Up Like Trump

[popcorn1]

I'd be very happy to see the Libertarians get at least 5% of the vote to receive FEC matching funds

Johnson did great things for NM but he really needs to drop the act that he is actually running for president.  At least McAffee had the correct platform a 3rd party should have this cycle: "do not vote for me I am running to talk issues only"  All Johnson can do is take away votes from Trump and Hillary.  Then the scammers can tell us Trump lost by a little while the voter machines rig the hackathon for Hillary. They both have almost identical platforms except in a few areas and so there is no point since Trump is willing to adapt to the people's will.  Trump is our manager.  Trump can do the job.  We do not need a 3rd rail this time around.

So we should continue the two-party system...

Who cares about the parties.  We do not have a 2 party system anyway.  This year it is 1) vote for Trump and we remove cancer from government and reboot or 2) More of the same failed government snakes.   But we should keep it down to 2 people yes.  The round before this had lots of people and it was weeded down to 2 now more people getting introduced is fuck all.  What has a third party ever done for a presidential election except totally fuck it up?

 Or in the alternative get rid of the party primaries and let the candidates all compete in rounds leading up to the final choices like the primaries but not monopolized by a "party".  

Pretty ignorant statement.  You don't even see the difference between candidates & parties in your rant.  "Lots of people" does not equal "lots of parties," which WOULD constitute a democracy.
I'll tell you about a Third Party.  The WHIG Party.  Abraham Lincoln got into politics via the WHIG PARTY.

I respectfully disagree that parties make it a democracy.  You can have a democracy without the party system is my understanding.  Therefore I will suggest your statement is the one that is ignorant since you do not see that a democracy was never depending on parties to exist and sustain them.  for reference I will include a link to Wikipedia, nowhere in their definition of democracy do I find the mention of parties being a functional component necessary to operate or any mention at all for that matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

And the Whig party of Lincoln started as an omage to the Whigs that were the founders party during the revolution (because of the White whigs they wore).  And by the time Lincoln won with the Whig party they were one of the top 2 parties in the USA since the the federalist party was seen as too central to be supported by the people at this time who did not favor a strong central bank so it was dead by 1814-1828.  In fact the Whig party that Lincoln came from was essentially a split in the republican party which was called the "democrat-republican party" at the time.  And so no the Whig party was not a 3rd party at the time with Lincoln in my opinion.  And also nowhere in the constitution does it say anything about a party system.  And when the USA started there were no political parties at all any where in the world.  Yes however it was only a few years before the politicians in USA began devising various systems to popularize the vote for their benefit.

Your wrong the more parties the more democracy..
The trouble is big money people paying for favours off politicians..
Now the best way to sort the problem out is you can only donate 25 dollars max to a party of your choice then no big donors to influence a politician   ..

The more choice out there the more democracy..
Listen to all the parties then pick one that you think will make your life better..

This is why your 2 party system is a joke..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCr4qLtbFaQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oxB4cqYq_w

I am not surprised they are both the same syndicate ..
Both use tax payers money for their own benefits not for the people but for their own family and friends while you and i get looked at like SHEEP..

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQuPRNaOXD4..

A 2 party system become one  ..Why fight when we can share the taxes between us both
plus all the government contracts which is the biggest money maker ..

10 parties all 25 dollar donations then it becomes more democratic ..
Why would i give a million dollars to a party?..
Now if they don't do what i ask when it comes to the next term in office do you think i will give a million again if i got no favours?..ALL ABOUT THE MONEY..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ1T8eZDnbI..

[RoomBot]

I'd be very happy to see the Libertarians get at least 5% of the vote to receive FEC matching funds

Johnson did great things for NM but he really needs to drop the act that he is actually running for president.  At least McAffee had the correct platform a 3rd party should have this cycle: "do not vote for me I am running to talk issues only"  All Johnson can do is take away votes from Trump and Hillary.  Then the scammers can tell us Trump lost by a little while the voter machines rig the hackathon for Hillary. They both have almost identical platforms except in a few areas and so there is no point since Trump is willing to adapt to the people's will.  Trump is our manager.  Trump can do the job.  We do not need a 3rd rail this time around.

So we should continue the two-party system...

Who cares about the parties.  We do not have a 2 party system anyway.  This year it is 1) vote for Trump and we remove cancer from government and reboot or 2) More of the same failed government snakes.   But we should keep it down to 2 people yes.  The round before this had lots of people and it was weeded down to 2 now more people getting introduced is fuck all.  What has a third party ever done for a presidential election except totally fuck it up?

