I'm not voting in this year's election

[wegs]

Whatever leads to positives changes is fine with me. The only problem is that when crowds think with their hearts rather than their minds (not saying that about you) is that the change they get doesn't correct the problems that they have.

I'd rather just see better people run but who in their right mind would want to be in politics these days? Parties are just names so if you get a good candidate to run they can do that as a Democrat but whatever is effective would be good by me.

Look at all the protests/marches (not referring to the current black/white/police protests) and do they ever result in or produce candidates that you would want a real political leaders in charge of anything?

What changes are you looking for in particular?

I’m tired of old rich white sexist men getting elected. As long as they fit those categories - all at the same time - I don’t see much change happening. Biden is not competent to become the next leader and Trump is just...we know what Trump is. I suppose paddoboy has a point - how to get Trump out of office. So you swallow your pride and vote against the guy you dislike, instead of FOR the guy you like.

Most of my friends vote Democrat, and they are cringing at the thought of Biden, but they will vote him in to remove who is currently there. Doesn’t something seem wrong here?

I’ll say that my life doesn’t revolve around politics but I’m caring more these days, after going through Covid with a President who didn’t seem to take it seriously. Covid affected everyone’s life/lifestyle and seeing a President incapable of handling a crisis with grace, is beyond unsettling. Now, with civil rights tensions escalating, he acts like it doesn’t matter...like it’s not happening. So, I care now.

 

[wegs]

What do you all think of Joseph de Maistre’s phrase “every nation gets the government it deserves?” How can that be true if every nation’s voters don’t all agree on government matters?

 

[parmalee]

You don’t know me at all lol You have no idea my struggles in life and why I dislike Trump and Biden. So, your self righteous, egoist tone is of no use to me.

I know that you have repeatedly posted in a manner that reflects ignorance of issues highly relevant to matters that are at stake here, i.e., you have posted wholly inaccurate information about what single payer healthcare systems would entail. If you are voting based upon a profound misunderstanding of the issues at stake, then that is wholly irresponsible IMHO.

No one likes Biden, but his "sins" pale in comparison with Trump. This really is a lesser of two evils scenario, in that one of the choices is purely "evil," in all respects that matter to ordinary citizenry, i.e., not the rich/born-rich, etc.

 

[parmalee]

Yes, definitely leave it to the pros. They know what's best for you.


Politicians don't want educated constituents; they're harder to manipulate.

Admittedly, it's a highly contentious issue--and not a "popular" viewpoint. And the fact that there is no plausible way to really screen voters for their level of understanding and knowledge of the issues is... well, problematic, to say the least.

 

[pjdude1219]

I dislike both Trump and Biden, neither is any better than the other. I feel that the Presidency has become little more than a figurehead position, and it doesn't really matter who wins. Congress seems to control everything, anyway.

Having wrestled with it a bit, I'm settled about this decision, now.

Biden is a closet republican and racist, so he and Trump seem cut from the same cloth. Are you going to vote? If you don't like either candidate, why are you voting?

if you cant see that biden bad as he may be is clearly better than trump we are better off if you don't vote

 

[Seattle]

What do you all think of Joseph de Maistre’s phrase “every nation gets the government it deserves?” How can that be true if every nation’s voters don’t all agree on government matters?

I agree with people getting (collectively) what they deserve.

You have to look at what people do rather than what they say. When I was in college (in the mountains) I skied a lot. I was as broke as anyone there but during the winter I arranged my classes so on two days I had the afternoons free and the local ski slope had very inexpensive student half day rates.

I ate a lot of hotdogs during those winters. I had other (student) friends who had much more money, had new cars, lived in townhouses, etc and they said that I was lucky and that they really wanted to ski more but they couldn't afford it.

My saying is that people do what they really want to do. Sure if I go on vacation and someone else is enviously and wishes they could visit another country or whatever they say they wish they could do that. But they really don't or they would.

At the time I was married, no kids, used car, small apartment and that's the only reason why I could afford that. I made my choices and they made theirs.

It's the same with voting. You can say that you don't like the way things are but if you keep voting for the same kind of people...you get what you deserve.

People don't like wasteful spending projects in Congress but they continue to vote for their guy who promises to bring (wasteful) spending projects to their districts.

Everyone wants taxes to go up for the other guy but not for them. People aren't rational in what they say but they generally are rational in what they do.

So, I agree that statement is accurate.

