Bernie Sanders' Revolution a drifting derelict afloat in a crooked Democratic Party

[Terrell]

Why would people vote 3rd party in a system where the person with the most votes wins and there's no prize for 2nd place? How exactly do you get that to happen when splitting liberal votes between multiple parties, when conservative votes remain in the Republican party results in more Republican victories? How much damage do you have to undo should you even get this to work, as opposed to having moderate Democrats in power while you build a broader more progressive coalition to get the policies you want? 4 yards in a cloud of dust, consistently over a generation, is the way to go.

Right wingers always encourage third party voters because they know that there side is far more committed to controlling the supreme court than the left.

That wouldn't surprise me if the Republicans were slipping the Greens some money under the table. It would be to their advantage to do so, especially in close states.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Right wingers always encourage third party voters because they know that there side is far more committed to controlling the supreme court than the left.

That wouldn't surprise me if the Republicans were slipping the Greens some money under the table. It would be to their advantage to do so, especially in close states.

It's been documented that they were huge financial supporters of the Nader campaign.

 

[Terrell]

That wouldn't surprise me if the Republicans were slipping the Greens some money under the table. It would be to their advantage to do so, especially in close states.

It's been documented that they were huge financial supporters of the Nader campaign.

Now if the Dems would slip some money to the Constitution party they might hurt the Republicans.

 

[Harry Bosch]

It's been documented that they were huge financial supporters of the Nader campaign.

Now if the Dems would slip some money to the Constitution party they might hurt the Republicans.

I doubt it! The reps are a minority party. I haven't seen recent numbers, but there are millions of more registered dems than republicans. And yet the republicans control the senate, the house, most governorships, most state legislators, and had a majority of the supreme court. I think that the dems need to look in the mirror and figure out how to be more united.

 

[Terrell]

Now if the Dems would slip some money to the Constitution party they might hurt the Republicans.

I doubt it! The reps are a minority party. I haven't seen recent numbers, but there are millions of more registered dems than republicans. And yet the republicans control the senate, the house, most governorships, most state legislators, and had a majority of the supreme court. I think that the dems need to look in the mirror and figure out how to be more united.

The Democratic leaning voters need to get out and vote, especially in the midterms. Having more Democrats nationwide doesn't mean that the Democrats will control either the House or the Senate. For that to happen, solely based on total number of Democrats v. Republicans there would also need for them to be roughly evenly distributed across the country.

Rural areas tend to be more conservative while urban areas tend to be more Democratic. States also vary in population, often by a great deal, but every state has 2 Senators. States where the urban population outnumbers the rural population will tend to send Democrats to the Senate, for states with more rural populations they'll tend to send Republicans. This can result in there being more votes cast for Democrats in Senatorial elections but more Republicans that win. In 2012 more votes were cast for the Democrats, overall, in House races, but that Democratic support is concentrated into fewer districts.

 

[RavenSky]

Now if the Dems would slip some money to the Constitution party they might hurt the Republicans.

I doubt it! The reps are a minority party. I haven't seen recent numbers, but there are millions of more registered dems than republicans. And yet the republicans control the senate, the house, most governorships, most state legislators, and had a majority of the supreme court. I think that the dems need to look in the mirror and figure out how to be more united.

And how to gerrymander voting districts like the Republicans are so good at?

 

[arkirk]

That wouldn't surprise me if the Republicans were slipping the Greens some money under the table. It would be to their advantage to do so, especially in close states.

It's been documented that they were huge financial supporters of the Nader campaign.

SOURCE? COME ON, SHOW ME! YOU ARE MAKING AN ACCUSATION YOU CANNOT SUPPORT.

- - - Updated - - -

Right wingers always encourage third party voters because they know that there side is far more committed to controlling the supreme court than the left.

That wouldn't surprise me if the Republicans were slipping the Greens some money under the table. It would be to their advantage to do so, especially in close states.

Mainstream Repuglicans are putting their money on Clinton. PAPA Bush is in her camp. Hillary is THAT KIND OF GIRL...ITS CALLED NEOCON.

 

[arkirk]

I have to hand Sanders one thing. He is supporting the most progressive of down ballot candidates and I wish him well in that regard. He also is supporting progressive initiatives, one in particular in my state. He may be a derelict but he is one it is impossible to dislike...too long.

