Current Topics
RoundTable for December 2018
by pdx rick
19 minutes 45 seconds ago
Justice is coming
by Bored Member
Today at 05:15 PM
ICE - the new gestapo
by NW Ponderer
Today at 05:03 PM
What Left?
by pondering_it_all
Today at 01:44 AM
Another Solution
by pondering_it_all
Today at 01:10 AM
Archie Moore vs Yvon Durelle, December 10, 1958
by Greger
Yesterday at 04:27 PM
Judge orders porn star Stormy Daniels to pay Trump $293,000 in attorneys' fees,
by pondering_it_all
12/12/18 09:51 PM
Election Day
by NW Ponderer
12/12/18 03:42 PM
The Passing Parade: Obituaries: 2018
by Golem
12/10/18 09:15 PM
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by chunkstyle
12/10/18 06:37 PM
Smart watches: Need Xmas Advice for Wifey
by rporter314
12/10/18 04:32 PM
None of the Above (NOTA)
by rporter314
12/09/18 06:03 PM
Israel negotiating with Hungary on revisionist Holocaust museum
by pondering_it_all
12/07/18 11:22 PM
Brexit Eve
by NW Ponderer
12/04/18 04:26 PM
Miscellaneous humor thread
by Jeffery J. Haas
12/04/18 12:52 AM
Our political elders
by Greger
12/03/18 02:52 AM
Round table NOVEMBER 2018
by pondering_it_all
12/01/18 07:59 PM
Historic Corruption
by pondering_it_all
11/30/18 08:36 PM
Sleazy Slimeball or Slimy Sleazebag?
by Ujest Shurly
11/30/18 08:25 PM
2 million federal workers receive memo warning they can’t use the word ‘resist
by pondering_it_all
11/30/18 06:45 AM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16430 Topics
283247 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#308926 - 10/14/18 07:12 PM Voters
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2194
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
A couple of weeks ago we were watching the 6:00pm news from a Seattle station. One of the segments was on a state school district that had fallen on terrible times. Their infrastructure was close to collapse (buildings and schools), the district had a large increase in students, the teachers were underpaid, etc. It is, basically, a genuine mess with no help in view. The reporter went on to say that in the last school district vote 83% of the parents, of the children in the school district, DID NOT VOTE! Let me say that again EIGHTY (80) PERCENT OF THE PARENTS OF THE CHILDREN IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DID NOT VOTE!

I, personally, am for making voting mandatory. Australia did it and it helped. Anyway, this particular case, I think, points out just how responsible the American voting public is. This IS a case of utter, shameful, irresponsibility of the parents of these children! In the last general election, in Washington state, a whole 38% of the voters even bothered to vote. I consider not voting to be incredibly irresponsible by any measure I can think of.

To vote, in Washington state, one has the ballot mailed to them and then they can mail it back. The state picks up the cost of mailing so it costs absolutely nothing to be responsible and vote. The only real cost is time. Even if you don't actually vote then sending back a blank ballot also tells the politicians things. Then there are those who are not noted for voting regularly. The Poor and the Young (18 to 28) are two that come to mind. There is another fact that is connected to voting. If your group does not vote then your group gets screwed. That is simple fact. The politicians know who brung them to the party and those are the ones the politicians pay attention to. There is nothing secret about this and has to do with taking care of business to keep your job. That too is simple fact.

Right now we are approaching another election in less than a month. The main subject of the tv talking heads is, right now, who is going to vote for who/what. There are a pile of speculations (tv speculation is the fare of the day and actual news not so much). Then we have the election and then we find out which talking heads had it right. Historically they really don't have a great fortune telling record.

The simple fact (another one) is that the American voting public is lazy, incompetent, irresponsible and apparently ignorant as well. There used to be a meme that went something like; "You can trust the electorate to do the right thing". I am no longer convinced and doubt that the American voting public even has enough competence to vote in their own best interest. Another example on this one would be the supporters of the Jackass. It seems that the majority are either on Medicare or about to be. These people are going to be dependent on Medicare yet they are supporting a Jackass who is actually destroying Medicare! They, the true believers, however, just don't believe it. There is no secret, it was on the budget and in the "tax reduction" bill (100 billion out of medicare, every year, until its dead). Seems that the 1% needed that money more than the elderly. What is amazing is that the elderly actually vote regularly! What is not so amazing, but rather discouraging, is that, these days, the elderly no longer have the capacity to act in their own best interest. What is really discouraging is that they are not alone in that respect.

Anyway, you might want to give this a little thought. So, when the election results are in, and your every wish is not fulfilled, you will understand it a bit more.

I sincerely hope that my conclusions are utterly wrong.

Top
#308927 - 10/15/18 03:07 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16372
Here's a simple fact: our system is controlled (mostly) by those who vote. (I say "mostly" because vote suppression/disenfranchisement works to counter that.) There are anti-democratic elements at play, but for the most part, we can overwhelm those elements. But, we need to do it soon, or the opportunity will pass. That's how dictatorships are born.

Like climate change, the signs are all around us, but the impetus to "do something" is not strong enough. We suffer through disaster after disaster, but, collectively, are complacent. My mantra has long been, "if you didn't vote, you can't complain." Unfortunately, that rarely prevents complaints.

Top
#308930 - 10/15/18 06:47 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
I sincerely hope that my conclusions are utterly wrong.


I hope the rest of your day goes as well as this part, because you are utterly wrong. grin

Blaming the young, the poor, the disillusioned and disenfranchised who choose not to vote for the outcomes of elections is a little like blaming the victims for the crime.

I don't know why people choose not to vote. But on the other hand sometimes I wonder why I even bother.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308931 - 10/15/18 07:04 PM Re: Voters [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
our system is controlled (mostly) by those who vote.

Pifflewink and poopoo. Our system is controlled(mostly) by the donor class.
"Those who vote" get a single yea or nay on a handful of people they know very little about every two years. The donor class is voting every day of the year with their wallets.

Oh, and they also control the propaganda machines that control the voters.

