Again, The Orange Baboon

[Minimalist]

Min, you certainly mischaracterized my point. I don't think they will care about one vote, but they sure as hell will care about hundreds of thousands. If you think the two majors don't care about preserving their places in the status quo, I've got a bridge you might be interested in buying.

One thing I do know is that trying more of the same will probably get us more of the same.

Thump, millions of people don't vote at all and you know what.  They don't really give a shit about them, either.  I appreciate what you are trying to say but I think you are kidding yourself.  Johnson/Stein are not a threat. Therefore they do not give a flying fuck about either of them.

And pretending that Hillary and Drumpf are "the same" is simply intellectually dishonest.

[Brian37]

Min, you certainly mischaracterized my point. I don't think they will care about one vote, but they sure as hell will care about hundreds of thousands. If you think the two majors don't care about preserving their places in the status quo, I've got a bridge you might be interested in buying.

One thing I do know is that trying more of the same will probably get us more of the same.

Thump, millions of people don't vote at all and you know what.  They don't really give a shit about them, either.  I appreciate what you are trying to say but I think you are kidding yourself.  Johnson/Stein are not a threat. Therefore they do not give a flying fuck about either of them.

And pretending that Hillary and Drumpf are "the same" is simply intellectually dishonest.

Yep, it is a mistake to make our political process about 1 politician in a three branch system. It is one thing to point at Hillary's flaws or mistakes as an individual, but when you speak about ideas as a collective national idea, the two parties are not the same. Progressives, not politicians, but as voters and non politicians are on the right side of history. The voters of the GOP as voters are not. Progressives want livable wages and more economic power for workers, we want equal pay for women. We value reproductive rights. We value minority rights and LGBT rights. We value affordable education and universal health care. The only lagit criticism about our politicians over the past 36 years is that they have allowed the GOP to control the narrative and have been too compromising. But it is also voter apathy especially in midterms and GOP gerrymandering that has not helped.

[The Grand Nudger]

Unfortunately there are no progressives running, nor is there a progressive party.

[Brian37]

Unfortunately there are no progressives running, nor is there a progressive party.

Uggggggg, 

No, there are only bad ground games and not enough long term involvement. But you don't get to decide what every single democrat believes.

[Minimalist]

As I've said before that is because "progressives" are too fucking pure to get involved themselves.  They want everything handed to them on a silver platter.  Progressives need to stop being a bunch of whiny little bitches and do what the religious right did to the republicunts in the 70's.  Take it over and remake it in the image they want.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Thump, millions of people don't vote at all and you know what.  They don't really give a shit about them, either.

That makes every vote cast even more significant, which is why the parties don't mind non-voters; it means their target audience is smaller and easier to hit.

 

I appreciate what you are trying to say but I think you are kidding yourself.  Johnson/Stein are not a threat. Therefore they do not give a flying fuck about either of them.

So, you're telling me that the parties will happily see their members defect -- not stop voting -- without taking any steps to address that issue?

I disagree. They may not mind non-voting, but if they see their numbers declining as they also see the numbers of their analogous rival-party (Libertarians/Republicans, Greens/Democrats) grow -- in other words, people not passively staying home, but actively voting against the majors -- they'll take action.

And pretending that Hillary and Drumpf are "the same" is simply intellectually dishonest.

When have I done that? Please link to that post.

Matter of fact, I've made it plain in many, many discussions that I consider her the lesser of two evils, and that if Texas becomes a close state, I will vote for Clinton to help keep Trump out of office. I know you've seen me type that often enough.

I also know you've never once read a post of mine saying they're "the same", because said words have never been typed by me.

[Brian37]

As I've said before that is because "progressives" are too fucking pure to get involved themselves.  They want everything handed to them on a silver platter.  Progressives need to stop being a bunch of whiny little bitches and do what the religious right did to the republicunts in the 70's.  Take it over and remake it in the image they want.

I wouldn't put it like that. But we have certainly not had the same level of local, state and national long term planning the GOP has. Progressives are gaining right now and the good news is the younger generations aren't buying the old GOP crap. We can win long term if we organize at the same pace long term. I  think the occupy movement being a result of the market crash was a wake  up call and that mentality has gotten bigger. But what will sustain it and make it grow is if progressive don't get distracted by the GOP use of social issues and bullshit commie slurs.

[Minimalist]

Trump is helping.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/polit.../88666746/

Young voters flee Donald Trump in what may be historic trouncing, poll shows

 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is consolidating the support of the Millennials who fueled Bernie Sanders' challenge during the primaries, a new USA TODAY/Rock the Vote Poll finds, as Republican Donald Trump heads toward the worst showing among younger voters in modern American history.
The survey shows Clinton trouncing Trump 56%-20% among those under 35, though she has failed so far to generate the levels of enthusiasm Sanders did — and the high turn-out that can signal — among Millennials.
"I get worried about the bigoted element of our country, and that they will stick with Trump regardless of his stupidity," says Elizabeth Krueger, 31, an actress in New York City who was among those surveyed. She supports Clinton. "She is not going to be a perfect president, but who would be?"

[Minimalist]

Thump, millions of people don't vote at all and you know what.  They don't really give a shit about them, either.

That makes every vote cast even more significant, which is why the parties don't mind non-voters; it means their target audience is smaller and easier to hit.

 

I appreciate what you are trying to say but I think you are kidding yourself.  Johnson/Stein are not a threat. Therefore they do not give a flying fuck about either of them.

So, you're telling me that the parties will happily see their members defect -- not stop voting -- without taking any steps to address that issue?

I disagree. They may not mind non-voting, but if they see their numbers declining as they also see the numbers of their analogous rival-party (Libertarians/Republicans, Greens/Democrats) grow -- in other words, people not passively staying home, but actively voting against the majors -- they'll take action.

And pretending that Hillary and Drumpf are "the same" is simply intellectually dishonest.

When have I done that? Please link to that post.

Matter of fact, I've made it plain in many, many discussions that I consider her the lesser of two evils, and that if Texas becomes a close state, I will vote for Clinton to help keep Trump out of office. I know you've seen me type that often enough.

I also know you've never once read a post of mine saying they're "the same", because said words have never been typed by me.

You wrote:

One thing I do know is that trying more of the same will probably get us more of the same.

I don't know how else to interpret that.

Clinton and Trump are not THE SAME.

[Thumpalumpacus]

You wrote:

One thing I do know is that trying more of the same will probably get us more of the same.

I don't know how else to interpret that.

Clinton and Trump are not THE SAME.

My apologies for not being clearer, then. When I wrote "more of the same", I meant the two-party predominance, not a (false) equivalence between the two candidates.