Why I am not Voting Obama

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

It's symptomatic of how Dems conduct business anymore.

You mean like removing support from the one guy who had the balls to stand up for his principles?

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:
It's symptomatic of how Dems conduct business anymore.

You mean like removing support from the one guy who had the balls to stand up for his principles?

That does seem to be how a large segment of the Dem base operates these days.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

It's nice to see that some Democrats have the testicular fortitude to stand up to Obama, it shows me
that there really is hope that things can change for the better soon after Obama is defeated this fall.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Still not good enough for you.

Joe(why don't we just Nader ourselves again, eh?)Nation

0 Replies

@failures art,

failures art wrote:

I take a much simpler analysis: The people of Vermont wanted Bernie Sanders to represent them, and it isn't about the Democrats--it's about the people of Vermont.

Sure, but an ongoing theme in this thread is that Edgar shouldn't just vote for whom he wants when who he wants stands left of the Democrats. The argument is that such a vote can only Naderize the election for the benefit of Republicans. Sanders proves that this argument isn't generally true for Senators. And it's a reason to think that it also isn't generally true for presidents.

2 Replies

Naderize the election for the benefit of Republicans.

Yes you can!

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Quote:

Sure, but an ongoing theme in this thread is that Edgar shouldn't just vote for whom he wants when who he wants stands left of the Democrats.

But, there is nobody to the left of the Democrats at that level. And Edgar isn't proposing actually doing anything to get someone in place who is left of them.

What he's proposing is simply boycotting the election b/c of his dissatisfaction with the guy the Dems have in charge. And that's a perfectly valid choice; but let's not pretend it's some sort of honorable stand, or something that will ever lead to him getting what he wants in a leader. It isn't and it won't.

Cycloptichorn

3 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

Sure, but an ongoing theme in this thread is that Edgar shouldn't just vote for whom he wants when who he wants stands left of the Democrats.

But, there is nobody to the left of the Democrats at that level.

There is no candidate at that level because most liberal voters don't vote for left-0f-the-Democrats candidates, whether or not such candidates choose to run. Liberal voters behave this way for fear of throwing their votes away. Liberal voters, in turn, rightly fear to throw their votes away because there are no non-Democratic candidates at that level---yet.

There is a vicious circle here. It needs to be broken somewhere. Why shouldn't liberal voters start breaking it by losing their fear of thrown-away votes? It's the only part of the circle they fully control.

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

And Edgar isn't proposing actually doing anything to get someone in place who is left of them.

He is. The same thing JPB is considering.

You don't like it, or don't approve, but it's up to Edgar and others to do what they think is correct. And it's up to other individual posters to decide what they think about it.

Lecturing liberals is about as effective as lecturing conservatives. Usually gets backs up.

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Why shouldn't liberal voters start breaking it by losing their fear of thrown-away votes? It's the only part of the circle they fully control.

Absolutely.

If the Democratic party doesn't represent American liberals, they need to find a way to get representation outside of the Democratic party.

In the same way, many American conservatives felt they were no longer represented by the Republican party - and started to feel things out by way of the Tea Party movement.

Whichever of the big 2 parties figures out how to represent the disaffected groups first is probably going to make a big jump in some upcoming election. It sure doesn't feel like there's going to be any kind of landslide this time round.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
And Edgar isn't proposing actually doing anything to get someone in place who is left of them.

He is. The same thing JPB is considering.

Surely you aren't referring to the 'America Elect' thing? That project is specifically designed to find a CENTRIST - someone who is to the right of the current Dem leadership.

So, no; they aren't doing anything to find a candidate who is to the left of the current admin. Unless they are doing something else that wasn't mentioned earlier?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

Sure, but an ongoing theme in this thread is that Edgar shouldn't just vote for whom he wants when who he wants stands left of the Democrats.

But, there is nobody to the left of the Democrats at that level.

There is no candidate at that level because most liberal voters don't vote for left-0f-the-Democrats candidates, whether or not such candidates choose to run. Liberal voters behave this way for fear of throwing their votes away. Liberal voters, in turn, rightly fear to throw their votes away because there are no non-Democratic candidates at that level---yet.