It has ever been thus and always will be.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308932 - 10/15/18 07:42 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2194
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
First, I was not blaming any specific groups as there others that also tend to not vote. If EVERYBODY agreed that there were only 2 solutions - right (Republicans) and left (Democrats) and they voted their druthers the Dems would win in a heartbeat as there are, simply, more of those. The reason for that is that the Republicans tend to clump together and are currently clumped in the extremist side of the right. That being the case the left/Democrats comprise more of the voting public than the right.

The simple truth is that Dems tend to not vote as consistently as the the Republicans. They would have, incidentally, won in 2016 if there was no electoral college. She lost, basically, because the Republicans out smarted the Dems and used their resources better.

My point, however, is that there are entire groups that tend not to vote and, if they had the capacity to actually turn out in their own best interest they would have a large say in how money is spent and who gets taken care of. That too is a simple fact.

As far as the donor class is concerned I don't believe they control anything but the propaganda machines, and the elected themselves and, while that is true, its also true that the elected, first and foremost, pay attention to them that voted for them first and the donor class that helped second. This happens because they want to keep their jobs and them that did the electing need to be coddled, deferred to and talked to on a regular basis. All the money in the world won't keep them employed if they don't do that.

Anyway, we have only a few more weeks and we will know what happened. My fond hope is that everybody votes, on both sides. If that happens the Dems win, if not, they lose. There seems to be no doubt that most of the Republicans are going to vote and the main question seems to be whether the Dems can get out their own voters. When I think about the snarky Dems who voted for Jackass because they were upset I get a little antsy about the chances of the Dems. While the Republicans are the ones who started the "my way and don't give and inch" I fear that the Dems have learned the lesson but not the solution as there are groups on the left who didn't get their way and voted for Jackass before. I don't think they have gone away or actually understand the facts. It dawns on me that there are folks on both sides that are just having a terrible time understanding how it works, what facts are, and actually much about the real world at all. The simple fact (another one) is that if somebody does not vote for the Dems they are, basically, voting for Jackass regardless of what they think. This is, basically, the problem in a nutshell?

Top
#308935 - 10/15/18 11:28 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
its also true that the elected, first and foremost, pay attention to them that voted for them first and the donor class that helped second.


Ummm...you actually believe that? Lets use Donald Trump as an example. What Has he done to help the voters who put him in office?
I'll wait while you compile a list.

For the Donor Class there were Trillion$ in tax cuts. Environmental regulations were rolled back so they could make more money. Banking regulations rolled back so they could make more money. Trade deals re-written so they could make more money....

I hear the poor folks have a great time at his rallies though.

Back to that crowd that doesn't vote, statistically their additional votes would contain the same number of Red voters to Blue voters. You'd get bigger numbers but the same result. I think you're seriously wrong in assuming they would all vote the way you want them to.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308937 - 10/16/18 03:25 PM Re: Voters [Re: Greger]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16372
According to Pew Surveys, Greger, demographics indicate that the higher the voting percentages, the more likely Democrats would win:
Quote:
Among those likely to once again stand on the sidelines on Nov.7: relatively large numbers of young people, Hispanics, and those with less education and lower incomes.

Whites continue to be disproportionally represented in the voting booth: 37% of whites are regular voters, compared with 29% of non-whites, including 31% of blacks and 24% of all Hispanics. Conversely, 40% of Hispanics and considerably smaller proportions of blacks (17%) and whites (20%) say they are not registered to vote.
Who Voted, Who Doesn't, and Why.

BTW, my point earlier was not that money in the campaigns doesn't influence voters -it clearly does, and needs to be curbed - but that voters still (presently) have the ability to control outcomes. Influence campaigns only work on the margins, mostly to suppress the votes and deceive voters. If people vote their conscience and pay attention to issues, they can overwhelm the suppression, gerrymandering, and other manipulation efforts. The problem is, they don't.

Top
#308938 - 10/16/18 04:04 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Money narrows the width and breadth of issues that we are allowed to discuss or vote on. Outcomes are defined by what is allowed to be discussed. The status quo gets maintained this way.

Or as Chomsky puts it:

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate."

May explain why nothing changes for most folks and why voting doesn't matter for a lot of em. Rich are gettin richer off the setup to be sure by limiting what's acceptable to argue about. Hell, we couldn't even give some of the most important politicians and their ideas a real hearing on this board if they were wearing the wrong banana sticker. The conditioning runs so deep within us consumers.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/16/18 04:05 PM)

Top
#308939 - 10/16/18 05:31 PM Re: Voters [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
demographics indicate that the higher the voting percentages, the more likely Democrats would win:


Reality dictates that it all depends on which team riles up the non-voters the most. Rile up the rednecks and more rednecks vote. Rile up the POCs and more of them vote.

The media has been working the crowd into a frenzy.

I think Democrats were ahead in their GOTV efforts but the Kavanaugh Affair was a lightning bolt that drew the attention of the less likely to vote, conservative leaning crowd. Votes will be closer than they would have been if it hadn't happened at all. It's a good thing he was confirmed. They would have overwhelmed us if we'd won a round right before the election.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308946 - 10/17/18 06:27 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2194
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Trying to say that Jackass is representative of anything, other than himself, would be a huge mistake. After the last big Florida weather disaster he didn't even both to go down there for several days. When he did, however, his base was there waiting and making excuses for him. Saying that Jackass is anything but a jackass is an error in judgement.

As far as the donor class is concerned. There are the rich on both sides of the isle. The Dems, however, are not as eager to give away the store as are the Republicans. The reason is pretty simple on that one. They feel that their donor class ARE their voters as they are expert at getting idiots to vote against their own best interests and also controlling said virtually mindless idiots. In other words, they are supporting those they feel are responsible for their jobs and the actual voters are of no real interest. This can be fixed when corporations are no longer considered to be an individual and money is not speech. I am not even sure that an amendment is necessary. It would be interesting if the congress could write two laws saying that out loud and see what happens. If nothing else it would start a discussion.

