Political Discussion

Charity said:
I feel very sorry for all Americans to have a senile great-grandfather as president. It can hardly get any worse, that's the good side.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I feel sorry for all Swiss to have a government based around providing money shelters for the Oligarchs, Tyrants, and Nazis. Switzerland is the piggy bank for literally the worst people in the world.

Good cheese though.
 
Great episode of John Oliver last night.

Started out shitting on Eric Adams, then went on to talk about the decades long campaign by Republicans and Leonard Leo to remake the courts with conservative judges. And now much of a snake Mitch McConnell is.

The highlight of the episode for me was the graphic of Mitch McConnell jumping / crashing through a wall like the Cool-Aid Man when someone mentions Judge Appointees.
 
A friend I like otherwise shares a lot of "both sides bad" political content; they swing wide left, but are doing the "I don't see a difference between the candidates" thing. I especially hate when they address Harris support as cult of celebrity; I know there are some people who fully, unquestionably support her, but I think many of us are holding our noses and picking the less-fascist option knowing fully well we're working with a broken system.

This morning they shared a video where a pundit was saying if Jill Stein won 5% of the popular vote the AIPAC would be forced to fund the Green Party and we'd effectively destroy the two-party system. This seems deeply stripped from reality; for one, I'd imagine most people getting this message are on the left (or maybe I'm just in an echo chamber); it wouldn't be like 2.5% of otherwise-Trump voters and 2.5% of otherwise-Harris voters would make up that group. It would have an effect on the election, and not a good one. The pundit also says with that 5% "it wouldn't matter who won, because all we'd be talking about is Jill Stein." But, not to be too alarmist, we're facing a situation where if one candidate won, democracy and free elections would be on the chopping block. Plus, I don't think AIPAC funding would suddenly reshape politics in our country; the third party would probably be as disenfranchised as it is now, just with a budget.

I had to hold back from replying, but considering how pessimistic they are about the political landscape, this seemed like intensely Pollyanna-ish thinking.
 
Bull Shannon said:
A friend I like otherwise shares a lot of "both sides bad" political content; they swing wide left, but are doing the "I don't see a difference between the candidates" thing. I especially hate when they address Harris support as cult of celebrity; I know there are some people who fully, unquestionably support her, but I think many of us are holding our noses and picking the less-fascist option knowing fully well we're working with a broken system.

This morning they shared a video where a pundit was saying if Jill Stein won 5% of the popular vote the AIPAC would be forced to fund the Green Party and we'd effectively destroy the two-party system. This seems deeply stripped from reality; for one, I'd imagine most people getting this message are on the left (or maybe I'm just in an echo chamber); it wouldn't be like 2.5% of otherwise-Trump voters and 2.5% of otherwise-Harris voters would make up that group. It would have an effect on the election, and not a good one. The pundit also says with that 5% "it wouldn't matter who won, because all we'd be talking about is Jill Stein." But, not to be too alarmist, we're facing a situation where if one candidate won, democracy and free elections would be on the chopping block. Plus, I don't think AIPAC funding would suddenly reshape politics in our country; the third party would probably be as disenfranchised as it is now, just with a budget.

I had to hold back from replying, but considering how pessimistic they are about the political landscape, this seemed like intensely Pollyanna-ish thinking.
Click to expand...
not to mention there is absolutely no chance of Jill Stein receiving 5% of the popular vote. she would have a tough time getting 5% of the popular vote if she was the only third party candidate on ballots let alone one sharing real estate with Cornell West, RFK Jr. and whoever the Libertarians are running.

She's ran for President before and garnered 1.07% of the popular vote in 2016. If anyone thinks she will preform 5 times better than she did in 2016, I've got Russian made Trump brand sneakers to sell them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top