 Or in the alternative get rid of the party primaries and let the candidates all compete in rounds leading up to the final choices like the primaries but not monopolized by a "party".  

Pretty ignorant statement.  You don't even see the difference between candidates & parties in your rant.  "Lots of people" does not equal "lots of parties," which WOULD constitute a democracy.
I'll tell you about a Third Party.  The WHIG Party.  Abraham Lincoln got into politics via the WHIG PARTY.

I respectfully disagree that parties make it a democracy.  You can have a democracy without the party system is my understanding.  Therefore I will suggest your statement is the one that is ignorant since you do not see that a democracy was never depending on parties to exist and sustain them.  for reference I will include a link to Wikipedia, nowhere in their definition of democracy do I find the mention of parties being a functional component necessary to operate or any mention at all for that matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

And the Whig party of Lincoln started as an omage to the Whigs that were the founders party during the revolution (because of the White whigs they wore).  And by the time Lincoln won with the Whig party they were one of the top 2 parties in the USA since the the federalist party was seen as too central to be supported by the people at this time who did not favor a strong central bank so it was dead by 1814-1828.  In fact the Whig party that Lincoln came from was essentially a split in the republican party which was called the "democrat-republican party" at the time.  And so no the Whig party was not a 3rd party at the time with Lincoln in my opinion.  And also nowhere in the constitution does it say anything about a party system.  And when the USA started there were no political parties at all any where in the world.  Yes however it was only a few years before the politicians in USA began devising various systems to popularize the vote for their benefit.

Your wrong the more parties the more democracy..
The trouble is big money people paying for favours off politicians..
Now the best way to sort the problem out is you can only donate 25 dollars max to a party of your choice then no big donors to influence a politician   ..

The more choice out there the more democracy..
Listen to all the parties then pick one that you think will make your life better..

This is why your 2 party system is a joke..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCr4qLtbFaQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oxB4cqYq_w

I am not surprised they are both the same syndicate ..
Both use tax payers money for their own benefits not for the people but for their own family and friends while you and i get looked at like SHEEP..

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQuPRNaOXD4..

A 2 party system become one  ..Why fight when we can share the taxes between us both
plus all the government contracts which is the biggest money maker ..

10 parties all 25 dollar donations then it becomes more democratic ..
Why would i give a million dollars to a party?..
Now if they don't do what i ask when it comes to the next term in office do you think i will give a million again if i got no favours?..ALL ABOUT THE MONEY..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ1T8eZDnbI..

Great post.  Good stuff.
The vid, "Practically Family: Clinton And Bush," shows just what I meant when I said our 2-party system is incestuous & inbred.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCr4qLtbFaQ

[popcorn1]

How many people on here would take the money?..

50 people fighting to build a factory on this plot of land 1 guy offers you a million the rest offer you nothing who will you give the contract too?..
Even though you know one guy can do better job but he offered you no money who will you offer the contract too..

Now remember 1 million can buy you a house with a swimming pool in depending where you live
of course..Will you take the money ..

Then because many many people been giving you back handers you hang around with all the rich folk
you become like them..Now instead of making a million you want a billion..
So who pays the price for there GREED?..


No more big donations 25 dollars max.
No family and friends to get government contracts.
No family member can run for president if another family member as been in office..100 years before you can run for president..
No one can serve more than 2 terms as president.
                            ^
                A FAIR DEMOCRACY

           Learn something politicians
 
Reps Deserve A Raise? - Rep Moran: $174K A Yr Isn't Enough To ...
Video for trey gowdy telling people about his wages▶ 8:21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EflHUPNpW2w
 

[popcorn1]

I'd be very happy to see the Libertarians get at least 5% of the vote to receive FEC matching funds

Johnson did great things for NM but he really needs to drop the act that he is actually running for president.  At least McAffee had the correct platform a 3rd party should have this cycle: "do not vote for me I am running to talk issues only"  All Johnson can do is take away votes from Trump and Hillary.  Then the scammers can tell us Trump lost by a little while the voter machines rig the hackathon for Hillary. They both have almost identical platforms except in a few areas and so there is no point since Trump is willing to adapt to the people's will.  Trump is our manager.  Trump can do the job.  We do not need a 3rd rail this time around.

So we should continue the two-party system...

Who cares about the parties.  We do not have a 2 party system anyway.  This year it is 1) vote for Trump and we remove cancer from government and reboot or 2) More of the same failed government snakes.   But we should keep it down to 2 people yes.  The round before this had lots of people and it was weeded down to 2 now more people getting introduced is fuck all.  What has a third party ever done for a presidential election except totally fuck it up?