 

[wegs]

I know that you have repeatedly posted in a manner that reflects ignorance of issues highly relevant to matters that are at stake here, i.e., you have posted wholly inaccurate information about what single payer healthcare systems would entail. If you are voting based upon a profound misunderstanding of the issues at stake, then that is wholly irresponsible IMHO.

No one likes Biden, but his "sins" pale in comparison with Trump. This really is a lesser of two evils scenario, in that one of the choices is purely "evil," in all respects that matter to ordinary citizenry, i.e., not the rich/born-rich, etc.

I’m not against universal healthcare, I recall stating that I’m opposed to not giving citizens an option to keep their employer healthcare. You don’t need to lie about me to make a point. You’re better than that.

 

[Seattle]

Regarding old white rich men getting elected...that's going to happen a lot in a country with a lot of old white rich men and those are generally the ones who are able to get into politics and that's who people elect.

You don't generally elect a young person to be President nor is a poor one necessarily a good choice. Biden is particularly rich by Presidential standards (to be fair). He had a working class upbringing. His problem IMO is just that he is too old and has been in politics for too long.

 

[wegs]

I agree with people getting (collectively) what they deserve.

You have to look at what people do rather than what they say. When I was in college (in the mountains) I skied a lot. I was as broke as anyone there but during the winter I arranged my classes so on two days I had the afternoons free and the local ski slope had very inexpensive student half day rates.

I ate a lot of hotdogs during those winters. I had other (student) friends who had much more money, had new cars, lived in townhouses, etc and they said that I was lucky and that they really wanted to ski more but they couldn't afford it.

My saying is that people do what they really want to do. Sure if I go on vacation and someone else is enviously and wishes they could visit another country or whatever they say they wish they could do that. But they really don't or they would.

At the time I was married, no kids, used car, small apartment and that's the only reason why I could afford that. I made my choices and they made theirs.

It's the same with voting. You can say that you don't like the way things are but if you keep voting for the same kind of people...you get what you deserve.

People don't like wasteful spending projects in Congress but they continue to vote for their guy who promises to bring (wasteful) spending projects to their districts.

Everyone wants taxes to go up for the other guy but not for them. People aren't rational in what they say but they generally are rational in what they do.

So, I agree that statement is accurate.

Ah, I see what you’re saying. If you keep voting the same way, you’ll always end up with the same. But, how about the situation we’re in where Biden isn’t a good option, just better than what we have. (That said, he’s “better” in some ways, but he’s not wholly better, imo)

I liken it to how much I dislike jelly donuts, but I guess I’d eat them if I had nothing else. That doesn’t mean I feel jelly donuts are good, though. The option of starving to death would simply disinterest me more. Does this make sense?

 

[Seattle]

Ah, I see what you’re saying. If you keep voting the same way, you’ll always end up with the same. But, how about the situation we’re in where Biden isn’t a good option, just better than what we have. I liken it to how much I dislike jelly donuts, but I guess would eat them if I had nothing else. That doesn’t mean I feel jelly donuts are good, though. Does this make sense?

It makes sense in that I don't like jelly donuts either (and I love donuts) and I don't buy them but if I was hungry and I had a choice between jelly donuts (just don't eat the jelly) and beef liver (ugh) I'd eat the donut.

At the moment the real choice is do you want 4 more years of Trump? I do not. Over the next 4 years you could support other better choices and convince Biden to not run again for a second term (if he is even still alive).

Or over the next 4 years support some growing 3rd party. On a more practical level get better people elected into your district in Congress. If you can change the make-up of the House and Senate you can get the kind of government you want.

We can't have people who get in just to lower taxes so that they can get corporate funding for their re-election or get cushy jobs after they leave politics. That's where the change has to take place.

If you leave the system (and Congress) as is and then try to just pick a "good" President, it isn't going to work.

 

[DaveC426913]

Admittedly, it's a highly contentious issue--and not a "popular" viewpoint. And the fact that there is no plausible way to really screen voters for their level of understanding and knowledge of the issues is... well, problematic, to say the least.

And it goes directly against the "one person, one vote" tenet.
The whole point of proportional representation is to eliminate the problem of powerful players skewing results.

 

[parmalee]

I’m not against universal healthcare, I recall stating that I’m opposed to not giving citizens an option to keep their employer healthcare. You don’t need to lie about me to make a point. You’re better than that.

And yet the proposed single payer plans do not prevent or inhibit a person from keeping their employer healthcare, if they are satisfied with it. Suggesting that they do is reflective of either dishonestly or ignorance. That is a real problem.

