Do we really have to go with the DNC & RNC picks?

[MorkandMindy]

The candidates lobbyists and the rich pick are ones who will do the most for them and the least for everyone else.

Ever wonder why there's no one to vote for? The multi-zillionaires own both parties and pick both candidates, and when they get in, the politicians move Trillions of dollars up the the very rich.

If you're in the part of the economic spectrum I'm in, even a small medical bill is more than I earn in a year. The money keeps getting sucked up the economic ladder.

 

[Strathos]

Yeah, that's definitely true. The sad reality is, though, that there's not much that can be done about it. You could try a write-in vote for a 3rd party candidate, but don't expect it to make a difference.

 

[MorkandMindy]

We all have to agree on someone in the middle who is more able to do the right thing than the candidates the parties have thrown at us

To me the choice is simple because I only know of one who even knows which decade we are in.

If there is another I would like to know, but the important thing is a whole lot of us have to reach and agreement soon on which one or we won't get anyone any good.

 

[Strathos]

I resigned myself to voting for the lesser evil several election cycles ago.

 

[Albion]

Most states have minor party candidates on the ballot, and if your conscience says to refuse your vote to the candidates of both of the major parties, do consider voting third party.

Some people will say it's a waste of your vote, but so is voting for the candidate of whichever one of the two major parties winds up losing the election, if you think about it for a moment.

In any case, your conscience deserves not to be ignored too casually.

 

[MorkandMindy]

A party called Unity2020 have proposed to run both Andrew Yang and Admiral McRaven and claim to have ways to get them onto the ballot.

Change.org has a petition to get them onto the ballot and people are signing it and contributing at a good rate, looks like it will reach the target before midnight, I mean in 3 hours.

Right or Left there is a good non-corrupt candidate in that pair for you and both are better than the ones the main parties are backing.

It should make little difference which is President and which is VP because they are willing to work together and the overall plan is they should reach an agreement on (hopefully) everything.

 

[timothyu]

How about doing what MLK did in the 60's with cardboard and peaceful marches, say as big as Trump claimed was at his inauguration, and remind governments they serve the people, not the financial and corporate interests. Take back the country. Tell them when they say, ok work with us, that they have it backwards and must work with you.

 

[Nithavela]

If you dislike it, change it. But the majority of US americans prefers it this way.

 

[jayem]

The candidates lobbyists and the rich pick are ones who will do the most for them and the least for everyone else.

Ever wonder why there's no one to vote for? The multi-zillionaires own both parties and pick both candidates, and when they get in, the politicians move Trillions of dollars up the the very rich.

If you're in the part of the economic spectrum I'm in, even a small medical bill is more than I earn in a year. The money keeps getting sucked up the economic ladder.

An independent Presidential candidate, neither a Democrat nor Republican, will probably face a funding problem. It's unlikely he/she will have the resources to mount a competitive national campaign. But let's assume the Indy candidate is viable. 3 major candidates in each state means the chance of one winning a clear majority of a state's votes could be remote. So that state's EVs would then go to whoever wins the plurality. Those pluralities could well be small. Is it really fair if all of a state's EVs go to a candidate who wins, let's say, only 40% of the vote? Imagine the 2000 Bush v. Gore drama being replayed in multiple states where the 3 candidates' vote totals are close. I can see the possibility of court challenges and recounts galore. And if 3 candidates have fairly even support nationally, there's also a distinct possibility that no one will get an Electoral College majority. Which will throw the election into the House of Representatives.

I agree that more, and better choices than the 2 major parties would be desirable. But the logistics--especially in a Presidential race--could be very problematic.

 

[Nithavela]

A party called Unity2020 have proposed to run both Andrew Yang and Admiral McRaven and claim to have ways to get them onto the ballot.

Change.org has a petition to get them onto the ballot and people are signing it and contributing at a good rate, looks like it will reach the target before midnight, I mean in 3 hours.

Right or Left there is a good non-corrupt candidate in that pair for you and both are better than the ones the main parties are backing.

It should make little difference which is President and which is VP because they are willing to work together and the overall plan is they should reach an agreement on (hopefully) everything.

We've discussed this foolish attempt to split the liberal vote extensively on this forum.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The candidates lobbyists and the rich pick are ones who will do the most for them and the least for everyone else.

Ever wonder why there's no one to vote for? The multi-zillionaires own both parties and pick both candidates, and when they get in, the politicians move Trillions of dollars up the the very rich.

If you're in the part of the economic spectrum I'm in, even a small medical bill is more than I earn in a year. The money keeps getting sucked up the economic ladder.

Money is always in motion, and available to anyone willing to work for it. I 'own' lots of money, but others are using it and paying me a small fee to do so.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

If your going to challenge the choice of the party establishment, you need to have enough money to do it. We've seen how that is done...

 

[returntosender]

Do they have to have a certain amount of votes to get elected? If so then everyone could write in their choice and no one would get elected. I am going to write in Condoleezza Rice. She's great. I know it will be a wasted vote unless one has to have a minimum amount of votes.
The dems seem to have it this time so all we can do is hope that his VP will be to all's liking as he won't be able to handle the job for long.

 

[Nithavela]

Do they have to have a certain amount of votes to get elected? If so then everyone could write in their choice and no one would get elected. I am going to write in Condoleezza Rice. She's great. I know it will be a wasted vote unless one has to have a minimum amount of votes.
The dems seem to have it this time so all we can do is hope that his VP will be to all's liking as he won't be able to handle the job for long.

I expect the VP candidate for biden to be female, which will guarantee that she won't be to everyone's liking.

 

[returntosender]

Speaking of his choice. He is supposed to announce his choice next week.

 

[timothyu]

But the majority of US americans prefers it this way.

Then they deserve the consequences, no?

 

[Nithavela]

Then they deserve the consequences, no?

The failing of democracy is that other people get a vote, too.

 

[timothyu]

I expect the VP candidate for biden to be female, which will guarantee that she won't be to everyone's liking.

But will have a good shot at the Presidency as Biden said he would only seek one term, perhaps Hillary with a deep tan.

 

[timothyu]

The failing of democracy is that other people get a vote, too.

Yes but the S of A is a republic,, not a democracy.

 

[Nithavela]

Yes but the S of A is a republic,, not a democracy.

That line never gets old.