 Or in the alternative get rid of the party primaries and let the candidates all compete in rounds leading up to the final choices like the primaries but not monopolized by a "party".  

Pretty ignorant statement.  You don't even see the difference between candidates & parties in your rant.  "Lots of people" does not equal "lots of parties," which WOULD constitute a democracy.
I'll tell you about a Third Party.  The WHIG Party.  Abraham Lincoln got into politics via the WHIG PARTY.

I respectfully disagree that parties make it a democracy.  You can have a democracy without the party system is my understanding.  Therefore I will suggest your statement is the one that is ignorant since you do not see that a democracy was never depending on parties to exist and sustain them.  for reference I will include a link to Wikipedia, nowhere in their definition of democracy do I find the mention of parties being a functional component necessary to operate or any mention at all for that matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

And the Whig party of Lincoln started as an omage to the Whigs that were the founders party during the revolution (because of the White whigs they wore).  And by the time Lincoln won with the Whig party they were one of the top 2 parties in the USA since the the federalist party was seen as too central to be supported by the people at this time who did not favor a strong central bank so it was dead by 1814-1828.  In fact the Whig party that Lincoln came from was essentially a split in the republican party which was called the "democrat-republican party" at the time.  And so no the Whig party was not a 3rd party at the time with Lincoln in my opinion.  And also nowhere in the constitution does it say anything about a party system.  And when the USA started there were no political parties at all any where in the world.  Yes however it was only a few years before the politicians in USA began devising various systems to popularize the vote for their benefit.

Your wrong the more parties the more democracy..
The trouble is big money people paying for favours off politicians..
Now the best way to sort the problem out is you can only donate 25 dollars max to a party of your choice then no big donors to influence a politician   ..

The more choice out there the more democracy..
Listen to all the parties then pick one that you think will make your life better..

This is why your 2 party system is a joke..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCr4qLtbFaQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oxB4cqYq_w

I am not surprised they are both the same syndicate ..
Both use tax payers money for their own benefits not for the people but for their own family and friends while you and i get looked at like SHEEP..

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQuPRNaOXD4..

A 2 party system become one  ..Why fight when we can share the taxes between us both
plus all the government contracts which is the biggest money maker ..

10 parties all 25 dollar donations then it becomes more democratic ..
Why would i give a million dollars to a party?..
Now if they don't do what i ask when it comes to the next term in office do you think i will give a million again if i got no favours?..ALL ABOUT THE MONEY..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ1T8eZDnbI..

Great post.  Good stuff.
The vid, "Practically Family: Clinton And Bush," shows just what I meant when I said our 2-party system is incestuous & inbred.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCr4qLtbFaQ

There is more than 2 parties just your tv stations don't show them because they got no money to get on tv so no one knows about them..So they are SILENCED..

Party out there saying they give you all a free car if you vote for them and you don't know who they are ..
No party is offering a car but you wouldn't know because you don't know what they are offering
because the tv station don't show your other parties..

Any way av a nice day

[RoomBot]

RE:  "No party is offering a car"

Only Oprah gives away massive numbers of cars!

Obama gave away ObamaPhones!

"Obama Phone" Remix (parody song) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr201FqTP4w

[Spendulus]

RE:  "No party is offering a car"

Only Oprah gives away massive numbers of cars!

Obama gave away ObamaPhones!

"Obama Phone" Remix (parody song) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr201FqTP4w

LOL, I happened the day before yesterday to run across a plastic envelope with the actual application and sales pitch for a free Obama phone.  I have it still but have not read it.

[RoomBot]

Well even the Obama Phone Lady herself now admits that Obama is a total liar!!!

The Obama Phone Lady Wakes Up, with Alex Jones, ( 4 mins)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLZuKGTZlEY

Amazing transformation. 

Nice work, Jones.   

[popcorn1]

RE:  "No party is offering a car"

Only Oprah gives away massive numbers of cars!

Obama gave away ObamaPhones!

"Obama Phone" Remix (parody song) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr201FqTP4w

..So funny ..
At least we British got a free laptop if we voted for Gordon Brown ..

Gordon brown to spend £300m giving free broadband and laptops to the poor..
Then he sold our gold and royal mail to all his friends at knock down prices making himself millions and millions in back handers..And Tony Blair oh don't get me started on that RAT..

Become a good politician serve your country well and after you have served then you can go on to make money..
Write a book to make you millions do speaking events bake cakes and sell them to make millions
But all this must be done after you serve as president ..Not while your president BUT AFTER..

Just think if we had no internet we would all still know nothing just guessing with no real evidence.
If the news wont tell you the truth the internet will..