Think of a congressman who had a weather disaster and didn't show up for several days because he/she was doing something else. I would predict, without hesitation, that he/she wouldn't be a congressman after his/her next election, especially if said politican was a Democrat.

A politician has to stroke his/her voters or he/she loses. Jackass doesn't stroke them so much as entertain them. I don't think his base is clever enough to realize that this isn't TV and WILL effect them in the end. When their medicare goes up in smoke they are going to have a really bad time finding anybody else to blame but their beloved leader and liar in chief.

Top
#308950 - 10/17/18 09:36 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Trying to say that Jackass is representative of anything, other than himself, would be a huge mistake.

And not one that you and I are liable to make.
You, however, seem to think that some of the other politicians have got your best interests at heart.

I don't.

Quote:
I don't think his base is clever enough to realize that this isn't TV and WILL effect them in the end.

Republicans are just as clever as Democrats, they simply have a different philosophy regarding how government should operate. They fear the effects of a Democratic(socialist) takeover far worse than the effects of a smaller government.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308955 - 10/17/18 11:20 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2194
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
OH, I think there are politicians with their hearts in the right place. I have known some that started out that way but then lost their way. I suspect its easy to do with a LOT of incentive along the way based, pretty much, and a belief that corporations are considered to be a single person and money is speech, both of which just seem wrong to me although I can understand the construction that has made it so it doesn't make it right.

I keep on saying it but I don't have all that many fellow travelers. The left believes humans need regulation and the right does not. I believe that its that simple. I know several conservatives which will argue, with vigor, Social Security and Medicare, for instance. They consider both to be taking the freedom of making their own decisions away from them. You might not consider either of those things to be regulations but serious conservatives do. I remember an ongoing arugment over Social Security with a friend of mine. He assured me that if SS didn't exist people would do the right thing and set aside for rainy days and retirement. I told him they would not and referred him to the passage of SS along with all that went with it. I can also remember going to Russia and seeing all the elderly on the streets begging and starving. The assumption of conservatives, that people will do the right thing if just allowed, is just wrong but they refuse to believe. Its like the religious argument over original sin set to a modern tune and its very strange to me. My friend also told me that if people didn't do the right thing then they deserved to starve, die, etc. He said that would set an example and others would not make the wrong decisions. He was wrong about that too and there are lots of examples to prove it.

However, to the point. I think classic socialism has ever worked out. Its been tried, and its failed every time. It simply does not work. However, socially funded state initiatives do work. I don't believe such qualify as socialism. That would mean that Police and Fire departments, Public schools and libraries would then be socialist but nobody thinks that. They all work but they both also need public interest to stay on an even keel. When the public becomes disinterested in this stuff bad things happen. We have seen this with all of these. To assume that healthcare is one that is special and won't work is just wrong but you need an aware public for any of them to work and the shame is that the public seems to take it all for granted and only gets involved with desperation sets in - again, schools and police are great examples of this.

A good example is the school district in Washington state where 83% of the parents of the children in that school district didn't vote and the district was a genuine mess. I betcha, if you were to ask any of those non-voting, and irresponsible, parents what they thought of their school system they would set off a horrible whine and blame it all on teachers and the administration. To function in a Democracy folks gotta take an interest, they don't have to all run for office but they sure as hell should VOTE!

Oh, I like to use two groups as non-voting, the poor and the young. If there were ever two groups that got screwed with alarming regularity its those two. What's good about it is that some of the youth get it and get involved and the same includes the poor. But they are few and far between. I can guarantee you, however, if they both did vote things would REALLY change. I also consider the education loans to be one of the worst things ever done to youth but it hasn't made them vote with any regularity as far as I can tell. They don't, I guess, have the time to think it through. There have been signs the young are starting to awake but who knows?

Anyway...................

Top
#308960 - 10/18/18 02:46 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
JGW,
As far as socialism having been tried and failed everywhere I would draw your attention to China? Not my cup of tea being harsh and authoritarian. Another aspect that you miss in the 'Failed everywhere' logic is that it is immediately attacked by the forces of capitalism. Wether it has been thru assassinations of it's leaders, manipulation of currency, or outright state violence imposed on it. That's my recollection western capitalism's jihad against it. Also, there is the fits and starts in capitalism's beginnings with failures as well. The Irish famine comes easily to mind. Yet it's now followed on a level of religion thru out the world. It may have been resisted by the entrenched fuedal order at the beginning but it hardly met the resistance and outright state violence that socialism has been attacked with.
There has never been political persecution of capitalists in this country as their has been against organized labor, socialists, communists or anarchists. Unless you think paying a progressive tax is on a par with getting treated to a Pinkerton bullet or a McCarthy trial...
My guess is the juries still out but I do believe that the choice of 'socialism or brutality' is valid.
Finally, regarding the poors, I'm reminded of a quote from somewhere that said 'nothing breaks the human spirit like poverty'. There has been little for the poor to celebrate by way of political victories and the politicians rarely, if ever, craft legislation to help reduce poverty. Heck, Democrats have been willing to slash social services to burnish their 'gittin tough on the poors' bona fides to moderate boomer voters. A nasty cycle that only socialists seem willing to address and speak directly too, now as in the past.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/18/18 02:49 PM)

Top
#308965 - 10/18/18 06:22 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
started out that way but then lost their way
They didn't lose their way, they became politicians.

Quote:
The left believes humans need regulation and the right does not.
That's quite a hat you keep drawing all these simple facts from.
The left believes that capitalism needs to be regulated.
The right believes that people need to be regulated.
You hear all about environmental regulations being rolled back, because they cost capitalists/donors money.

You don't hear much about abortion regulations being rolled back.
Because people can't be allowed to make their own decisions.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308969 - 10/18/18 10:12 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2194
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Chunk;
I travel to China on a regular basis and I can tell you that China does not own all sources of production. That is a simple fact and there are a LOT of American owned companies there to prove it. I really don't care why it fails, it just does and has everytime its been tried. That is a simple fact. There are lots of these pie in the sky things that look real good on paper but absolutely fail. The reason, I think, is that they leave out the human need for greed and everything that means. Russia, for instance, tried Communism, yet another pipe dream of the thoughtless. I believe that we need gov to regulate but the kind of stuff you are talking about are excellent examples of simply going too far (which both sides regularly demonstrate).

