the presidential popular vote required for a new party's candidate to receive first time General Election public funding from 5% in the previous General Election to 1%; and change the percentage of the presidential popular vote required for a new party to receive public presidential convention funding from 5% for its candidate in the previous general election to 1%.

Include the option to vote for a binding None of the Above (NOTA) on all party primary and general election ballots.

Support the right to initiative, referendum and recall at all levels of government. Enact signature gathering standards that empower volunteer collection efforts and financial disclosure requirements that identify the sources of funding behind paid signature efforts.

Enact a national "right to vote" law or constitutional amendment to guarantee universal, automatic, permanent voter registration, along with fail-safe voting procedures, so that eligible voters whose names are not on the voter rolls or whose information is out-of-date can correct the rolls and vote on the same day.

Enact statehood for the District of Columbia. Ensure that residents of the District of Columbia have the same rights and representation as all other U.S. citizens.

Restore full citizenship rights to felons upon completion of their sentence, including the right to vote and to run for elected office. Enable greater enfranchisement of overseas voters.

Support strong enforcement of the Federal Voting Rights Act and, where applicable, state voting rights acts like the California Voting Rights Act.

Make Election Day a national holiday and/or have weekend elections.

Amend the U.S. Constitution to require that all vacancies in the U.S. Senate be filled by election rather than appointment.

2. Reducing corruption

Develop publicly-owned, open source voting equipment and deploy it across the nation to ensure high national standards, performance, transparency and accountability; use verifiable paper ballots; and institute mandatory automatic random precinct recounts to ensure a high level of accuracy in election results.

Establish guarantees that every citizen's vote counts, and that all U.S. voting systems—including electronic ones—are verifiable, transparent and accurate.

Establish a National Elections Commission with the mandate to establish minimum national election standards and uniformity, partner with state and local election officials to ensure pre-election and post-election accountability for their election plans, require nonpartisan election boards, and depoliticize and professionalize election administration across the United States.

Establish independent and transparent non-partisan redistricting processes to stop partisan gerrymandering and protect minority rights and representation.

Increase the number of polling places, and increase the pay for poll workers.

Strengthen "sunshine laws" to provide citizens with all necessary information and access to their political system.

Ensure that all important federal, state and local government documents are on the Internet, especially texts of bills, searchable databases of voting records, draft committee and conference reports, and court decisions.

Reinvigorate the independent investigative agencies, such as the General Accounting Office and the inspectors general.

In addition to allowing members of Congress to send mail to their constituents for free, letters from citizens to their members of Congress shall also be free.

Enact tough new federal anti-bribery and gratuity laws to stop corporations and the wealthy from purchasing government action, and vigorously enforce of anti-corruption laws by the Justice Department.

Prohibit members of Congress, Governors, state legislators and their staffs from accepting for their own personal benefit any gifts of any amount from lobbyists or the general public.

Require outside counsel to investigate ethics complaints against members of Congress, and toughen punishments within the congressional ethics processes for corruption, abuse of power and other wrongdoing.

Replace the Federal Election Commission with a vigorous watchdog empowered to enforce federal campaign finance laws.

Expand revolving-door lobbying "cooling off" periods for members of Congress and their top staff to at least two years.

Allow any member of Congress to require a floor vote on any congressional earmark, to stop wasteful spending.

Support the ability of cities to establish civilian police review boards to increase understanding between community members and police officers, provide a public forum to air concerns on policy matters and to ensure public oversight and accountability of their local police department.

The page you’re looking for isn’t here, but it’ll be ok.

As Republican politicians try to make it harder to vote, Democrats are working to expand access to the polls. Whether we are hitting the streets to register voters, engaging with local election officials, passing commonsense laws, or taking our fights against discriminatory voting laws to court, we won't stop working to promote a system of elections that is accessible, open, and fair. As Congressman and Civil Rights leader John Lewis says, “the vote is the most powerful nonviolent tool or instrument in a democratic society. We must use it.”

callmeslick wrote:I don't have either the time or inclination to pick them apart, but just look at some of those 'plans'. With zero by way of legislative representation, how do you suppose any of those have a prayer of happening?