GOP more corrupt than DNC with choosing of nominee

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Why should any of us belong to any party at all?

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Why should any of us belong to any party at all?

I don't and no one should.

Until people leave these two corrupt parties, we will always get more of the same corrupt business as usual.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Why should any of us belong to any party at all?

A contest usually ends up being between 2 people. No matter how many were originally at the starting line.

With or without a named party - - the divide would be the same IMO.

a reply to: Annee

The divide is between the parties and the people, IMO.

There's a lot of common ground between the voters despite the division fanned by the two parties. I think a large majority could appreciate a social liberal/fiscal conservative. But you don't ever see the major two parties offering up someone like that.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

The divide is between the parties and the people, IMO.

There's a lot of common ground between the voters despite the division fanned by the two parties. I think a large majority could appreciate a social liberal/fiscal conservative. But you don't ever see the major two parties offering up someone like that.

I'd say its still going to come down to the same two people. Party affiliation or not.

The practical side. You can't campaign these days without media visibility. That costs money. Money/power is going to go to the front runners. Just how things work.

a reply to: matafuchs

Why bother voting when the system ends up choosing their candidate in the end. It kind of flies in the face of free and democratic elections. If the public majority truly has a choice of picking a candidate, than conventions are nothing but a waste of money and are disguised to make it look like we have a democratic voting system. The delegate system is nothing but giving a particular candidate an unfair advantage over another candidate.

Screw the delegate system and better yet screw the party system! Our country is not what seems.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: matafuchs

Trump is using the independents to create his run. He is doing it. The fringe. The blue collar worker. The white collar worker. The college student. The minorities....He is pulling in from ALL of them.

Is he *really* though? I mean that statement is technically correct in that all candidates have some degree of support from across the demographic spectra but how sure are you that he has actual broad appeal with all of those groups and if so, why?

Trumps protectionism / tariffs opinion does well among blue collar Democrats who have gotten the smelly end of the stick when it comes to globalism.

Trump is a moderate. He is fiscally conservative to a point and socially liberal. He should be a progressive's wet dream. He isn't going off the deep end talking proselytizing and talking about non-starter issues like abortion. Like anyone with a lick of common sense, he sees and says unapologetic ally that our border situation is out of control. He understands the Ameircan worker cannot compete against a $2/day peasant in China when it comes to manufacturing and it is gutting our middle class.

a reply to: BlueAjah

He isn't saying what he thinks or being honest. Trump is saying what YOU and others WANT to hear.

It's part of the class "How to Become Popular 101" ...

Tell people what they want to hear, promise them things they want, and focus anger and attention on someone else to avoid having to explain in detail your own plans.

Trump doesn't care about you or anyone else that isn't as rich as himself. People like Trump sit around dinner and talk about the middle and lower classes with disgust. We're nothing to them -- a usable platform to make money and gain power and influence. That's it. They don't care or have any respect for the common man. They need us, but they also hate and despise us.

a reply to: Annee

In the age of the internet, it should not take big money to campaign. Nearly everyone in the U.S. has access to the internet.

IMO, there should be a campaign website where all who want to run post their resumés and platforms. The people vote and narrow that pool down. Then the candidates answer a series of essay questions. The field is further narrowed down. Then there are debates with the candidates that are left.

It doesn't have to come down to two choices.

Big money to campaign is keeping the people from having real choices.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Agree. I don't think anyone knows where Trump really stands on any issue. He's a liar and his record is all over the spectrum and is constantly changing.

He's not to be believed.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

In the age of the internet, it should not take big money to campaign. Nearly everyone in the U.S. has access to the internet.

I'm gonna respond this way. I went through 2 corporate takeovers. New people, big ideas, change for the better, yada, yada, yada.

Within a year everything went back to exactly the way it was before they came.

It will take a lot to change the system already in place. As most people are apathetic, I don't see it happening.

We here on ATS, choose to be here. Choose to question the system and argue what's right and wrong.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Agree. I don't think anyone knows where Trump really stands on any issue. He's a liar and his record is all over the spectrum and is constantly changing.

He's not to be believed.

I'm not sure Trump knows.

He's a manipulator. He gets people to do what he wants.

I don't think he's really thought past that.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Agree. I don't think anyone knows where Trump really stands on any issue. He's a liar and his record is all over the spectrum and is constantly changing.

He's not to be believed.

Not to believed compared to who? Hillary? Her positions change like Bill's girlfriends.

Sanders? You mean pie in the sky and free stuff for everyone?

Cruz?

Rubio?

Carson?

a reply to: Annee

My anecdotal experience is difference: I worked for a large state performing art center for about a decade. While I was there we changed Presidents three times. With each new guy a lot actually changed.

I think there could be change if we could get rid of the two parties that keep everything exactly the same. As it stands we always get a republican or democrat. Always. Can't expect change that way.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Agree. I don't think anyone knows where Trump really stands on any issue. He's a liar and his record is all over the spectrum and is constantly changing.

He's not to be believed.

Not to believed compared to who? Hillary? Her positions change like Bill's girlfriends.

Sanders? You mean pie in the sky and free stuff for everyone?

Cruz?

Rubio?

Carson?

Oh, they're all liars and panderers. Doesn't make Trump honest. He's as big a liar as Hillary.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

My anecdotal experience is difference: I worked for a large state performing art center for about a decade. While I was there we changed Presidents three times. With each new guy a lot actually changed.

I think there could be change if we could get rid of the two parties that keep everything exactly the same. As it stands we always get a republican or democrat. Always. Can't expect change that way.

Its still going to come down to 2 people.

Doesn't really matter what "flag" they're under.

a reply to: Annee

Why just two?

We have a two-party system. That's why it currently comes down to two.

It doesn't have to come down to two.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Agree. I don't think anyone knows where Trump really stands on any issue. He's a liar and his record is all over the spectrum and is constantly changing.

He's not to be believed.

Not to believed compared to who? Hillary? Her positions change like Bill's girlfriends.

Sanders? You mean pie in the sky and free stuff for everyone?

Cruz?

Rubio?

Carson?

Oh, they're all liars and panderers. Doesn't make Trump honest. He's as big a liar as Hillary.

Trump seems pragmatic to me. Sure he makes knee jerk comments and policy positions, but he seems to come off to me as someone who can compromise or will change his opinion when presented facts that may be contrary to his initial belief. You have to be this way to be successful in business. I don't see him as purely an ideologue.

Obama, Hillary, Sanders, etc all seem to be ideologues who despite overwhelming evidence contradicting their positions, will still hold steadfast.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

Why just two?

We have a two-party system. That's why it currently comes down to two.

It doesn't have to come down to two.

Because contests always come down to the last two.

a reply to: Annee

There is nothing that says every contest must only have two contestants. There can be first, second, third place, etc... And there can even be ties in any of those places.

If it's going to come down to two, let the people decide that each and every election.