 

[wegs]

Thanks Seattle, you’ve helped me work this out a bit. I don’t want four more years of Trump, so I may just have to swallow that jelly donut.

I would like to see us break away from this two party system, but how can that ever happen? (if we never give it a chance, collectively)

 

[Seattle]

And it goes directly against the "one person, one vote" tenet.
The whole point of proportional representation is to eliminate the problem of powerful players skewing results.

You are right but our system really works best with an educated electorate (educated on the issues). Which just means that people really ought to read a little before they speak or vote.

 

[wegs]

And yet the proposed single payer plans do not prevent or inhibit a person from keeping their employer healthcare, if they are satisfied with it. Suggesting that they do is reflective of either dishonestly or ignorance. That is a real problem.

The problem is that I may run across misleading info, there’s quite a lot of it out there. I’ve posted a thread about that - what media views can be trusted? But that’s not this thread.

 

[parmalee]

And it goes directly against the "one person, one vote" tenet.
The whole point of proportional representation is to eliminate the problem of powerful players skewing results.

Exactly. Hence why it is highly problematic and contentious.

Along similar lines, I have concerns about trials by a jury of one's "peers." If you've watched the Netflix doc series, The Staircase, you'll get a sense of what I'm talking about here. The prosecutors used bogus, utter b.s. "science" to make their case, with the full knowledge (I presume) that the jury was comprised of very few people versed in scientific methodologies.

 

[parmalee]

The problem is that I may run across misleading info, there’s quite a lot of it out there. I’ve posted a thread about that - what media views can be trusted? But that’s not this thread.

Of course, secondary and tertiary info is always--or often, at least--going to be somewhat inaccurate. But it's kind of your responsibility to parse through the nonsense and b.s., seek out the primary sources, and make informed opinions based upon that.

I absolutely agree that, in this day and age especially, there's a glut of disinformation and misinformation--as well as outright lies and bullshit--but you've got critical thinking skills! That cannot be said for a lot of people--and that's not a dis: the fact is, an awful lot of people are, well, just kinda stupid--you know, the bell curve and all that. I hate having to clarify this, but I'm in no way suggesting that such persons are wholly worthless or of less import. They simply lack the requisite critical thinking skills to make informed decisions upon any number of topics. And that is precisely what makes people like Trump especially dangerous (he "loves" the "poorly educated!"). It's kind of everyone else's responsibility to ensure that such persons are not dangerously misled--and that is why I am especially irked when otherwise intelligent people disseminate dangerous misinformation.

 

[Seattle]

Thanks Seattle, you’ve helped me work this out a bit. I don’t want four more years of Trump, so I may just have to swallow that jelly donut.

I would like to see us break away from this two party system, but how can that ever happen? (if we never give it a chance, collectively)

Keep in mind, IMO, that it's really not about a two party system vs a multi-party system. They current "system" can work. In other words the problem isn't with the "system", it's with the people and the decisions that are being made.

You can have 3 parties but if they all have self-interested politicians and if "big money" is allowed to influence it, then the new party will be just like the old parties.

If you reform things a bit then 2 parties works just fine. The point is, don't expend a bunch of energy fixing the wrong problem. It does not good to feel good for a while only to realize that everything is still basically the same.

Have Congressional payment and benefits determined by someone other than Congress. Elect people interested in campaign reform. Reduce some of the abusive powers/rules that Congress has made for itself.

Don't allow someone like Mitch McConnell to in effect run the country.

 

[DaveC426913]

You are right but our system really works best with an educated electorate (educated on the issues). Which just means that people really ought to read a little before they speak or vote.

While that may be true, it does not imply the opposite, as parmalee claims - to-wit: without a sufficient education, people should not vote.

That would be tantamount to invoking an entry requirement based on education to have a say in the country's leadership.

That is not a democracy. That is - er - an aristocracy, I guess.

 

[DaveC426913]

Exactly. Hence why it is highly problematic and contentious.

Along similar lines, I have concerns about trials by a jury of one's "peers." If you've watched the Netflix doc series, The Staircase, you'll get a sense of what I'm talking about here. The prosecutors used bogus, utter b.s. "science" to make their case, with the full knowledge (I presume) that the jury was comprised of very few people versed in scientific methodologies.

Indeed. The systemic dumbing-down of the American people is a scourge that extends way beyond politics.