How Did the Republicans Manage to Run 17 Candidates with Zero I Would Vote For?

a reply to: pirhanna

I am sorely tempted to vote for Trump. I really am. And if Bernie does not beat Clinton, then my choice will be to vote for Trump, baring some really fine independent run, or not vote at all.

Way back when I first saw Trump becoming a celebrity billionaire I thought to myself, sooner or later this wild man will run for president, but we are smarter than that, said I to myself. But now I am not so sure we are. But what really did it for me was when he was made "Boss of America" on national TV. To my understanding of how things work, this was the big stepping stone, the leg up, the elevator to him becoming the peoples choice. Make him a TV star and then later let him run for president. "Papa Don". For me, this is all to blatant.
So all those years we watched Trump playing 'rich man' being the celebrity playboy living the high life, where was Bernie. Often voting alone in the House and the Senate. Standing at times by himself in those chambers speaking out for the truth, as he sees it, doing his best within this corrupt system to better the plight of the average citizen.

From what both have to say, be it right or wrong, to me it is a question of who do I trust to be most sincere, Trump or Bernie, and that is hands down a simple choice for me.

a reply to: Metallicus

...Well, the Democrats have done that for all 20 years I've been voting in America. 20 years, POTUS, Congressmen, Senators, state reps, governors, local elections, etc... countless candidates, never cast a vote for someone with a 'D' by their name. Just way too much bad blood and no desire to vote against my own best interests.

a reply to: Metallicus
I've not made up my mind yet but Gary Johnson seems to match my philosophy more than either mainstream party.
Here's the thing about voting third party---it has to start at the local level. Only by voting in honest people who don't hitch themselves to the corrupt major parties will we be able to advance those honest folks on to the state and federal levels. In local and state politics, just one independent can often make a huge difference. If they are truly independent and don't always side with one of the major parties.
What I find amazing is that the msm was able to accommodate that whole slate of major party candidates and yet when the primaries are done we won't see presidential "debates" with 10-15 candidates up there---only two, the major parties will be presented. This gives us the impression that we must pick the "lesser of evils" because it is the major parties who have the money to hand over to msm for advertising. Furthermore, they are trained to ridicule third party candidates when they're not ignoring them completely. Believe me, I know, been there, done that.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

It sounds reasonable because it is hind sight. I am not trying to come down hard I just think people have rose colored glasses on when it comes to Bernie. He has openly supported corrupt regimes and everyone gives him a pass. I don't want someone so blinded by 60 years of ideology that they cant recognize that its their ideology that leads to these corrupt regimes.

If you guys can't find one candidate out of 17 republicans, what do you want from democrats. Unless you are a democrat. All the democrats I know are happy with their choice. We be playin'?

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: Metallicus
I've not made up my mind yet but Gary Johnson seems to match my philosophy more than either mainstream party.
Here's the thing about voting third party---it has to start at the local level. Only by voting in honest people who don't hitch themselves to the corrupt major parties will we be able to advance those honest folks on to the state and federal levels. In local and state politics, just one independent can often make a huge difference. If they are truly independent and don't always side with one of the major parties.
What I find amazing is that the msm was able to accommodate that whole slate of major party candidates and yet when the primaries are done we won't see presidential "debates" with 10-15 candidates up there---only two, the major parties will be presented. This gives us the impression that we must pick the "lesser of evils" because it is the major parties who have the money to hand over to msm for advertising. Furthermore, they are trained to ridicule third party candidates when they're not ignoring them completely. Believe me, I know, been there, done that.

Very true, the long term solution is to reestablish the minimum government sentiment that we used to have.

It will take a bottom up displacement of statists from dog catcher on up to senators.

Top down would also be nice but will likely be less effective.

I think the first order of business is to divest authority and power from the federal government so the states can compete for productive populations. It can be done by offloading income taxes to the states to allow them to directly control revenue allocation.

Some states will be real losers, they may even completely fall apart before they accept responsibility but, that's better than running the whole train off the tracks.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

It sounds reasonable because it is hind sight. I am not trying to come down hard I just think people have rose colored glasses on when it comes to Bernie. He has openly supported corrupt regimes and everyone gives him a pass. I don't want someone so blinded by 60 years of ideology that they cant recognize that its their ideology that leads to these corrupt regimes.

Gottcha. Rose colored glasses. Yeah. Obama's first run at least was the most perfect example. Thought, Santa, arn't they worn most of us most of the time? Isn't this why the grass seems greener on the other side of the fence? Why this pill will cure my ills, this women will make me happy. etc. I think this whole stinking process DEPENDS on rose colored glasses.

You are absolutely right in that. Rose colored glasses are really blinders. For me, this idea of 'making America great again is another pair. Anyone who promises this pot of gold , this chicken in a pot, depends on people wearing them day and night.

And I agree that many of Bernies fans wear them, though as you can guess I also think this true of Trump's.

Support for corrupt regimes is an American tradition, turning a blind eye if it serves to bring about a solution to 'present' problems. I see this in Bernie's past. I see it in MY past. And I venture you can see it in yours too. We rationalize these inconsistencies in our pursuit of an absolute standard. Hell look at Marx. The whole idea 'communism' was imagining an 'ideal' world. One where everybody would be happy, as opposed to the world in which he found himself. And the road to that ideal world from this corrupt one depended upon a number of stages of sacrifice and austerity and authoritarianism which would bridge the gap. Problem is though is that every attempt to get through that passage mired down soon after the submittal to authoritarianism. (sound like give up on freedoms to rid the world of terrorism?)

So yes, I can easily see Bernie willing to support some of those regimes under those circumstances. It was all part of the process. I don't know as he would be so naive though, now.

So you rightly point out that it was that ideology that brought about those corrupt regimes he supported. But doesn't it seem that just about all ideologies at least allow if not instigate corrupt regimes?

But back to Bernie. Yeah, I think ole Bern is an ideologue and as you say likely blinded by 60 years of being so. And I agree. But who else right now has a big enough microphone to holler at the American public the things that Bernie is screaming. The rest of the field, both parties, may be yelling at the Washington Machine. But none of them are calling out the bosses behind that machine. The oligarchs and the corrupt system of commerce they control.

Ron Paul did. I voted for him several times, not because I completely agreed with him but because he was a voice pointing against the grain of popular myopia. I see Bernie in the same light.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire


Having tasted the bitterness of the Paul campaign you should understand Bernie has no chance. Same tactics but for different reasons this time. I think the elite would actually be happy to have Bernie in office but they have already pledged their support to Hillary due in no small part to the mountains of black mail material her and Bill lifted using the FBI. It seems people have forgotten when Hill and old Obama went missing while running against each other and had their secret meeting in VA.