When you say capitalism I always wonder. The other side, for instance, doesn't actually seem to believe that private ownership is a good thing. I believe its a reality. Hell, even my dog knows what is her's, such as her collar and her bed.

Gregor;
Now as far as regulation goes. The Right/Republicans/Conservatives believe, absolutely, in the right of people to live regulation free and should be allowed to make their own mistakes and pay for the same. They make no distinction between any kind of regulation. If you talked to a good, old fashioned conservative he/she would explain it to you. Incidentally, regulation takes many forms but it boils down to simplicity, ie. "This is what you can do and this is what you can't" If you don't mind society will stomp on you to one degree or another. Regulation is necessary because, basically, many humans are offensive jerks who tend to harm others and that is, I think, what its really about. The problem, again, is that sometimes the left/Democrats tend to go too far just as the right/Republicans are doing right now (going too far).

Its really quite strange. The Republicans will, if asked, tell you that Police and Fire Departments are ok (although one of the red states actually tried to privatize Fire Departments a few years ago (and failed)). These are socially supported agencies and could actually be called "socialist". It would seem to me that might be a place to start a discussion but then, obviously, what do I know? These socially supported agencies are just another way to 'regulate' but most don't think those two (and a pile of others) are wrong or evil.

This is, again, why a two party system can be REALLY functional. This will only happen when those running things have open minds and need to find common ground to get anything done. Its that common ground thing that regulates BOTH sides from going too far. The mess we have now is because the Republicans (who started this one) decided they would no longer play the two sides common ground thing which I believe to be the basis for our entire nation. The Dems are now playing the same game to punish the Republicans for starting it in the first place. BOTH sides, if we are to survive are going to have to stop the word service (and little else) and start listening to each other. I have no idea if this is even possible but I remain convinced that its what will save us from ourselves.

The abortion thing is pesky. It used to be, a very long time ago, that even the Catholics allowed Abortions when Incest and Rape were involved. No more, now everything that might stop a pregnancy, include using rubbers is a great sin and is actually thought of as killing something that doesn't even exist! I am not for abortion if those against will stand up and take the unwanted children and, humanely, be responsible for them through college. I really don't think most others would feel much differently. That, however, is never going to happen. Those against take, absolutely, no responsibility for the results in their so called pro-life stance, they just want to stop abortions/safe sex/protected sex, etc. no matter what because God told them to. Hell, we have a vice president who is unable to be alone in a room, with a woman not his wife, because he fears his urges. Muslims make the same claims against a woman showing their hair as it forces them to do bad things due to the lust incurred. They certainly have a right to their belief but they don't have a right to tell everybody else what to do without taking one iota of responsibility for their actions.

If the sides are ever to start talking to one another they must start to bring a bit of common decency and regulate their offensive speech crap and both sides have to start doing that before they can ever start talking to one another again. I also suspect that it wouldn't hurt of the seats in both the house and the senate staggered parties amongst the seats (no more this is our side and that is yours because we are all here to do the nation's work and not the parties or personal druthers).

Sorry - I get waaaaaaaay too wordy!!

Top
#308970 - 10/18/18 11:00 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Originally Posted By: jgw
Chunk;
I travel to China on a regular basis and I can tell you that China does not own all sources of production. That is a simple fact and there are a LOT of American owned companies there to prove it. I really don't care why it fails, it just does and has everytime its been tried. That is a simple fact. There are lots of these pie in the sky things that look real good on paper but absolutely fail. The reason, I think, is that they leave out the human need for greed and everything that means. Russia, for instance, tried Communism, yet another pipe dream of the thoughtless. I believe that we need gov to regulate but the kind of stuff you are talking about are excellent examples of simply going too far (which both sides regularly demonstrate).

I don'y know where you keep getting the idea that the government owns the means of production (setting aside the other very important sharing of surplus product). My understanding is that the means of production are shared socially. I may be wrong on that point and wouldn't mind being corrected.

You have not addressed the fact that it has only been tried while under constant assault by capitalist government. I wonder how well a student of another village would do if he was constantly being punched while trying to study? I'm going to guess not well. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the student was hopeless and couldn't learn.
My understanding is that the Chinese government maintains rules of ownership with foriegn companies in China. Is that correct?

Top
#308972 - 10/19/18 04:44 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
I think a planned economy is an essential element of communism, and that has always failed miserably compared to a market-driven economy. It is a problem of complexity: When you plan to produce X number of say bagels, what happens when you turn out to need X+10? Ten people have to go without bagels. Apply the attempt to plan all production of everything, and you end up with a lot of people going without, queues for staples, goods in the wrong part of the country, etc. Compare that to market-driving production of everything with things like discounts on over-produced goods, raised prices on items in shortage, producers entering the market when demand is high for something, and so forth and it all works automatically.

That is the main reason why communism always has failed: Planning everything becomes an N-squared problem. So we in America have simplified the problem. We do plan, but for a very limited subset of all goods. For example, we plan to educate everyone in public schools, plan to provide fire and police protection to all, plan to provide military protection for all, plan to regulate the stock market, plan to provide health care for most of the population, plan to provide social security for the elderly, etc.

Most Americans are unaware that all of these "planned" items are socialism plain and simple. We already are socialists! All the right and left are arguing about is exactly what should be planned or not. Our pie is cut at 50% and we are fighting about if it should be 49% or 51%.