To all who seek the truth and post it on the internet for the good of humanity I THANK YOU ALL

[RoomBot]

RE:  "No party is offering a car"

Only Oprah gives away massive numbers of cars!

Obama gave away ObamaPhones!

"Obama Phone" Remix (parody song) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr201FqTP4w

..So funny ..
At least we British got a free laptop if we voted for Gordon Brown ..

Gordon brown to spend £300m giving free broadband and laptops to the poor..
Then he sold our gold and royal mail to all his friends at knock down prices making himself millions and millions in back handers..And Tony Blair oh don't get me started on that RAT..

Become a good politician serve your country well and after you have served then you can go on to make money..
Write a book to make you millions do speaking events bake cakes and sell them to make millions
But all this must be done after you serve as president ..Not while your president BUT AFTER..

Just think if we had no internet we would all still know nothing just guessing with no real evidence.
If the news wont tell you the truth the internet will..

To all who seek the truth and post it on the internet for the good of humanity I THANK YOU ALL

Well said! 

NOT WHILE PRESIDENT.

Watch "Clinton Cash," the movie:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LYRUOd_QoM

Did you ever get that laptop??   

[popcorn1]

RE:  "No party is offering a car"

Only Oprah gives away massive numbers of cars!

Obama gave away ObamaPhones!

"Obama Phone" Remix (parody song) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr201FqTP4w

..So funny ..
At least we British got a free laptop if we voted for Gordon Brown ..

Gordon brown to spend £300m giving free broadband and laptops to the poor..
Then he sold our gold and royal mail to all his friends at knock down prices making himself millions and millions in back handers..And Tony Blair oh don't get me started on that RAT..

Become a good politician serve your country well and after you have served then you can go on to make money..
Write a book to make you millions do speaking events bake cakes and sell them to make millions
But all this must be done after you serve as president ..Not while your president BUT AFTER..

Just think if we had no internet we would all still know nothing just guessing with no real evidence.
If the news wont tell you the truth the internet will..

To all who seek the truth and post it on the internet for the good of humanity I THANK YOU ALL

Well said! 

NOT WHILE PRESIDENT.

Watch "Clinton Cash," the movie:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LYRUOd_QoM

Did you ever get that laptop??   

YER  typing on it as we speak ..About 10 years old 5 buttons missing but still works..
Me wife bought me a new laptop for me Birthday about 2 year ago playing poker stars and smashed it because i got beat..Well set up like a kipper ..
So i am refusing to buy a new one till this blows up ..

I only need one to bet and trade and this still does the job  ..
Me phone still about 15 years old  ..
Oh but me wife and kids got all the latest gadgets i got NOTHING and i pay for it all ..

Clinton Cash," the movie i have seen it and i was pissed off because of the lives they destroyed
they have no morals..
Like this i have a dog and if someone offered me 1 million dollars for my dog i would refuse in a flash because i love her so much..
Clinton would sell Chelsea because she is a DOG ..

[Bitbobb]

The notion that if you limit the money in the election you limit the corruption is a very noble one until you find out that it is not realistic.

Let me give you an example: Israel

Israel citizens will tell you until they are blue in the face that they have elections where they removed money from politics and blah, blah,blah.  And if it were true it would be truly wonderful.

And it really sound good unless you know the facts.

Fact is that for Netanyahoo's presidential election, FOREIGN INDIRECT CONTRIBUTION came 90% from USA for the sole purpose of influencing the election results in Israel.

So the folks who have analyzed this system have deduced that while the Israel citizen feels really good while they brag about their free elections...in fact what has happened is now the election is completely influenced by foreign interests.  And with no domestic money to counter balance the indirect foreign influence, the removal of money in fact made their election process more vulnerable and not less vulnerable to influence.  And in this case foreign money is arguably much worse by comparison than domestic money.

     So while I agree that removing or limiting the money in a USA presidential election is a tempting thought the reality on this planet and the evidence as shown with Israel prevents me from being convinced that is realy possible to implement and therefore in fact more dangerous at this time.

I say this because today most people in Israel do not know that 90% of Netanyahoo's money for his campaign was sent from addresses from within the USA.  They do not even know about the money that was used to help him get elected.

If they knew that information they would understand their president is not the guy that would have won that election.  It was this money that made it possible for him to win.  His election could have gone very different.

