Racism And Kamala Harris

[RVonse]

I'd prefer straight D over a mix or straight R.

One party rule? Are you sure? That sounds more like the Peoples Republic of China than democracy to me.

if anything there needs to be more party's and more choices. Not monopoly in government. Even if you might believe one of the current party's is insane.

“One party rule”? The Democrats are not some hive mind monolith like the Chinese Communist Party,

Really? Who picked Kamala to be the Democrats POTUS nominee? And for that matter, who decided Joe Biden should not remain in the running?

If not for the electoral college we would already be in a 1 party state. You might like having only 1 party today since you like being a Democrat today, but that could and probably would change in the future and that is when there will be nothing that can be done at that point.

How is a party choosing its candidate evidence of an one party STATE? You are not making any sense.

Unlike the Republicans the Democrats don't seem to care at all about democracy in choosing their nominee for POTUS. This is also why some of Sanders supporters became part of MAGA supporters when Hillary ran over them the same way. The people running the DNC would make Stalin proud displaying how they would be effective leaders for a monopoly party.

 

[laughing dog]

I'd prefer straight D over a mix or straight R.

One party rule? Are you sure? That sounds more like the Peoples Republic of China than democracy to me.

if anything there needs to be more party's and more choices. Not monopoly in government. Even if you might believe one of the current party's is insane.

“One party rule”? The Democrats are not some hive mind monolith like the Chinese Communist Party,

Really? Who picked Kamala to be the Democrats POTUS nominee? And for that matter, who decided Joe Biden should not remain in the running?

If not for the electoral college we would already be in a 1 party state. You might like having only 1 party today since you like being a Democrat today, but that could and probably would change in the future and that is when there will be nothing that can be done at that point.

How is a party choosing its candidate evidence of an one party STATE? You are not making any sense.

Unlike the Republicans the Democrats don't seem to care at all about democracy in choosing their nominee for POTUS.

Biden won the primaries and was going to be the candidate until he choose to step down. He could have remained the candidate. It was too late to have more primaries.

 

[TomC]

I'd prefer straight D over a mix or straight R.

One party rule? Are you sure? That sounds more like the Peoples Republic of China than democracy to me.

if anything there needs to be more party's and more choices. Not monopoly in government. Even if you might believe one of the current party's is insane.

“One party rule”? The Democrats are not some hive mind monolith like the Chinese Communist Party,

Really? Who picked Kamala to be the Democrats POTUS nominee? And for that matter, who decided Joe Biden should not remain in the running?

If not for the electoral college we would already be in a 1 party state. You might like having only 1 party today since you like being a Democrat today, but that could and probably would change in the future and that is when there will be nothing that can be done at that point.

How is a party choosing its candidate evidence of an one party STATE? You are not making any sense.

Unlike the Republicans the Democrats don't seem to care at all about democracy in choosing their nominee for POTUS. This is also why some of Sanders supporters became part of MAGA supporters when Hillary ran over them the same way. The people running the DNC would make Stalin proud and effective leaders for a monopoly party.

Tell me about the 2024 Republican primaries. Unlike the Democrats there was no real incumbent.

So, tell me about the Republican challengers to Trump for the Republican candidate for POTUS.
Tom

 

[bilby]

If not for the electoral college we would already be in a 1 party state.

According to Wikipedia, there are 64 parties currently active in the USA, 37 of which have "ballot access".

37 is (if we are to believe Mainstream Mathematics) greater than 1 (and 64 is greater still).

That only two of these parties has any power worth a damn is a consequence of your electoral system, which is subject to Duverger's Law - without significant changes to the system, there will usually be two dominant poitical parties in the US. Which two (and whether one is batshit nutso crazy insane) is entirely up to the voters.

If not for the electoral college, it would be easier for the voters to drop one party from the duopoly, when it came under the sway of a demagogue and/or a bunch of certifiable nut-jobs who think the President controls the weather, and to replace it with a less crazy option.

With or without the electoral college, the US will tend to remain a two party state while the selection process remains district based 'winner takes all' plurality voting.

 

[RVonse]

So, tell me about the Republican challengers to Trump for the Republican candidate for POTUS.
Tom

To be sure, the other candidates were not much competition for Trump unfortunately. But at least the Republicans presidential primaries gave the people a fair opportunity to elect someone different.

 

[Toni]

I'd prefer straight D over a mix or straight R.

One party rule? Are you sure? That sounds more like the Peoples Republic of China than democracy to me.

if anything there needs to be more party's and more choices. Not monopoly in government. Even if you might believe one of the current party's is insane.

