oh, so when it comes down to it, you CAN come to your senses. So why are you wasting our time with your selfish bullshyt?
What are your thoughts on Secular Talk
- Thread starter Nuke Dukem
- Start date
storyteller
Veteran
Note I mentioned Gary Johnson though
. Anyway, if 15% of the electorate is or would prefer to vote for a candidate; then that candidate has a significant enough amount of support to have his/her ideas heard. It may end up costing the Dems a presidential or the Republicans; but if that many American voters are inspired by the policies then their voice should be heard and if the Dems or Republicans are feeling that threatened by the third party candidate...pull a Cuomo and adopt their policies to absorb that 15% of the electorate.Just be real about it breh. Would every potential candidate for 2020 latch on to Universal Healthcare bills if not for Bernie's success in the primary? I'm not saying he invented it. I'm saying that Bernie got on the national stage and presented it to the people as a viable alternative to incremental increases of the number of insured that his primary opponents were pushing.
storyteller
Veteran
On the podcasts topic, I've seen some David Pakman videos that I thought were pretty well put together but the dude is soooo bland that I can't get into most of his ish. Like that may be a good informative source of information but I haven't been able to enjoy the show enough to stick around and find out...but it did seem like it might be alright, I just don't know.
Benjamin Dixon is a dude I had been sleeping on until recently. I gotta check for him more.
Benjamin Dixon is a dude I had been sleeping on until recently. I gotta check for him more.
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
Oh I came to my senses after the loss. I was an establishment two parties only prior to that humiliating loss. That inexcusable loss got me out of that.
You're veering into "well what if?" territory.Note I mentioned Gary Johnson though
Just be real about it breh. Would every potential candidate for 2020 latch on to Universal Healthcare bills if not for Bernie's success in the primary? I'm not saying he invented it. I'm saying that Bernie got on the national stage and presented it to the people as a viable alternative to incremental increases of the number of insured that his primary opponents were pushing.
It won't happen.
Thats, that.
And Bernie just adopts everything that working senators can't actually get done but pretends he came up with it first.
Example?
storyteller
Veteran
Fam the entire premise of our discussion is whether or not a third party candidate can get to 15% in polling. This whole discussion been a what if from the jump where I'm offering examples of why I think it's more viable than completely impossible. That a "meh" candidate like Johnson got to double digits in some polls shows a significant amount of interest in alternative options. Add 40% of the electorate not voting at all and the idea that 15% is impossible to reach becomes just a bad a reach as if I were to call it likely. Unlikely? Sure, but Johnson got too damned close with massive gaffes to act like it's something that could never happen.
Let's do this, we'll remove Bernie's name from it and just put it this way. In 2016 the Democratic party by and large supported ACA expansion over a more immediate Universal Healthcare concept. When the Universal Healthcare concept was presented to them at a national level, it was embraced and shifted the Dems approach to the healthcare debate. That is the value of having alternative policies presented on a national stage.
Last edited:
Nice to see a thread derailed
storyteller
Veteran
I'm curious about this too. I know I saw him debate some alt-right cat once but he was hella aggressive. Continually called the dude a moron and clowned the guy which was deserved because the guy was completely unprepared for an actual intelligent debate. Not that I doubt you, I just haven't seen him interact with 'em besides that personally.
Long story short Kyle is related to trump voters. I even think he’s from Ohio or somewhere in the mid west. That’s why he identifies what they see in trump. So even if he doesn’t explicitly agree he sees the window to debate and persuade them and engage them because he see their grievances as something to be debated.
He does the same thing with alt right dudes.
Plus again, it’s one thing when someone like Ben Shapiro gets mad at identity politics. It’s a whole other beast when allegedly left leaning dudes do it. Look it up. This dude gets physically angry when identity politics are discussed. It’s like he’s mad white dudes don’t have the same cache to be able to have a core argument.
my point is that third parties are mega stupid in our voting system. Never accomplishes anything other than minor policy shifts that don’t gain traction because the ballot box still decides who sits in office. You can’t fight game theory like that. People will vote against something using the party most likely to stop what they totally don’t want. People rarely vote FOR something.
My other point is that we already have far left democrats with these talking points.
And I’d be cool with Bernie if he joined a party. But at the moment he’s attacking us while we’re weak and still trying to hitch a ride to us. Which is it?
Lol at this clown. Fam still stuck on Hillary hence him acknowledging Cenk telling folks to vote for her after saying he was backpedaling and apologizing.
I called him a bridge from folks on that side to the left due to him engaging certain topics although some like college campus shyt is entirely blown up by right wing media. He will then call out some of these free speech stuff that right wing media doesn't agree. Thars the part that I think makes people see him as problematic. For white folks who are apolitical without any knowledge of shyt, they'll view the absolutism as being reasonable. His beef with identity politics is mainly due to the weaponization of it by establishment Democrats. He's a little ignorant on the topic.
storyteller
Veteran
I get the general idea that the majority won't vote FOR something. But we're not talking a majority by any means. Bump that percentage requirement above 20 and I'd consider it completely unrealistic. But from a viability conversation, we've seen a candidate come close enough that 15 isn't impossible. It would be an outlier, yes.
This is true, but I'm not focused on far left here. Just the underlying concept of a protest vote and potential value it brings.
You've pretty much been presenting why this is his only option to mainstream these ideas in this discussion. Getting to 15% as an independent is possible but not likely by any means. Considering he's caucused with Dems forever, has been embraced by a large segment of Dems and could potentially bring in a large voting bloc that wasn't interested before...I'd contend there's mutual benefit. Especially with how much the Dems have lost down ballot.