 

[Terrell]

It's been documented that they were huge financial supporters of the Nader campaign.

SOURCE? COME ON, SHOW ME! YOU ARE MAKING AN ACCUSATION YOU CANNOT SUPPORT.

- - - Updated - - -

Right wingers always encourage third party voters because they know that there side is far more committed to controlling the supreme court than the left.

That wouldn't surprise me if the Republicans were slipping the Greens some money under the table. It would be to their advantage to do so, especially in close states.

Mainstream Repuglicans are putting their money on Clinton. PAPA Bush is in her camp. Hillary is THAT KIND OF GIRL...ITS CALLED NEOCON.

I'm not so sure it's out of like for HRC; it could be dislike of Trump.

 

[Harry Bosch]

It's been documented that they were huge financial supporters of the Nader campaign.

SOURCE? COME ON, SHOW ME! YOU ARE MAKING AN ACCUSATION YOU CANNOT SUPPORT.

- - - Updated - - -

Right wingers always encourage third party voters because they know that there side is far more committed to controlling the supreme court than the left.

That wouldn't surprise me if the Republicans were slipping the Greens some money under the table. It would be to their advantage to do so, especially in close states.

Mainstream Repuglicans are putting their money on Clinton. PAPA Bush is in her camp. Hillary is THAT KIND OF GIRL...ITS CALLED NEOCON.

Are you shitting me? You are very similar to Trumpintes in that you don't understand how to use google!

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/GOP-donors-funding-Nader-Bush-supporters-give-2708705.php

 

[bilby]

It's been documented that they were huge financial supporters of the Nader campaign.

SOURCE? COME ON, SHOW ME! YOU ARE MAKING AN ACCUSATION YOU CANNOT SUPPORT.

From October 27, 2000:

In a pre-election twist, Republicans are buying TV ads promoting Ralph Nader in states where votes for the Green Party candidate might tip the outcome to George W. Bush.
...
The Republican Leadership Council plans to spend at least $100,000 and hopes to raise more over the weekend to increase the ad buy.

source

And then in July 2004:

Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader -- still not on the ballot in a single state -- has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party, an analysis of federal records show.

Nearly one in 10 of Nader's major donors -- those writing checks of $1, 000 or more -- have given in recent months to the Bush-Cheney campaign, the latest documents show.

(source)

And again, in August 2004:

... among Mr Nader's new supporters this election is the billionaire Richard Egan, who was appointed ambassador to Ireland after raising hundreds of thousands of dollars for President Bush. Campaign monitors say other big Republican donors have contributed as well. In Oregon, also poised for a tight contest, two conservative groups admitted telephoning supporters to help put Mr Nader on the ticket.

(source)

It's not so much an accusation, as a matter of established fact.

And it is very easy to support - indeed, it seems astonishing to me that anyone would bother trying to deny it, given that two minutes Googling is enough to show it to be a fact.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Encourage people to vote 3rd party. The more that do, the more will. As they do the pressure mounts on the major parties. If a critical mass is reached and a third party wins either the presidency or numerous seats in the house/senate, then we'll see even more rapid change, as the parties will see it in their benefit to move towards proportional representation and to listen to the voters instead of just the donors/funders/corrupters.

The idea that you can never vote for what you actually want, but instead against what you like the least, has to die. As does the idea that you have to vote for one of the two established big money corrupt parties currently running the show together.

Ya, sort of like we had in Canada. More and more people voted NDP and split the vote and gave us ten years of Harper as a PM. Then, after only one short decade of the government implementing the exact opposite policies they'd want, the Conservatives collapsed under the weight of their own inadequacies and everybody voted for the Liberals again and the NDP tanked.

Those third party voters sure stuck it to the uppity elitists and made a real difference!

Not only did the Conservatives come into power, but the Liberals were all but decimated. And now today, with the Liberals back in power, Trudeau does pretty much nothing without seeking a wide array of input from the public. He knows the above history. He knows the Liberal Party can be decimated again as it was before if enough Liberal voters turn away from him. And that his despite having won the election by a wide margin.