Top
#308977 - 10/19/18 12:16 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Well we just jumped from socialism to communism PIA but even so, where do you get the idea that an economy must be planned under communism?
Quick note: Russia and China have earned the distinction of raising the most peoples standard of living in the shortest amount of time. Not advocating to live under their particular government systems. Just pointing out that fact in contradiction to the free market effeciency fable that so many believe in.
Case in point: China has gone all in on renewable energy and mass transportation by allocating resources and Capitol to persue a low carbon objective. The U.S. On the other hand has done the opposite. Apparantly the invisible hand of the free market doesn't want to believe in climate change and resists the need to pair resources and Capitol to the issue. Instead, it allocates resources to produce confusion and sow doubt among the population and buys politicians to look the other way. Much like the free market did over tobacco causing cancer.
So what's failing whom with deadly consequence?
Any who, though it's got nothing to do with voting, I'd be curious if you could point me to where its baked that communism has to have a centrally planned economy.

Top
#308978 - 10/19/18 12:49 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8912
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Apparantly the invisible hand of the free market doesn't want to believe in climate change and resists the need to pair resources and Capitol to the issue. Instead, it allocates resources to produce confusion and sow doubt among the population and buys politicians to look the other way. Much like the free market did over tobacco causing cancer.

The great failing of capitalism is that anything that is not monetized has no value and is of no consequence. Any expenditure on things that do not generate a profit is considered to be a waste of money. Even conservation (saving) is considered to be a waste of money. Capitalism is soulless, which is not necessarily a bad thing in a tool, but is is a very bad thing in a philosophy of life.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#308979 - 10/19/18 01:15 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Agreed Logtroll.
I would also add that capitalism and it's distribution of excess product (profit) gets decided by a minority of participants (board of directors). The result is that the Officers of the organization come first. Property owners (share holders) second and the labor last and very much least. Any attempts by labor to address this inequality is thwarted by boards of directors thru co-option of political systems, threats and intimidation to the workforce (think saint Alan, Ayn Rand's boy toy, Greenspans' worker insecurity delivering corporate profits) and co-option of legal frameworks.

All being accomplished currently. Trump, Clinton. Makes no difference. Capitalism gets what it wants whoever is pretending to run the show.

Worker co-op's are the opposite of that model and would be more accurate to compare to a socialist or communist organization, IMO.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/19/18 01:16 PM)

Top
#308980 - 10/19/18 05:42 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2194
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
First, what socialism is. Here is one definition (you can google more but the definition is quite specific:

Definition of socialism
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Here is a wikipedia link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

It all boils down to the same stuff. Gov gets control of all production and then turns the management over to the "workers".

The point is pretty simple - words mean something and what I see people calling socialism isn't even close. You might also take a look at the "Socialist Worker's Party" (a group of serious loons). There is, in other words, a vast difference between 'socialism' and society taking over specific things in the public good. Some of these are Police and fire departments, libraries, education. The one currently causing fits but should be on that list is 'healthcare'. Actually I suspect that 'the military' is yet another gov undertaking which is supported by taxes. Basically, I guess, social enterprises, if tax supported, all qualify. This, of course, means 'agriculture' too, especially BIG agriculture, which is always claiming to be capitalist and privately owned. When one considers the billions that one is raking in I suspect calling it a "social enterprise" may be a bit off the mark.

My point is simple, all this business about 'socialism' is simply missing the point. Bernie Sanders, for instance, simply does not qualify as a 'socialist', unless you really mean "capitalist socialist". His call for Medicare for All is a good example of this and, as far as I can see a real cop out. We need some kind of single payer system which is completely available to all citizens and paid for, completely, by taxes and gov. The Bernie plan kinda pays for it but, if its like medicare, there will also be a medigap for the insurance companies to sell. On top of that gov must also seriously regulate the entire industry. No more Jackass plans like solving the drug problem by insisting other countries raise their drug prices and no more insurance companies. If we don't seriously regulate the entire industry we will be bankrupt within 10 years - others have done it and we should too!

We should also keep in mind that the United States is the ONLY industrialized nation that has a decreasing life expectancy whilst those that control the costs, control the industry, etc. have an increasing life expectancy. We sacrifice nothing, insofar as our healthcare is concerned. If we do it right we save over a trillion dollars annually on top of the fact that our healthcare will actually be better.

I should also mention that Switzerland has instituted a different healthcare plan and their costs are higher than the single payer systems as they kept the insurance companies in the loop. Their plan is pretty straightforward. If you are an insurance company you must give away basic healthcare and they can charge for the rest. One of the results of that one is that the insurance companies now own most of the hospitals in Switzerland. Interesting times.......








Edited by jgw (10/19/18 05:43 PM)

Top
#308982 - 10/19/18 06:56 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
Quote:
Apparantly the invisible hand of the free market doesn't want to believe in climate change and resists the need to pair resources and Capitol to the issue. Instead, it allocates resources to produce confusion and sow doubt among the population and buys politicians to look the other way.


It's a bit more complicated than that. Sometimes the difference is simply a short term outlook or a longer outlook. Case in point:

Walmart solar panels

Top
#308984 - 10/19/18 08:34 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
the definition is quite specific

Your definition isn't specific at all, it's all over the map. Here's one that that is pretty specific.
Quote:
so·cial·ism
/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.


We elect people to represent us. They write regulations to control the means of production, distribution and exchange. These regulations should insure that there is a level playing field for everyone.

Quote:
socialism
These days, the word socialism gets tossed around so much, it's almost lost all meaning. Originally, though, it was the bedrock of Marxism and meant that workers and their community should control the market for what they make.

Because the Soviet state eventually strayed far from Marx's idea of socialism towards Lenin's totalitarian communism, socialism is now often used to mean everything from "fascism" to "progressivism." But in its purest form, socialism was a political, social, and economic system meant to empower the working class. In the U.S. today, though, it's often used as shorthand for "the services that government provides and which are paid for by taxes." Depending on who's talking, that idea is either a goal or a target.


A system meant to empower the working class.

So stop with your definitions of "classic socialism" and government control of the means of production and try to get yourself into the 90s where we are trying to empower the working class through higher wages and social programs supported by taxes.

Now, just as in the days when Karl Marx formulated his theory, the rich have gotten rich on the backs of the working class. Inequality is rampant.

