Wait, so you think it’s more naders fault than the unjust, undemocratic system that installed bush or the gore campaign for pushing a partial recount open to an equal protection ruling (that’s the bush v gore basis) that it couldn’t even win or for not realizing that it needed left voters and adjusting its platform appropriately?
When is it the fault of the democrats for running a bad campaign? For running on a bad platform?
I’m saying that Nader, knowing full-well he has zero chance of winning, intentionally ran a campaign that could do nothing but harm Al Gore’s campaign and help the GOP.
The Green party did now fandango to the environment in that campaign than can ever be offset by them. They’re an environmentalist party that doomed the planet of of arrogance, stupidity, or duplicity, and I don’t care which. I blame them and anyone who voted for them for the current state of the world that they enabled with their irresponsibility.
Evil people are gonna try to be evil. When there’s an enemy at the gates we need to put aside our minor differences and work together to defeat them, not stab the other guards and let the city get overrun.
I’m no defender of the greens and I don’t think people should vote for them, so please bear that in mind before you read this:
You blame the self proclaimed environmentalist party and their voters, a tiny proportion of the electorate by comparison, for 24 years of the two non environmentalist parties devastating the climate while in power which they reached by receiving in every case several orders of magnitude more votes than the ostensibly environmentalist party did.
You blame them more than the foolishness of the gore campaign for not choosing the full recount it would have won, and the undemocratic system it was operating under for stopping the recount and installing bush.
Do you think that responsibility for the actions of people in power ultimately rests on their shoulders? Do you think that there was some deficit in the gore campaigns environmental policy and that the Green Party shaped itself to fit that niche?
I literally think people shouldn’t vote for the greens though, so why not talk about what I do support, voting psl?
Gore couldn’t do a full recount because there’s a federal deadline (first Tuesday after second weekend of December) by which the delegates must be selected so they can vote for President. That’s what Bush v Gore was about - whether or not the recount could go on past the date the electors were required to select the President. The Court ruled that the election date couldn’t be moved, so the recount couldn’t continue.
The ruling was that to allow only a partial recount (which gore would have lost!) would constitute a violation of the equal protection clause and that because the state couldn’t do a full recount in the three days remaining between when the Supreme Court heard the case and the safe harbor date that the stay would be granted and as a consequence, bush installed.
Once again: do you assign more blame for the events of the last 24 years to the people who voted for the self proclaimed environmentalist party than the major party that didn’t appeal to those voters, the undemocratic systemic failure at the municipal, county, state and federal level, the decisions made by the people in power during those times to perpetrate the actions of this nation and the administrative state actors who went along with them?
If you would prefer not to answer that question:
Why not abandon talking about the greens, a party I do not support or want people to vote for and instead engage with what I do want, for people to vote psl?
The GOP is gonna GOP.Blaming the enemy for being the enemy doesn’t change their behavior. Anyway - they’re a minority and should be easy to stop. Since the 90s, they’ve received a majority of the popular vote 1 time.
But they’ve managed to hold the White House for 14 years in that same time period and have gerrymandered the shit out of the Congressional map. Texas had a majority Democratic delegation to the US House from the Civil War until 2005.
Hiw have they achieved so much? Easy - they’re organized and put forth a unified front while the rest of us flail about chasing perfection, sabotaging and resistance, and get crushed.
Asking the GOP to stop winning is dumb. That’s their goal, and I can’t really expect them to not try and win. What I can expect is for those who oppose their policies to get their heads out of their asses and vote for the people who can stop the GOP. We can work on making the Dems better later.
Right now we’re being stabbed to death by the GOP, and instead of fighting that third-party voters are focusing on a hangnail.
If you’re claiming to hold an ounce of socialist leanings and you don’t oppose the GOP, you’re an idiot. They need to be stopped before any progress can be made. Look at the GOP as cancer and the Dems as Chemotherapy. You may not feel good about the Dems, but the GOP will kill the country if left unchecked.
Supporting third parties is like trying to cure cancer with a chain letter. It achieves nothing, wastes resources, and is super annoying.
Be careful with insults on world communities. I expect they’ll tolerate fewer and fewer qualifying words as the rhetoric heats up going into November. You’ve also spoken to me enough for a discerning eye to recognize that as a direct insult.
My vote for psl is by definition in opposition to the gop, although I don’t hold the same ideas as you that opposing the republicans a fundamental communist principle.
If the republicans were killing the country then it’d be dead already and good riddance. Democrats have consistently tacked right for the last 40 years and the country’s not dead because of it. Harris is running to the right of Regan. I have trouble thinking of a metric by which the country is dying that can be attributed to the Republican Party.
You keep bringing up what voting for a third party is like. Neither of us live in a world where the gop is a cancer. The gop doesn’t have to be stopped before the country can improve.
I actually don’t believe that America can have a communist future without some body representing the small bourgeois (closest thing I can think of to the land/local and regional capital axis that best describes the republican base) in the transition to socialism and eventually communism.
Wait, so you think it’s more naders fault than the unjust, undemocratic system that installed bush or the gore campaign for pushing a partial recount open to an equal protection ruling (that’s the bush v gore basis) that it couldn’t even win or for not realizing that it needed left voters and adjusting its platform appropriately?