There is a vicious circle here. It needs to be broken somewhere. Why shouldn't liberal voters start breaking it by losing their fear of thrown-away votes? It's the only part of the circle they fully control.

Well, the obvious answer is that there is zero proof that it will bring about the results they want, and a tremendous chance that it will have the opposite effect. You seem to feel that the Dem party will tack left when it sees that it is losing left-wing voters; there's just as much of a chance that they will instead tack right, in order to capture a larger percentage of ACTUAL voters.

The circle is broken when individuals put work in to build support and a framework for a third, more liberal party - which currently doesn't exist today and nobody is doing anything to make happen, period. Protest votes do nothing to build this framework.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Surely you aren't referring to the 'America Elect' thing?

They're considering something. You don't have to approve.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

I understand a lot of Edgar's opinions as I consider myself left of the Democrats.
I am disappointed in Obama's compromising from the center to start with, or so I took it, but I still appreciate him in many ways.

I can easily understand wanting to promote a left thinking party in lieu of two center to far right main parties. But I don't think election day is the day to do that. Building a party to contend with the majors is a long, time consuming deal.
And spurious naderizing is, to me, both a waste of time and tremendously dangerous.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

I agree that Edgar and JPB, both of whom I respect, get to vote their choice.
I'm saying what I think, not trying to manipulate them to change.
That rarely works anyway. Times I've changed opinions, it usually from some off the cuff thing someone said that managed to stay in my brain as some kind of tag.

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Surely you aren't referring to the 'America Elect' thing?

They're considering something. You don't have to approve.

Let me repeat myself. Edgar seems angry that there isn't a more Liberal candidate out there for him to vote for. This anger will not be assuaged by participating in a project that is specifically designed to produce a less Liberal candidate than the one who is out there.

It's like having a broken leg, and going to an auto mechanic instead of a doctor, and saying 'well, they're doing SOMETHING about it, at least.' They are not doing something about the problem.

JPB, less so than Edgar, b/c to my knowledge she really would prefer a centrist over Obama.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Protest votes do nothing to build this framework.

Here's the thing.

edgarb doesn't plan to vote for Obama. Obama's not getting his vote.

Other options are being considered. The options don't include voting for Obama.

That could certainly lead to a result that neither edgarb or Obama supporters like.

It could also eventually lead to a result edgarb prefers. I think that making any kind of effort to move things in a direction he prefers is better than voting for someone he doesn't want to vote for.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

This anger will not be assuaged by participating in a project that is specifically designed to produce a less Liberal candidate than the one who is out there.

<snip>

JPB, less so than Edgar, b/c to my knowledge she really would prefer a centrist over Obama.

IMNSHO, centrist would be more liberal than Obama.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Protest votes do nothing to build this framework.

It could also eventually lead to a result edgarb prefers. I think that making any kind of effort to move things in a direction he prefers is better than voting for someone he doesn't want to vote for.

The evidence of his actions actually leading to such a result is so slim as to not be taken seriously. You are making what is termed an 'underpants gnome' argument -

Step one: withhold your vote from the guy you agree with 60-70%.
Step two: ?????
Step three: get a candidate you agree with 90-95%!

What is step two?? Nobody can say. Without that info I don't see how one can reasonably connect step one with any chance of step three happening.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

I agree that Edgar and JPB, both of whom I respect, get to vote their choice.
I'm saying what I think, not trying to manipulate them to change.
That rarely works anyway. Times I've changed opinions, it usually from some off the cuff thing someone said that managed to stay in my brain as some kind of tag.

And meanwhile, we get 4 years of a loud-mouthed adulterer parading as an American values man or 4 years of a bland hairpiece that has lived the 1% lifestyle so long that he thinks paying 15% on his income taxes is perfectly reasonable and why should the poor and middle class that get to pay 30%+ get pissed off at him?

I'm all for taking a stand. However if your 'stand' is to shoot the only semi-progressive party in the foot and then tell it to do better to beat the conservative bastards on the other side of the aisle then you're kind of just setting yourself and the country up for fail.

1 Reply

Why I am not Voting Obama

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know