So once again I must respectfully disagree.  However I am grateful for the opportunity to debate this important topic and respect each opinion and my chance to respond

[Bitbobb]

Parties are not required for Democracy.  Parties were invented in USA in 1790 and democracy existed long before this date so how did democracy survive without a political party all those years??
 You could have no parties and still have democracies I promise.  
The fact that you are thinking in terms of a party is flawed.  In fact the entire party system came about because people rallied around their platform which is a word for the views and beliefs they hold.  
The party did not even exist the first few years in USA.
 The party system is a pure USA invention that really serves little legal function.
 But as we see now it holds great power over the process in ways that were never meant to be.  
SO the statement that more parties = more democracy is like saying you get more water because you use more cups.

[RoomBot]

Wrong.

2 "choices" -  both puppets.  2 sides of the same coin.  Hardly a "choice."

3rd parties bring in independent candidates.

The problem with the "2-party" system is they don't allow others to debate.  That is hardly "democratic."

And yes, having more choices is more democratic.

[Bitbobb]

Wrong.

2 "choices" -  both puppets.  2 sides of the same coin.  Hardly a "choice."

3rd parties bring in independent candidates.

The problem with the "2-party" system is they don't allow others to debate.  That is hardly "democratic."

And yes, having more choices is more democratic.

Lol.  Saying I am wrong does not actually make me wrong. 

John F. Kennedy said: "Sometimes party loyalty asks too much"

And again saying Trump is the same as Hillary does not make it true.  I think the gridlock may make them both unable to bring change but Trump has way better chances at real positive and meaningful change IMO.

  They are like totally not the same by most people's estimate.  So you have a curious opinion .  Most people think a vote for Trump is a vote for reform and a vote for Hillary is a vote for deplorable status quo.

Yes the party system is bullshit now you see my point in part.  This is why Trump is like a Kennedy he keeps only loose ties with such groups.  Trump, like JFK can afford to flout the traditional party rule system of pressure and control since he is so popular with the people. 

[Spendulus]

Wrong.

2 "choices" -  both puppets.  2 sides of the same coin.  Hardly a "choice."

3rd parties bring in independent candidates.

The problem with the "2-party" system is they don't allow others to debate.  That is hardly "democratic."

And yes, having more choices is more democratic.

Lol.  Saying I am wrong does not actually make me wrong. 

John F. Kennedy said: "Sometimes party loyalty asks too much"

And again saying Trump is the same as Hillary does not make it true.  I think the gridlock may make them both unable to bring change but Trump has way better chances at real positive and meaningful change IMO.

  They are like totally not the same by most people's estimate.  So you have a curious opinion .  Most people think a vote for Trump is a vote for reform and a vote for Hillary is a vote for deplorable status quo.

Yes the party system is bullshit now you see my point in part.  This is why Trump is like a Kennedy he keeps only loose ties with such groups.  Trump, like JFK can afford to flout the traditional party rule system of pressure and control since he is so popular with the people. 

I agree with the bolded.  In the past, libertarians have often argued "the two candidates are the same."

It certainly looked that way when the Powers That Be were trying to push Jeb Bush on the people, as the Repub candidate.

Well, it sure does not look that way now.

[RoomBot]

Agreed.  But wait until the Powers That Be get a hold of whomever.

"Progressive" Bill Clinton went full Neo-Con upon his election -- making the 20th Century slave trade out of our PRISONS.

Trump is not really a Republican OR a Democrat --  he's not even a politician, so......

We need #Green & #Libertarians & anyone else we can find to keep the DemoCrips and ReBloodlicans ( somewhat) (more) honest.

[pepethefrog]

This is Pepe the frog, and this here Pepe approves of this thread.  

[Spendulus]

Agreed.  But wait until the Powers That Be get a hold of whomever.

"Progressive" Bill Clinton went full Neo-Con upon his election -- making the 20th Century slave trade out of our PRISONS.

Trump is not really a Republican OR a Democrat --  he's not even a politician, so......

We need #Green & #Libertarians & anyone else we can find to keep the DemoCrips and ReBloodlicans ( somewhat) (more ) honest.

I think it was clear during the primary that (bolded) was exactly why people favored him.

Is it true that #Green and #Libertarian keeps anyone more honest?  I'm having some trouble with that premise.

Liberarian has a pro-marihuana legalization platform for at least 20 years, but it seems they were totally ignored and when society wanted to go that way, it did. 

So who do they keep "more honest?"  Just asking, not trying to pick nits. 

[RoomBot]

OK, maybe other candidates will help to keep the 2 parties "less sleazy??"

IDK.

[bryant.coleman]

In many of the opinion polls, Gary Johnson is polling double digits. However, I have a feeling that what happened during the 1996 elections will repeat this time as well. In 1996, Ross Perot was polling as much as 20% in the opinion polls. But when the election results came out, he received just 8% of the vote (but that was enough to ensure the defeat of the Republican candidate).