The Politics Post - Page 2 — The Bump
February 2017 Moms

The Politics Post

2456710

Re: The Politics Post


  • A higher showing may motivate the elephants and donkeys to move in that direction, though. That's best case for my vote; move the two large parties stances slightly in the next round.
    Doubtful - all that Nader accomplished in 2000 was to elect Bush over Gore.  
    scifichick09skiingstarkjennpearl007

  • A higher showing may motivate the elephants and donkeys to move in that direction, though. That's best case for my vote; move the two large parties stances slightly in the next round.
    Doubtful - all that Nader accomplished in 2000 was to elect Bush over Gore.  
    It also forced the Democratic party to change in order to appeal to their voter base again. IE; move their stances slightly in the next round.
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
  • Lafreeman21Lafreeman21
    500 Love Its 100 Comments Second Anniversary Photogenic
    member
    edited September 2016
    @scifichick09 You're making the same point as several PPs. Points for finding a logical article. I liked it. It talks about 3rd party voting as a boycott, which is what I'm doing:

    "The first theory of change, the boycott, assumes that if people simply refuse to vote, it will threaten the establishment with loss of legitimacy. This will in turn cause that establishment to become more responsive to the demands of the boycotters."

    They go on to say that it doesn't work in the US because voter turn out is so poor, the parties don't have to cater to their constituents. This is true. This is why @MissMerciBeaucoup ;has belittling shared the effect of Nader at me. The article talks about Nader's blurry impact too. The boycott vote doesn't work well. Meekly voting GOP and sending letters to Congress about disliking their financial stances doesn't work well either.

    This round, the GOP is already trying to re-appeal to their voters. The fact that such an out-there, anti-establishment candidate got the party nomination is pretty clear sign that they had to make changes in order to stay relevant. (Otherwise, The per-party-standard Cruz would be up there) If we're going to have any change in the GOP, the time will be relatively soon.

    I am aware of the impact of my 3rd party vote. I'm an ENTP with a rare-for-us conviction.  No one needs to continue undermining my decision to vote 3rd party. I suppose it's entertaining, but it won't change my mind on my hot-button issue, which boils down to our fed government's spending per GDP. I wouldn't try selling gun control to @WinchesterGirl either.

    I'm also not sure why people are degrading my decision at all. Some of you are probably social and fiscal liberals, and would find it incomprehensible if I voted for Trump based only on his marginally closer alignment on finances and debt.

    ETA: So I'm actually defecting, not boycotting. Whoops.
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
    WinchesterGirlMamaD233kap1988ChaoticWolf
  • @Lafreeman21 I suppose I should've put more context to my post. I wasn't trying call you out specifically, that's why I didn't tag you. I'm sure there are more than a few people on this board voting for third party or not at all. I was just trying to make a point about why I feel the third party, or non-vote, is a wasted vote. And I felt that article laid out pretty well how I felt. I know very few 3rd party voters (or non-voters), if any, will change their minds and vote either Trump or Hillary, but I was just laying it out there in hopes that maybe I could change just one persons mind. I'm very sorry if I offended you, that was not my intention.

    ME: 25, DH: 27

    TTC #1 since 09/2015

    Miscarriage @ 10 wks 02/28/2016

    BFP 05/28/2016!

    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
    skiingstarkjennpearl007
  • @scifichick09 You're making the same point as several PPs. Points for finding a logical article. I liked it. It talks about 3rd party voting as a boycott, which is what I'm doing:

    "The first theory of change, the boycott, assumes that if people simply refuse to vote, it will threaten the establishment with loss of legitimacy. This will in turn cause that establishment to become more responsive to the demands of the boycotters."

    They go on to say that it doesn't work in the US because voter turn out is so poor, the parties don't have to cater to their constituents. This is true. This is why @MissMerciBeaucoup ;has belittling shared the effect of Nader at me. The article talks about Nader's blurry impact too. The boycott vote doesn't work well. Meekly voting GOP and sending letters to Congress about disliking their financial stances doesn't work well either.