It’s not one party rule if people have the freedom to choose which party they vote for.

A majority of D or R in either or both houses with the same party as POTUS does not mean one party rule. The other party still has a voice and still affects what legislation gets written, amended, passed. Within every party in the US is a diversity of opinion, motivation, needs, wants, philosophies. Admittedly these days the GOP legislators seem to vote lock step together, but that does not have to be the case. Outside de the elected officials there is a veritable tsunami of prominent GOP voices speaking out against Trump and the dangers of a second term, particularly among those who worked most closely with Trump.

This is how it will happen:

The logic is anything but logical. Trump has stated that he would be a dictator in day one and has told voters that if they vote for him, they won’t need to vote ever again. To me, that sounds like an end to democracy.

Musk is among those billionaires who want to rule the world without ever having to bother actually running for office. Trump has proven himself a useful idiot for Putin and he will be delighted to do the same educative who keeps him out of prison.

We do not need a country run by the likes of Musk and Theil who were not born in the US and are ineligible to be POTUS but certainly are happy to fund candidates who will serve them—Trump and Vance, for starters.

Musk even purchased an entire social media platform to spew racist garbage and massive amounts of disinformation then decrying people pointing out the lies as trying to deny him ( or his posters) his Furst Amendment rights—and is happy to suppress voices he disagrees with.

 

[laughing dog]

So, tell me about the Republican challengers to Trump for the Republican candidate for POTUS.
Tom

To be sure, the other candidates were not much competition for Trump unfortunately. But at least the Republicans presidential primaries gave the people a fair opportunity to elect someone different.

How is it fair that "the people" could only vote for a candidate for one party not every party in a primary?

 

[Toni]

So, tell me about the Republican challengers to Trump for the Republican candidate for POTUS.
Tom

To be sure, the other candidates were not much competition for Trump unfortunately. But at least the Republicans presidential primaries gave the people a fair opportunity to elect someone different.

I think the GOP missed a huge opportunity by not nominating Nikki Haley. I’m grateful, of course, assuming that Trump loses. I disagree vehemently flu with Gaiey about nearly everything but I don’t think that thes mentally incompetent or amoral, which puts her head and shoulders and knees and toes above Trump. And Vance, who has proven perfectly willing to tailor his stated positions to the position he wants. He’s not incompetent but he seems to lack basic morals, even for a politician.

 

[RVonse]

So, tell me about the Republican challengers to Trump for the Republican candidate for POTUS.
Tom

To be sure, the other candidates were not much competition for Trump unfortunately. But at least the Republicans presidential primaries gave the people a fair opportunity to elect someone different.

How is it fair that "the people" could only vote for a candidate for one party not every party in a primary?

This could be another shortcoming to our voting process. I'm no expert to our voting process, but I would think we would be more fair and democratic to increase the power of voters in favor of party insiders. Not the other way around.

 

[TomC]

So, tell me about the Republican challengers to Trump for the Republican candidate for POTUS.
Tom

To be sure, the other candidates were not much competition for Trump unfortunately. But at least the Republicans presidential primaries gave the people a fair opportunity to elect someone different.

Why weren't the other candidates much competition? What makes you think it was a fair opportunity to nominate someone else?

The people who own Trump dominate the Teaparty. As a result, real Republicans like Cheney and Romney had no chance. Even DeSantis was shit out of luck.

Trump is a criminal. He must win to avoid the consequences of his crimes. He'll promise anything to anyone to avoid that, from Putin to Musk to...
Well anyone. Especially billionaires. And they know he'll deliver on promises to make them richer despite the damage to the American people.

That's why nobody can get a word in edgewise amongst the Teaparty, much less the Republicans. Trump is absolutely necessary to the billionaires continued accumulation of wealth and power.
Tom

 

[scombrid]

I'd prefer straight D over a mix or straight R.

One party rule? Are you sure? That sounds more like the Peoples Republic of China than democracy to me.

if anything there needs to be more party's and more choices. Not monopoly in government. Even if you might believe one of the current party's is insane.

It’s not one party rule if people have the freedom to choose which party they vote for.

A majority of D or R in either or both houses with the same party as POTUS does not mean one party rule. The other party still has a voice and still affects what legislation gets written, amended, passed. Within every party in the US is a diversity of opinion, motivation, needs, wants, philosophies. Admittedly these days the GOP legislators seem to vote lock step together, but that does not have to be the case. Outside de the elected officials there is a veritable tsunami of prominent GOP voices speaking out against Trump and the dangers of a second term, particularly among those who worked most closely with Trump.

