Are you a Republican or Democrat? Shame on you

[VivaRevolution]

does it really matter who the person is? Politics is a team sport. If i want democrat policies, i vote for the democrat. If i want Republican policies, i vote republican. No one is special, they are all party line. Pick one you prefer.

What if I told you, they were both lying?

Call that being black pilled yo.

Btw, I really hope you were joking, because this is how we end up with team white people.

 

[Gandhi]

Maybe on the national level, I could partially agree with this. On the state and local level, it is absurd.

Their are Dems where I live that are running for office, that when I searched what they have actually said, I would vote for literally Hitler first.

The Dems near Seattle have lost their fucking minds.

*there are,

I kid of course.

Definitely on a national level.

I agree it’s hard for me to comment on the state level with any blanket statement. Governors like Mitt introduces Obamacare before there was Obamacare, so I could see it.

Although calling something absurd and then making a literally Hitler statesman is kind a funny.
I also think the same rules apply, you pick the party that is pushing the policy you support despite the particular candidate. Maybe an example would help illustrate your thinking.

 

[BoxingFan653]

If you are still a Republican or a Democrat, shame on you. Shame, shame, shame!

I don't care if you support individual Republicans or Democrats if you can tell me exactly why you support those people. If you can point to specific statements, or policies that candidate supports, I am fine with that.

However, if you have ever checked a box on a ballot because of the letter next to that name, shame on you. If you plan on doing so in the future, not just shame, but piss on you.

You are a traitor to this nation if you vote up and down ticket for a party.

Discuss........

I actually think the vast majority know that the parties don’t represent them. The point is which party represents them less.

I agree that both are part of the issue but not being involved is also a huge decision

 

[VivaRevolution]

*there are,

I kid of course.

Definitely on a national level.

I agree it’s hard for me to comment on the state level with any blanket statement. Governors like Mitt introduces Obamacare before there was Obamacare, so I could see it.

Although calling something absurd and then making a literally Hitler statesman is kind a funny.
I also think the same rules apply, you pick the party that is pushing the policy you support despite the particular candidate. Maybe an example would help illustrate your thinking.

I am actually thinking about not voting in the midterms. My state is locked blue for the national level where my vote counts, and the state Democrats are horrible.

I support Medicare for all, and want Dems to win now that they have a platform that actually matters in a significant way. However Dems controlling congress, and radical social progressives running my state are two very different outcomes.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I actually think the vast majority know that the parties don’t represent them. The point is which party represents them less.

I agree that both are part of the issue but not being involved is also a huge decision

This is key. Are you voting for something, or against something. Hillary didn't understand this on even the most basic level.

 

[BoxingFan653]

This is key. Are you voting for something, or against something. Hillary didn't understand this on even the most basic level.

I’m voting because It’s the only way I can be involved with the process. I’m also middle Eastern and it’s also nice to be able to be involved with politics unlike my birth country of Iran

 

[VivaRevolution]

I’m voting because It’s the only way I can be involved with the process. I’m also middle Eastern and it’s also nice to be able to be involved with politics unlike my birth country of Iran

Alright a shiite. Can I get a fuck Saudi Arabia?

FUCK SAUDI ARABIA!

 

[Jack V Savage]

There are a lot of issues in the periphery of campaign spending, and I think it would be hard to address any of them without addressing campaign spending first.

IMO, an optimal scenario is one where all candidates are allowed / required to spend only a predetermined amount of money on their campaign, and their share of media buy was equalized as well. That way a congressperson's term is more like 1 and 2/3 of a year devoted to governance and only 4 months devoted to campaigning for re-election instead of a congress-person worrying about getting a big warchest six months into their term because their big money opponent is given record campaign funds by their corporate buddies (who benefit from the opponents policies).

The problem with the approach you describe is non-major parties. If we have eight candidates, they all have to get equal time? And then there are free-speech issues. I agree that it would be good if campaign spending were lower and if the season were much shorter. Not sure there's a good practical way to get there. If there is, I haven't seen it.

 

[franklinstower]

When Democrats had full control of the federal government they tried to expand healthcare to millions. When Republicans had full control of government they passed the largest corporate tax cut in history while increasing military spending. Democratic states fund public education. Republican states have teachers striking because they can’t afford to live. We had the basics of a meaningful plan to mitigate the effects of climate change under the Obama EPA. Under Trumps that’s all been scrapped and the main objective of his “environmental” plan has been to prop up a dead coal industry and open up national reserves for drilling.

Both sides suck in some ways. But both sides are NOT the same.

Agreed. It is almost always better to vote democrat over republican. The republican party is way more corrupted by money and corporate interest. Fuck the republican party. Democrats are horrible too but they are not as bad.

 

[Gandhi]

I am actually thinking about not voting in the midterms. My state is locked blue for the national level where my vote counts, and the state Democrats are horrible.

I support Medicare for all, and want Dems to win now that they have a platform that actually matters in a significant way. However Dems controlling congress, and radical social progressives running my state are two very different outcomes.

Again policy specifics and things individuals said, the state, etc. would be helpful

 

[Gandhi]

The problem with the approach you describe is non-major parties. If we have eight candidates, they all have to get equal time? And then there are free-speech issues. I agree that it would be good if campaign spending were lower and if the season were much shorter. Not sure there's a good practical way to get there. If there is, I haven't seen it.

Not having fixed election calendars and gag laws do the trick in Canada.

 

[ocean size]

They are not the same. However, if you think the worst Democrat is better then the best Republican, I could not disagree more.

There for, voting up and down ticket for a party is not logically defensible.

Can you please give examples of Republicans you would vote for over Democrats in the next midterms?

 

[VivaRevolution]

Again policy specifics and things individuals said, the state, etc. would be helpful

I looked, and can't for the life of me find the Snohomish County Democrats E-mails they were sending me that was pissing me off.

 

[Quequeg]

In my view what the Republicans/Trump are doing is wrong and dangerous for many reasons, unfortunately the only way to limit the damage is to vote straight Democratic.

 

[TeTe]

Registered Libertarian

Shame on me, I vote for every libertarian on a ballot (including Gary Johnson the past two elections) regardless of who they are.

Shame on me.

 

[TeTe]

Naw.

We can do better. How about communist libertarianism?

When fussion and robots get here, you use the state to build libertarian decentralized self governing cities, and communities.

I spent about 2 seconds thinking about that theory, and it is superior to communism.

The closest thing you'll get is left wing libertarianism. I just don't know anyone that's run on that platform in recent days.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

I have to blindly vote Republican this year, across the board, because if the Democrats regain power they will impeach our greatest president and then proceed to open up the border, raise taxes, and subject our country to the false song of globalism.

We have no choice.

Trump admitted to being a globalist.

 

[machidafan99]

I registered as Republican so I could vote for Ron Paul in the primary in my state when he ran though I am independent, really.

 

[Gandhi]

I looked, and can't for the life of me find the Snohomish County Democrats E-mails they were sending me that was pissing me off.

LOL

I just going to assume some local politician pressed some identity politics buttons of yours.

So I am going to put your “pissing on graves” and “literally worse than Hitler” stuff down to silly hyperbole.

I think if your point is you can’t just vote down the slate irregardless of who the actual candidate is, then that is fine, although not sure it warrants your indignant OP.

But even at the state level, politics is a team sport, and I don’t see any good examples from you of democratic team sports resulting in actual bad policy.

Still Romney signed health care and his democratic successor implemented it, so there is that.

 

[Gandhi]

I registered as Republican so I could vote for Ron Paul in the primary in my state when he ran though I am independent, really.