    This round, the GOP is already trying to re-appeal to their voters. The fact that such an out-there, anti-establishment candidate got the party nomination is pretty clear sign that they had to make changes in order to stay relevant. (Otherwise, The per-party-standard Cruz would be up there) If we're going to have any change in the GOP, the time will be relatively soon.

    I am aware of the impact of my 3rd party vote. I'm an ENTP with a rare-for-us conviction.  No one needs to continue undermining my decision to vote 3rd party. I suppose it's entertaining, but it won't change my mind on my hot-button issue, which boils down to our fed government's spending per GDP. I wouldn't try selling gun control to @WinchesterGirl either.

    I'm also not sure why people are degrading my decision at all. Some of you are probably social and fiscal liberals, and would find it incomprehensible if I voted for Trump based only on his marginally closer alignment on finances and debt.
    So just on a interesting side note: Hillary's financial plan puts us less in debt than Trump's. 

    "The latest estimate shows Clinton’s economic plan would add $200 billion to the national debt over the next decade, while Donald Trump’s would add $5.3 trillion – or 26.5 times as much as Clinton’s – according to a new report from the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB)."

    Here is more of the article if anyone would like to read it. 

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-v-hillary-clinton-comparing-the-cost-of-their-plans/




    Married to my Soul Mate since 09/06/09

    BabyFruit Ticker

    MC 10.23.15 @ 10 weeks
    scifichick09Xstatic3333MissMerciBeaucoupjennpearl007
  • @scifichick09 Gotcha. I was just starting to feel like 8 ppl were belittling my decision making process. I don't usually get that for the political issues that I care about. It seems more rampant in debates about affirmative action and such.

    It was a good article. It brings up most of the shortcomings in what I'm doing. I'm hoping that defecting will work better than the article expects, this election. I would prefer any 3rd party voters to think about what they're doing and why vs emotional "I'm moving to Canada!" style votes also :)

    In the meantime, this is my fave (politics)facebook thing right now:

    It at least gets you to focus on the positives and what you care about.
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
    ChaoticWolf
  • MamaD233MamaD233
    100 Love Its 10 Comments Name Dropper Photogenic
    member
    edited September 2016
    Well I support third party voting and have done so myself in the past. The two party system that this go around obviously failed to deliver candidates to either party that inspire the masses of Americans will never ever change as long as most people feel locked into the two party system. Voter turnout sucks worse and worse it seems with 2008 as a historic exception. I've been hearing people describe elections as the lesser of two evils since high school and I'm 40 now. I think more people should feel free to vote other and their conscience and break the power lock of the donkeys and elephants. Voicing your true beliefs about who should lead your nation isn't a wasted vote - it is your right in a democratic system. 
    Lafreeman21blush64ChaoticWolf
  • Lafreeman21Lafreeman21
    500 Love Its 100 Comments Second Anniversary Photogenic
    member
    edited September 2016
    @skiingstark I don't give much weight to the man's current version of a financial plan. It's a mess, and he changes plans on the fly. He has specifics on the tax side, not so specific on the where reductions would come side. I think he's fiddling with the penny plan right now? The campaign sells better if he just talks about cutting taxes (which people like!) without mentioning spending cuts (which people don't like!)

    He at least has a platform partially based on reducing spending. His half-ass plan doesn't accomplish that, but it's a goal.

    Clinton has a fully formed budget plan. She is supportive of expanding both tax collection and tax spending, and doesn't show any indication to reduce or slow the growth of the national debt. Reducing spending is not a goal for her.

    (Edit: One candidate has a complete financial plan to do exactly the opposite of what I want, the other has a incomplete/bad plan to do what I want). Ergo, I have marginally closer alignment with Trump.
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
    WinchesterGirlkswiger06
  • I agree with you about the electoral college obstruction @Xstatic3333. I almost ended my post by saying "do away with winner take all elections" but I felt like a politician ending with a call to action lol

    So maybe all the third parties need to coalition a referendum vote or something of the sort. Probably would require a constitutional amendment, actually. 
    Xstatic3333
  • @Lafreeman21 I wasn't belittling you, I was pointing out the reality of what a 3rd party candidate accomplished in the 2000 election.  