The Proletariat gets trampled into the dirt by the Bourgeoisie and the Aristocracy just doesn't give a sh*t.

That's the battle which has raged for eons.

So...try to get past your definition and read mine. Take it to heart because it's the definition all the rest of us are using in the discussions.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308988 - 10/20/18 03:01 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
A small point but important one is that, as far as I have understood it, Marx was not so much offering a theory but an explanation of how capitalism worked and what was its glaring deficiencies and contradictions with it. His suggestions of what should be done were general and not specific. If I'm wrong on this point please correct me.
I haven't seen where he proposes that government must be the organizing force of production, a top down approach.
In fact, it has been and is being done from the bottom up thru workers co-op's in many places in the world. It has been resisted in this country by the bosses.
Other less direct forms are labor unions.
Otherwise Gregor, I agree with how you painted it.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/20/18 03:09 AM)

Top
#308989 - 10/20/18 03:05 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Walmart throwing up solar panels is like Jeffry Dahmer donating blood. It ain't complicated PIA, less you got mutual funds that require it to be.

Top
#308991 - 10/20/18 05:48 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
I currently hold zero stocks or mutual funds, and I think Walmart putting up solar panels is an instance of a corporation looking at the bottom line and making a rational choice. You can make all the silly analogies you want, but Walmart putting up solar panels is a case where a corporation has looked into the ROI of something beyond the next quarter. Just because you hate them doesn't mean everything they do is bad. The real world is not black and white.

Top
#308992 - 10/20/18 01:17 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
I have no doubt Walmart looked at the ROI and went for it. If I had to bet, there was a tax subsidy involved that helped sweeten the pot.
Walmart does a lot of crappy things that are made with ROI in mind beyond the next quarter. Unfair labor practices, tax abatements, externalizing the labor costs onto state and local tax payers, environmental degradation are just a few of the negative aspects of Walmarts drive to create excess surplus for its board and shareholders.
I stand by my analogy.
My apologies, you may like Walmart for other reasons than being a shareholder. Perhaps it's how they manage to roll back prices and provide you with savings everyday?

Top
#308994 - 10/20/18 11:52 PM Re: Voters [Re: pondering_it_all]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Walmart putting up solar panels


Even a blind pig finds an acorn now and then.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#308999 - 10/21/18 02:11 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
I'm not a snob, so I do shop there sometimes. Feels very democratic to shop with the masses! I like it not so much for the prices, but simply because they tend to have a lot of things I need all in one place. When I want something cheap, I usually look at Amazon. When I want something now, Walmart is useful.

I think the Walmart victims list is overstated. If their employees want higher paying jobs, they can go look for them. Still a free country, at least for now. The real victims are small business owners who were making a 30% markup, who now are out of business because they can't compete. Boo hoo. All their customers are happier at Walmart, and I tend to side with customers instead of small business owners.

Top
#309000 - 10/21/18 02:47 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Your confusing snobbishness with resentment PIA. Much like most Neoliberals confuse capitalism with democracy.
Walmart runs an extractive business models that, IMO, degrades local economies. Capitol flight accelerates and wages are reduced all while local taxpayers pay for the priveledge of supporting poor income workers.
I'm glad you've found good prices at. 30% off and stuck it to the small business owner. Heck, he might even be greeting you on the way in for those savings.
I resent my tax dollars supporting their business model but Walmart is one of many to externalizer their CODB on local governments and the tax bases to prop up their profits.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/21/18 02:51 AM)

Top
#309004 - 10/21/18 07:34 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
You are assuming that the employees of the small businesses Walmart killed were making higher wages, with absolutely zero evidence. I doubt they were. And why would you think they were better off working for small business owners with no HR policies other than "do it my way or you're fired", when such policies were very likely criminal or abusive in many cases?

I've actually worked for very small businesses and for large ones, and the small ones were MUCH MUCH worse. Very much a dictatorship, and I would especially have hated to be a woman working for those a-holes. At least a larger corporation usually has some written policies and tries to avoid abusing employees for fear of lawsuits.

Maybe you are thinking of union jobs? Those were not really a factor in the average small business for a very long time, long before Walmart. If anything, those employees are better off now because they can buy stuff at Walmart instead of paying much more to their former bosses.

I just looked up some data on what retail employees get at various big chains, and Walmart is not the lowest:

What they pay

Of course, there is no data on what Mom & Pop's hardware was paying.

Top
#309006 - 10/21/18 12:18 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8912
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
I have no doubt Walmart looked at the ROI and went for it. If I had to bet, there was a tax subsidy involved that helped sweeten the pot.
Walmart does a lot of crappy things that are made with ROI in mind beyond the next quarter. Unfair labor practices, tax abatements, externalizing the labor costs onto state and local tax payers, environmental degradation are just a few of the negative aspects of Walmarts drive to create excess surplus for its board and shareholders.
I stand by my analogy.
My apologies, you may like Walmart for other reasons than being a shareholder. Perhaps it's how they manage to roll back prices and provide you with savings everyday?

Walmart is a machine that serves the desires of our culture very well.

Just take a blue pill and relax...
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#309007 - 10/21/18 12:22 PM Re: Voters [Re: logtroll]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8912
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#309009 - 10/21/18 05:50 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
Just saying: If working for Walmart was so bad, everybody would quit. Working a Walmart job is better than no job. I'd rather work there than at McDonalds and I HAVE worked at McDonalds. In that same retail space, Costco looks like the best but it's not that much better. Working in retail sucks, but everybody has to start somewhere.

Stay in school, kiddies: Go for STEM or business, if you want to have a good job. Do it at a your state college or university so you don't end up a debt slave.

