Open Heart
Well-Known Member
- Aug 3, 2014
- 18,521
- 4,393
- 62
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Seeker
- Marital Status
- Celibate
They weren't the only two options.i voted for Trump, better than voting for Clinton.
Upvote
0
They weren't the only two options.i voted for Trump, better than voting for Clinton.
They weren't the only two options.
If you study the literature of people who talk about international banking conspiracies and international financial power brokers, etc., you'd see that the term does not mean to them what you say here, although a century ago that was probably the usual meaning.Two notes: I don't want to turn this into some kind of Trump = antisemitic thread. Though I am concerned about some of the things he said regarding "international bankers" which any Jew knows has been code for Jew for at least a hundred years
Yet, amazingly, when I see people spewing this stuff it always seems to be followed by anti-Jewish sentiment. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.If you study the literature of people who talk about international banking conspiracies and international financial power brokers, etc., you'd see that the term does not mean to them what you say here, although a century ago that was probably the usual meaning.
That aside, I am surprised that the American Jewish community seems to have remained mainly loyal to the Democrats even though the President is a supporter of Israel, the Dems would give it to the Palestinians without a moment's hesitation, and his opponent had made anti-Semitic remarks during the campaign.
This doesn't mean that all American Jews have to have a position on the future of Israel, but I think most do want the nation to survive.
Apparently this is the kind of self-deception that keeps Jewish voters in the Democratic camp.
When enough people vote for a third party candidate, it ends up influencing the platforms of the main parties, who use it to guage where the american public is at, since they want to gain back the constituency.Yes, but there were only two options that had any chance of winning.
They never get to that point unless people push for that. The American Solidarity Part appeals to those who have traditional morals, but also have a heart for the poor and sick and a concern for the earth. In other words it is a Christian Democratic Party like in many countries of Europe, although it will appeal to those who are not Christian as well.I sympathize with your thinking, but even if a voter decides to take the "long view" (which is how I'd described your strategy with third parties), it doesn't work unless the party is on enough state ballots to matter. Few third parties ever reach that level, mainly because the laws making it difficult are written by either Democratic or Republican state legislators.
It is despicable that most people of high ethics cannot have a party that is prolife from conception to natural death that is also compassionate for the poor and responsible towards the environment. These people are forced to choose one or the other, which is horrible.For your sake, I hope it succeeds in making headway. However, I have noticed that the toughest row for any third party to try to hoe is the centrist one. People will always find moderates in one or the other of the major parties to vote for.
The third parties that really do pressure the GOP or Dems come at them from either farther Right on the spectrum or farther Left, not from "not moderate enough on half of your platform."