When is it the fault of the democrats for running a bad campaign? For running on a bad platform?
I’m saying that Nader, knowing full-well he has zero chance of winning, intentionally ran a campaign that could do nothing but harm Al Gore’s campaign and help the GOP.
The Green party did now fandango to the environment in that campaign than can ever be offset by them. They’re an environmentalist party that doomed the planet of of arrogance, stupidity, or duplicity, and I don’t care which. I blame them and anyone who voted for them for the current state of the world that they enabled with their irresponsibility.
Evil people are gonna try to be evil. When there’s an enemy at the gates we need to put aside our minor differences and work together to defeat them, not stab the other guards and let the city get overrun.
I’m no defender of the greens and I don’t think people should vote for them, so please bear that in mind before you read this:
You blame the self proclaimed environmentalist party and their voters, a tiny proportion of the electorate by comparison, for 24 years of the two non environmentalist parties devastating the climate while in power which they reached by receiving in every case several orders of magnitude more votes than the ostensibly environmentalist party did.
You blame them more than the foolishness of the gore campaign for not choosing the full recount it would have won, and the undemocratic system it was operating under for stopping the recount and installing bush.
Do you think that responsibility for the actions of people in power ultimately rests on their shoulders? Do you think that there was some deficit in the gore campaigns environmental policy and that the Green Party shaped itself to fit that niche?
I literally think people shouldn’t vote for the greens though, so why not talk about what I do support, voting psl?
Gore couldn’t do a full recount because there’s a federal deadline (first Tuesday after second weekend of December) by which the delegates must be selected so they can vote for President. That’s what Bush v Gore was about - whether or not the recount could go on past the date the electors were required to select the President. The Court ruled that the election date couldn’t be moved, so the recount couldn’t continue.
The ruling was that to allow only a partial recount (which gore would have lost!) would constitute a violation of the equal protection clause and that because the state couldn’t do a full recount in the three days remaining between when the Supreme Court heard the case and the safe harbor date that the stay would be granted and as a consequence, bush installed.
Once again: do you assign more blame for the events of the last 24 years to the people who voted for the self proclaimed environmentalist party than the major party that didn’t appeal to those voters, the undemocratic systemic failure at the municipal, county, state and federal level, the decisions made by the people in power during those times to perpetrate the actions of this nation and the administrative state actors who went along with them?
If you would prefer not to answer that question:
Why not abandon talking about the greens, a party I do not support or want people to vote for and instead engage with what I do want, for people to vote psl?
The GOP is gonna GOP.Blaming the enemy for being the enemy doesn’t change their behavior. Anyway - they’re a minority and should be easy to stop. Since the 90s, they’ve received a majority of the popular vote 1 time.
But they’ve managed to hold the White House for 14 years in that same time period and have gerrymandered the shit out of the Congressional map. Texas had a majority Democratic delegation to the US House from the Civil War until 2005.
Hiw have they achieved so much? Easy - they’re organized and put forth a unified front while the rest of us flail about chasing perfection, sabotaging and resistance, and get crushed.
Asking the GOP to stop winning is dumb. That’s their goal, and I can’t really expect them to not try and win. What I can expect is for those who oppose their policies to get their heads out of their asses and vote for the people who can stop the GOP. We can work on making the Dems better later.
Right now we’re being stabbed to death by the GOP, and instead of fighting that third-party voters are focusing on a hangnail.
Good to know you don’t hold me responsible for the last 24 years of American policy.
I am not chasing perfection. There’s a lot I don’t like and have to look past about psl.
I’m not asking the gop to stop winning
It was a real stretch to read your response as a reply to me. Did you reply to the right post?
If you’re claiming to hold an ounce of socialist leanings and you don’t oppose the GOP, you’re an idiot. They need to be stopped before any progress can be made. Look at the GOP as cancer and the Dems as Chemotherapy. You may not feel good about the Dems, but the GOP will kill the country if left unchecked.
Supporting third parties is like trying to cure cancer with a chain letter. It achieves nothing, wastes resources, and is super annoying.
Be careful with insults on world communities. I expect they’ll tolerate fewer and fewer qualifying words as the rhetoric heats up going into November. You’ve also spoken to me enough for a discerning eye to recognize that as a direct insult.
My vote for psl is by definition in opposition to the gop, although I don’t hold the same ideas as you that opposing the republicans a fundamental communist principle.
If the republicans were killing the country then it’d be dead already and good riddance. Democrats have consistently tacked right for the last 40 years and the country’s not dead because of it. Harris is running to the right of Regan. I have trouble thinking of a metric by which the country is dying that can be attributed to the Republican Party.
You keep bringing up what voting for a third party is like. Neither of us live in a world where the gop is a cancer. The gop doesn’t have to be stopped before the country can improve.
I actually don’t believe that America can have a communist future without some body representing the small bourgeois (closest thing I can think of to the land/local and regional capital axis that best describes the republican base) in the transition to socialism and eventually communism.
You and I don’t want the same thing.