Top
#309011 - 10/21/18 06:17 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2194
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I have always wondered about the Hate Wallmart movement. I live in a small community of about 20,000 souls. We have a Walmart. Two people, who used to work for me are now the manager and assistant manager. Walmart has always, as far as I can tell, advances from within whenever they can. They pay untrained, off the street, new employees not much. This is because they are not worth much until they do get trained. The ones that resist training get laid off. I have always thought that was probably the way it should be. I have often wondered if the incapacities of workers new to working are worth less because of a failure in our schools. It used to be that High School, for instance, had classes for the students to get a bit on training on what happens next, ie. civics, home skills (boiling eggs, running a toaster, dealing with a check book, carpenter training, auto shop, machinist training, etc). Most of that is not there anymore. Now its all about college and little else. This is, I think, one of the problems we are having with not enough electricians, carpenters, plumbers, police, etc.

Then there is the meme about Walmart destroying local businesses. I have seen some close after Walmart arrives. I also noted that those that did close did not do what local businesses are supposed to - provide service. These businesses didn't even take time out of their really important stuff to say hello to somebody coming in to do business. My wife started, and ran a jewelry store for years. She did that because she was not able to find a jewelry store, in town, that would actually greet a customer when they walked into their store, she survived, and made a profit, for something like 40 years. Local stores are expected to beat the crap out of out-of-towners when it comes to customer care. If they don't/can't do that then they deserve to fail. When they fail they tend to blame it all on Walmart and I don't buy it.

Walmart is a big organization. Not unlike most big organizations they have all sorts of problems but their personnel practices, I think, are not the top of that list of complaints.

I also realize that there are exceptions to just about everything claimed above, sorry about that...........

Top
#309012 - 10/21/18 07:32 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
I still remember the wallmart battles of the eighties when they spread, locust like, across the country with their business model of externalizer costs, gaining tax abatements and forcing the off shoring of manufacturing to over seas factories.
There was also a small court settlement over sexual discrimination in promotion and hiring a short while ago.
Then their is the tax avoidance schemes that walmart uses to avoid paying into the system for.
There are plenty of reasons why I hate walmart but for starters JGW :
400 million memes



76 billion more to keep em company

That's just the tax avoidance that small businesses can't take advantage of. I suppose a warm customer greeting could neutralize that unfair advantage.

The list of large corporate abuses is long and has contributed greatly to our sad state of affairs. Is it any wonder that facism has marched in lock step with corporate globalism?

I do see good sales on toilet tissue this week though so maybe it's not all bad?


Edited by chunkstyle (10/21/18 07:33 PM)

Top
#309013 - 10/21/18 08:14 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13409
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
I still remember the wallmart battles of the eighties when they spread, locust like, across the country with their business model of externalizer costs, gaining tax abatements and forcing the off shoring of manufacturing to over seas factories.
There was also a small court settlement over sexual discrimination in promotion and hiring a short while ago.
Then their is the tax avoidance schemes that walmart uses to avoid paying into the system for.
There are plenty of reasons why I hate walmart but for starters JGW :
400 million memes


A lot of that was outrageous but at least back in the old days of Sam Walton, even though Wal-Mart was the 800 pound gorilla, he was OUR 800 pound gorilla. Wal-Mart prided itself on selling American made products.

Wal-Mart is perhaps the single biggest or one of the biggest reasons so much American manufacturing went bye-bye, because even though a fair amount of it was on the wane by the 1980's, when Sam died, his kids did a complete one-eighty and started their Made in China juggernaut.

I could forgive a lot if Wal-Mart had remained the champion of US manufacturing. The kids clearly did not share the old man's love of "MADE IN USA".
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309017 - 10/21/18 10:04 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
corporate globalism


Such as it is, it's the era we live in.
There have been worse times to live through. Probably will be again.
Might not be long.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309020 - 10/21/18 11:24 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Agreed.
As long as the man making over $300/hr and pays no taxes can convince the guy making 30/hr paying all of the taxes that his problem is the lazy people making 10/hr and more than likely not the same skin color to boot.


Edited by chunkstyle (10/21/18 11:25 PM)

Top
#309022 - 10/22/18 03:52 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16372
Chunk, you have encapsulated the problem well. There is a line, spoken by John Dickenson, in the musical1776, that puts it this way: "Don't forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor." The power of self-delusion is strong.

The problem and history of "The Wal-Martizaton of America" is real. I agree with the sentiment that if Sam Walton's "Made in the USA" approach had maintained, Wal-Mart would have a different impact - but it also wouldn't be nearly as big and profitable. The kids followed Lenin's prescription by outsourcing the exploitation to poorer countries - not that Lenin saw this as a virtue, just a reality. (For the record, I think that Marx and Lenin were HUGHLY wrong in their approach, but some of their analyses of economic circumstances was, and is, spot on.)

Now that we're here, though, what do we do about it? In my view, we need leaders who are clear-eyed about realities and focused on the best future for all of us, not just their cronies and fellow travelers. The best chance of finding them is getting rid of the old thinkers standing in their way.

Top
#309024 - 10/22/18 07:05 PM Re: Voters [Re: NW Ponderer]
Ujest Shurly Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 370
Loc: Sterling Heights, MI, USA
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
... we need leaders who are clear-eyed about realities and focused on the best future for all of us, not just their cronies and fellow travelers. The best chance of finding them is getting rid of the old thinkers standing in their way.


Yes, the Republican Party, Hillary, Pelosi, Schumer, Warner, Stabenow, Murray, Feinstein, etc. Make room for Booker, Harris, Warren, Gillibrand, Hirono, Duckworth a few others and the liberal Young Turks just entering the arena.
_________________________
Vote 2020.

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
#309025 - 10/22/18 07:52 PM Re: Voters [Re: NW Ponderer]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
.
Now that we're here, though, what do we do about it? In my view, we need leaders who are clear-eyed about realities and focused on the best future for all of us, not just their cronies and fellow travelers. The best chance of finding them is getting rid of the old thinkers standing in their way.


Get rid of the corporate wing, go bold with ideas, go populists with your message. Crush the fat cats with your support of ideas that have overwhelming majority approval. It aint hard unless your taking the corporate money.