    Separately, I actually would have preferred it if the 3rd party candidates were included in the debates, because I think it would give a more clear view of how ready they are to handle the presidency.  And given the recent interviews with Gary Johnson - it seems like he needs to hit the books a little.
    scifichick09skiingstarkjennpearl007
  • @MissMerciBeaucoup Doubtful - your terseness projects a demeaning tone. 

    I do agree with inclusion in debates being helpful to help judge a candidate's readiness. It helps a lot with primary debates. 
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
  • You say terse, I say succinct.  No matter, can't please everyone.  Sorry, am I being terse again??
  • @MissMerciBeaucoup I have a style of debate I like. I enjoy when people throw facts at me. The article on 3rd party votes was great; I could re-examine my viewpoint and test it. The deficit comparison between Trump and Hillary was great; I could re-examine my viewpoint and test it. I didn't know his plan sucked as much as it does; I learned something.Talking about electoral colleges and the logistics of why 3rd parties fail, okay. If you throw new information at me, I may change my opinion. When you say "And given the recent interviews with Gary Johnson - it seems like he needs to hit the books a little."

    I mean, source? What am I to research based on a barb? It's inflammatory, so you feel like you won and got a punch in, but it doesn't make me question my assumptions.

    Barbs and slurs is not something I find compelling to research; it's like a degeneration into being just emotional. I try not to act inflammatory towards someone or their ideas during a debate to make them feel attacked or stupid; even when I disagree. I like when both parties can explain our viewpoints and bring up data and grill each other on logic, not throw slurs. It can be so much fun. Even with people with extremely different political views. Mexican nationals on handgun laws, Swedes on social programs.

    People get barb-y. It happens. But I feel like we're missing the point of a political discussion once we start trying to hurt the other person or make them look stupid. I can't really debate with you, because you haven't shared many of your opinions, you've mostly just jabbed at my thoughts. I agreed with your stance and reasoning for 3rd party debate presence, but I don't have much else to go off. The fund managers you work for are voting Hillary, presumably because the company's best interests would be better served by her? I'm not clear if their voting would be motivated much by the impact on the firm's taxes, seems like they would still vote based on the personal impact. Voters don't understand what a drive to bring back manufacturing would do to cost of living... That's a bit interesting. It's quite likely, campaigns pander simplified things to the public. But it's still rolled into a barb on at Trump, not a selling pitch for any particular viewpoint.

    Meh, debates can be fun. Parts of this one were fun. I learned something new about Trump's budget. I saw a very coherent article about impacts of 3rd party voting, and how emotion is not a good driver for it.
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
  • @MissMerciBeaucoup I have a style of debate I like. I enjoy when people throw facts at me. The article on 3rd party votes was great; I could re-examine my viewpoint and test it. The deficit comparison between Trump and Hillary was great; I could re-examine my viewpoint and test it. I didn't know his plan sucked as much as it does; I learned something.Talking about electoral colleges and the logistics of why 3rd parties fail, okay. If you throw new information at me, I may change my opinion. When you say "And given the recent interviews with Gary Johnson - it seems like he needs to hit the books a little."

    I mean, source? What am I to research based on a barb? It's inflammatory, so you feel like you won and got a punch in, but it doesn't make me question my assumptions.

    Barbs and slurs is not something I find compelling to research; it's like a degeneration into being just emotional. I try not to act inflammatory towards someone or their ideas during a debate to make them feel attacked or stupid; even when I disagree. I like when both parties can explain our viewpoints and bring up data and grill each other on logic, not throw slurs. It can be so much fun. Even with people with extremely different political views. Mexican nationals on handgun laws, Swedes on social programs.