This is how it will happen:

More replacement theory. Musk is a white African that longs for a return to apartheid.

Check out Rhonduhsantus using state police to harass voters and threaten TV station that air paid opposition advertisements.

Fascists to bottom.

Musk and his technocrat buddies are all about democracy dontchaknow. Uh huh.

 

[bilby]

Let me explain: when somebody becomes a citizen of a democracy, no matter how they arrived at their citizenship, they have the right to vote. Denying some citizens the right to vote, because of their earlier migration status, or because of the other citizenships they hold, or have held in the past, is UNDEMOCRATIC.

Suggesting that some citizens should be denied the vote on such a basis, is a direct and vicious attack on democracy.

 

[bilby]

Rhonduhsantus

I thought they were all wiped out by a cometary impact sixty million years ago.

 

[Shadowy Man]

So, tell me about the Republican challengers to Trump for the Republican candidate for POTUS.
Tom

To be sure, the other candidates were not much competition for Trump unfortunately. But at least the Republicans presidential primaries gave the people a fair opportunity to elect someone different.

But why don't the Republicans believe in democracy when it comes to picking the Vice Presidential candidate? Vance is quite likely, given Trump's age and failing mental health, to become President if they win, but nobody would ever have voted for Vance.

In my opinion, the VP candidate should be the person who comes in second in the primary. That would seriously impact the way the parties handle their primaries and the way people vote in them.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But sometimes, I absolutely vote against a particular candidate. 100% the Republican Party has convinced me to never, ever even consider supporting any candidate they put forth. For now, that means I’m voting blue no matter who. I don’t know that that will be permanent but for now, that’s my guiding principle. There is no perfect candidate nor perfect platform and anyhow, it really does depend on the details that get worked out behind closed doors, hashed and rehashed, interpreted by states and courts.

Exactly. I see the election as a choice between don't like and terrified of.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'd prefer straight D over a mix or straight R.

One party rule? Are you sure? That sounds more like the Peoples Republic of China than democracy to me.

if anything there needs to be more party's and more choices. Not monopoly in government. Even if you might believe one of the current party's is insane.

Democrats are cats. It wouldn't actually be one party.

 

[ZiprHead]

But sometimes, I absolutely vote against a particular candidate. 100% the Republican Party has convinced me to never, ever even consider supporting any candidate they put forth. For now, that means I’m voting blue no matter who. I don’t know that that will be permanent but for now, that’s my guiding principle. There is no perfect candidate nor perfect platform and anyhow, it really does depend on the details that get worked out behind closed doors, hashed and rehashed, interpreted by states and courts.

Exactly. I see the election as a choice between don't like and terrified of.

I like Kamala and Walz.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This is how it will happen:

And what is the process by which 1 in 20 become citizens???

His claim simply makes no sense. You'll do better to assume anything he says these days is false.

 

[ZiprHead]

I'd prefer straight D over a mix or straight R.

One party rule? Are you sure? That sounds more like the Peoples Republic of China than democracy to me.

if anything there needs to be more party's and more choices. Not monopoly in government. Even if you might believe one of the current party's is insane.

It’s not one party rule if people have the freedom to choose which party they vote for.

A majority of D or R in either or both houses with the same party as POTUS does not mean one party rule. The other party still has a voice and still affects what legislation gets written, amended, passed. Within every party in the US is a diversity of opinion, motivation, needs, wants, philosophies. Admittedly these days the GOP legislators seem to vote lock step together, but that does not have to be the case. Outside de the elected officials there is a veritable tsunami of prominent GOP voices speaking out against Trump and the dangers of a second term, particularly among those who worked most closely with Trump.

This is how it will happen:

Do you realize how many laws would have to be changed to accomplish that? Do you realize that even most Democrats would object to that?

Please stop letting others do the thinking for you. And you call us sheeple.

 

[Toni]

But sometimes, I absolutely vote against a particular candidate. 100% the Republican Party has convinced me to never, ever even consider supporting any candidate they put forth. For now, that means I’m voting blue no matter who. I don’t know that that will be permanent but for now, that’s my guiding principle. There is no perfect candidate nor perfect platform and anyhow, it really does depend on the details that get worked out behind closed doors, hashed and rehashed, interpreted by states and courts.

Exactly. I see the election as a choice between don't like and terrified of.

I like Kamala and Walz.

In 2020 primary season, Harris was in my top 4. I like her more now and I like her and Walz together. They do make a good team, I think, at least on camera.