Or, as the Democratic autopsy one year later stated:

“One of the overarching important themes of the report is a challenge to the conventional wisdom that the best way for Democrats to defeat Republicans is to give ground to them and be ‘moderate,’” Solomon said. “Overall, the results haven't been good when Democratic candidates have poured vast amounts of resources and messaging into trying to appeal to the relatively scant number of ‘persuadable’ Republicans rather than inspiring enthusiasm and mobilizing turnout. When avoiding or opposing progressive populism, Democratic Party leadership has allowed right-wing populism to be the only door open for anger against the establishment.”

report here

It's worked remarkably well for this party in Yirrup, lead by this Corbyn fella. Membership has actually increased in his Labour part he now leads.
In the U.S. the traditional populist party of the people has been led by classist technocrats that have managed to cut the balls off the huntin dog and wonder why they come up short on votes after elections....


Edited by chunkstyle (10/22/18 07:58 PM)

Top
#309026 - 10/22/18 08:12 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Here's an example of a dog that can hunt
Populism intact

Top
#309028 - 10/23/18 01:55 AM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
I have a delicious US Representative choice this year: I could vote for Duncan Hunter, who has been indicted on over 60 charges of misuse of campaign money, wire fraud, and so forth. Or I could vote for the Democrat. Duncan and his wife go on trial after the election, but it's really a very well documented and blatant case so he's 99.99% sure to be found guilty of something. The first thing he thought of was to blame it all on his wife! I think a divorce is it his near future, too.

This should be fun either way. Unfortunately, when a US Rep goes to jail and resigns the governor doesn't get to appoint his choice. That only happens for absent Senators. Instead they have to hold a special election, so Republicans would get a chance to trot out some troglodyte for that. Like Mitt, if they could persuade him. He did have a summer house in San Diego for a while.

Top
#309031 - 10/23/18 04:05 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6566
Loc: Highlands, Tx
If she is a Trump supporter, she will not file for divorce. She will double her support for Mr Trump in hopes of fulfilling her already large self loathing quotient.

If he is in a largely Republican district, there is a better than even chance he will be elected.

I mean really ... let me repeat something I have said many times ... the American electorate is largely stupid
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#309032 - 10/23/18 04:29 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
The american republic is largely alienated and uninspired while working crap jobs for crap wages. AT least republicans offer their voters the enjoyment of owning the Libs. Libs offer more endless think tank drivel about norms and traditions and Bi-partison solutions.

Here's a fresh hot take on the Great Pretenders' hectoring recently that points this up:
Your indifference only makes us ignore you more

Top
#309040 - 10/23/18 11:36 PM Re: Voters [Re: rporter314]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8069
Loc: North San Diego County
Quote:
there is a better than even chance he will be elected

Certainly, and I'm going to enjoy that outcome, too. Because the charges are SO many, SO well documented, and SO blatant they are both going to be convicted. I mean they took the kids to Disneyland on campaign funds, for God's sake! They both actively tried to hide their illegal spending by telling their accountant personal items were for supporter entertainment.

It's going to be really entertaining watching people who voted for him deal with their crimes and their sentences. Reality comes to rub their dumb-ass noses in the poo they made in the House.

Top
#309059 - 10/25/18 06:08 AM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13409
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Here's an example of a dog that can hunt
Populism intact


I don't see him as a populist actually, just a Dem with some sack.
I hope he eventually runs for the WH.
Trouble is, I wish he'd run in 2020.
Trump and any other Repub would be toast.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309060 - 10/25/18 12:47 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
Ujest Shurly Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 370
Loc: Sterling Heights, MI, USA
I could get behind him!
_________________________
Vote 2020.

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
#309062 - 10/25/18 01:19 PM Re: Voters [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Here's an example of a dog that can hunt
Populism intact


I don't see him as a populist actually, just a Dem with some sack.
I hope he eventually runs for the WH.
Trouble is, I wish he'd run in 2020.
Trump and any other Repub would be toast.


We've seen that play Jeff.
I doubt very much that the corporate wing of the party would let him. If recent history is a guide they would certainly put the fix in on the fight.

Top
#309064 - 10/25/18 04:41 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Great interview of Ralph Nader by Larry King on why and how the Democrats won't win in 2018. Interview with Nader begins at 15;00.
But hey, there's always Bob Mueller to come in for the wind. Amiright?

They'd rather keep their state rooms and go down with the ship...

Top
#309074 - 10/26/18 04:09 AM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13409
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Here's an example of a dog that can hunt
Populism intact


I don't see him as a populist actually, just a Dem with some sack.
I hope he eventually runs for the WH.
Trouble is, I wish he'd run in 2020.
Trump and any other Repub would be toast.


We've seen that play Jeff.
I doubt very much that the corporate wing of the party would let him. If recent history is a guide they would certainly put the fix in on the fight.


Possibly but I think it also depends on whether they want to chalk up another loss.

2010 - 2014 - 2016...

2018? 2020? Can a party actually sustain five major losses of that magnitude?

Like was said, keeping their staterooms while going down with the ship. But sometimes seeing the water line actually traverse the portholes in your stateroom provides impetus in the right direction for a change, especially when you start to realize that the other guys already took all the lifeboats.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309079 - 10/26/18 12:30 PM Re: Voters [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1158
Is that a wished for sentiment Jeff? From my perspective, these races have been very winnable and should be now. You have one of the most unpopular presidents in modern history with unpopular policies from his party tightening the race. As Nader said 'eerily reminiscent of 2016'.
You cant wage a populist battle with a corporate majority of 'new democrats' dominating your party.
If you do, the results are defeats in 2010-2014-2016, etc...
My gut tells me Nader's right and telling the truth. These centrists Dems need to be thrown overboard. They don't deliver anything to anyone cept their donors.

Top
#309085 - 10/26/18 04:19 PM Re: Voters [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14415
Loc: Florida
Quote:
They don't deliver anything to anyone cept their donors.


Ojeda is still thinking like a soldier. Once elected he will begin to think like a politician. It might take a couple or terms but he'll come around.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Who's Online
1 registered (1 invisible), 50 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2