    People get barb-y. It happens. But I feel like we're missing the point of a political discussion once we start trying to hurt the other person or make them look stupid. I can't really debate with you, because you haven't shared many of your opinions, you've mostly just jabbed at my thoughts. I agreed with your stance and reasoning for 3rd party debate presence, but I don't have much else to go off. The fund managers you work for are voting Hillary, presumably because the company's best interests would be better served by her? I'm not clear if their voting would be motivated much by the impact on the firm's taxes, seems like they would still vote based on the personal impact. Voters don't understand what a drive to bring back manufacturing would do to cost of living... That's a bit interesting. It's quite likely, campaigns pander simplified things to the public. But it's still rolled into a barb on at Trump, not a selling pitch for any particular viewpoint.

    Meh, debates can be fun. Parts of this one were fun. I learned something new about Trump's budget. I saw a very coherent article about impacts of 3rd party voting, and how emotion is not a good driver for it.
    Sounds like you are a touch sensitive to be having political discussions in an online forum. Where you think I was throwing slurs or barbs, trying to hurt you, make you look stupid?  I mean seriously I have no idea what you are talking about.  I thought we were all having a lovely and civil discussion on here and I kept it respectful at all times - as did all the other ladies on this board.  I didn't share enough of my opinions?  Whatevs - I certainly chimed in a bunch on this thread at various points, one of which specifically in response to a PP who was looking for the business/investment perspective on the candidates.  I kept it brief and high level, because I don't assume that everyone is interested in hearing more about my view on it, and frankly didn't want to delve deep into economics as I know that isn't always an interesting topic for everyone.  I don't debate the way you would like?  Well wow, let me rectify that immediately.  I assumed that anyone who would jump in on a political thread like this would be up to date on the current happenings of their preferred candidate and probably the others in the race as well.   So when I said "And given the recent interviews with Gary Johnson - it seems like he needs to hit the books a little." I was referring to the much publicized interview and forum with him of late, where he in one instance didn't know what Aleppo was, and in another, couldn't name one world leader that he admired.  I wouldn't be so didactic as to tell you or anyone else on this board the news of the week regarding their candidate (I assumed you would be already aware).  Since foreign policy is really an important part of being the president, yeah, I think he should probably read up on the most basic questions regarding that.  That was my point.
      
    krobscifichick09poetryandoceans
  • re: Gary Johnson 

    He'a making a complete fool of himself and chance for 3rd party candidate to be taken seriously. 

    The President's main job responsibility these days is foreign policy and how we interact on a global scale. He has CLEARLY shown he knows nothing about what is happening in the world. 
    Me: 36, H: 37
    FTM, 2 Furbabies
    married 03/17/07
    lived in Houston, Austin, Los Angeles and NYC
    due: 2/15/17
    MissMerciBeaucoupcheymarie29poetryandoceanskirstynikole
  • @MissMerciBeaucoup I quoted you where I thought was mainly a barb, and explained why I didn't think it added value. You continue to discuss me instead of my views, now also bringing in the theory that I'm a touch sensitive, alluding that I need to study the news of the week on my candidate, and mocking me having preferences on debate styles. I have no respect for that style of debate; It's emotion-based and it won't convince me to consider my viewpoint. It works as well as criticising grammar.

    Now that you've specified foreign policy weakness was your point, I can investigate that some. Maybe it'll be convincing enough that I'll change my view. 
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
  • @Lafreeman21 I think the big recent Gary Johnson event most were recently referring to was when it came out in an interview that he doesn't know what Aleppo is. Given that city's importance to current world events, many found that extremely disturbing. Might be worth looking into. In all honesty I don't know much else about him, aside from the fact that, of course, he's a Libertarian. I spent more time looking into Jill Stein. 

  • @Xstatic3333 yeah, he's missed the world leader quiz question too. Maybe he's even more isolationist than he claims, lol. Trump makes gaffes like a hobby. Clinton doesn't seem to often. She had a basket of deplorables, but I dunno of others. She seems like a solid candidate for her party, it's just diametrically opposite my views.
    Me: 31  H: 32
    Married: 10/10
    EDD: 8/27/16  MMC 1/16
    Rainbow Boy: 2/04/17
    TTC: 4/18 BFP: 1/2/19
    EDD: 9/6/19
    Pregnancy Ticker
  • So here is a fun question I like to ask my classes, that I thought would be cool to find out what you guys think:

    Normally people debate on what the size govt should be (that is one of the most basic differences between the parties).... how I like to ask the question.... What do you believe the govt should do? The size is irrelevant, the size is whatever is needed for what you believe the govt should be involved in. So what do you guys think the govt should be involved in? 


    Married to my Soul Mate since 09/06/09

    BabyFruit Ticker

    MC 10.23.15 @ 10 weeks
    jennpearl007
  • I 100% agree with @PerraSucia. I don't have much else to add, as she basically summed up how I feel.

    Trickle down economics doesn't work, IMO

    ME: 25, DH: 27

    TTC #1 since 09/2015

    Miscarriage @ 10 wks 02/28/2016

    BFP 05/28/2016!

    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
    skiingstarkjennpearl007
  • skiingstarkskiingstark
    Ninth Anniversary 500 Love Its 500 Comments First Answer
    member
    edited October 2016
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=1

    Wow, big news about Trump's taxes. He really should just release his tax returns like every other person who ran for president in our modern times. 


    Married to my Soul Mate since 09/06/09

    BabyFruit Ticker

    MC 10.23.15 @ 10 weeks
    PerraSuciascifichick09
  • 18 years is a HUGE burden on the middle class. 
    skiingstark
  • I totally thought there was a limitation on losses. I mean I've never had enough to carry over for years but I can't believe you can indefinitely claim business losses until they're fully accounted for.
    skiingstark
  • I have a question that is unrelated to the candidates and more about the electoral process in the US - because I am a US citizen that just declared citizenship (dad didn't register my birth because he thought he had lost his citizenship) so this is the first election that I'll be participating in. I have an idea of which candidate I'll vote for but the process sounds different than the Canadian system. From what I understand I'll vote on propositions? Where can I find out more about the propositions I'm likely to find on my ballot (in Texas)? And the general electoral process? The Canadian education system is great, but doesn't teach the US electoral process...
    ---TW BFP and MC mentioned - scroll down past the Lilo and Stitch gif to avoid ---




    Me: 33 & DH: 33
    Married: 07/2006
    TTC: 10/2015
    BFP #1: 11/2015, MC 12/2015 (7 weeks)
    BFP #2: 06/2016, EDD 2/15/2017



    Pregnancy Ticker






    yogadevil
  • @yogadevil - no propositions would make it a simpler process the first time through - thanks for the links. And I am registered to vote, though thanks for checking, I think the deadline is this week or next. 
    ---TW BFP and MC mentioned - scroll down past the Lilo and Stitch gif to avoid ---




    Me: 33 & DH: 33
    Married: 07/2006
    TTC: 10/2015
    BFP #1: 11/2015, MC 12/2015 (7 weeks)
    BFP #2: 06/2016, EDD 2/15/2017



    Pregnancy Ticker






    yogadevilWinchesterGirlskiingstark
  • I was reading that trump is also being accused of having people repay him through his foundation so they could both get the tax write off on it. But using that money for personal stuff and claiming the business didn't get the money to claim it as a loss. 

    Which would be SUPER gnarly if true. 
    scifichick09skiingstark
  • Good article. The situation here is so heartbreaking for so many women. 

    skiingstarkjab3-2
  • I ask this with all sincerity. In light of the latest Trump video speaking about women, do those of you who planned to vote for him still plan to do so?

    And if so would you care to explain? 

    I'm curious to hear the other side of this. 
    Me: 36, H: 37
    FTM, 2 Furbabies
    married 03/17/07
    lived in Houston, Austin, Los Angeles and NYC
    due: 2/15/17
    lfrank12skiingstark
Sign In or Register to comment.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards