Unity 2020

[Viper1]

https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336

https://youtu.be/b4H-0S89pxU

On it's surface I like the idea but I haven't put much thought into it yet.

[1713570096]

1713570096

[1713570096]

1713570096

[1713570096]

1713570096

[suchmoon]

A lot of big words... proud to be an American... fuck yeah.

But completely devoid of "how". There have been third party candidates with big words before.

[Viper1]

Bit of a discussion on the idea.

https://youtu.be/Tz6AzwJGJiI

[squatz1]

A lot of big words... proud to be an American... fuck yeah.

But completely devoid of "how". There have been third party candidates with big words before.

Most third party candidates have a lot of the big words talking about how they're going to unify us as one nation and all of this. They talk about how bad the two party system is and how it has led us down this path and pitted Americans up against their fellow Americans.

But most of them are only proposing like one or two issues that they want changed and there really isn't even ever a shot of them even passing those ideas. Think of someone like Andrew Yang (who I still consider as 3rd party) who pushed for UBI and at the time it had no real chance of passing.

Third party candidates really need to have that state level / national level infrastructure to truly be able to push for their ideas. There's no chance a 3rd party President is going to win -- not enough people would know about them (unless their personal persona was big enough for that) -- but there is a chance that a 3rd party could win in other races. Governor, Senate, State Legislatures, Congress, etc.

[Spendulus]

https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336

https://youtu.be/b4H-0S89pxU

On it's surface I like the idea but I haven't put much thought into it yet.

The entire comment thread looks fake, and the article is pure lofty, unspecific speech.

Generally, a 3rd party has an effect calculated to move an advantage to one of the two large percentage parties, one of which will win.

[Juggy777]

https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336

https://youtu.be/b4H-0S89pxU

On it's surface I like the idea but I haven't put much thought into it yet.

The entire comment thread looks fake, and the article is pure lofty, unspecific speech.

Generally, a 3rd party has an effect calculated to move an advantage to one of the two large percentage parties, one of which will win.

@spendulus it’s quiet possible that those are paid comments as one can easily buy those comments online for few dollars, and further politicians have their own private social media team which buys these, but then again it’s difficult to prove this as we don’t have the required proof.

A lot of big words... proud to be an American... fuck yeah.

But completely devoid of "how". There have been third party candidates with big words before.

Most third party candidates have a lot of the big words talking about how they're going to unify us as one nation and all of this. They talk about how bad the two party system is and how it has led us down this path and pitted Americans up against their fellow Americans.

But most of them are only proposing like one or two issues that they want changed and there really isn't even ever a shot of them even passing those ideas. Think of someone like Andrew Yang (who I still consider as 3rd party) who pushed for UBI and at the time it had no real chance of passing.

Third party candidates really need to have that state level / national level infrastructure to truly be able to push for their ideas. There's no chance a 3rd party President is going to win -- not enough people would know about them (unless their personal persona was big enough for that) -- but there is a chance that a 3rd party could win in other races. Governor, Senate, State Legislatures, Congress, etc.

@squatz1 these third party candidates are no good as they neither have the vision or the skills required to run the nation, and that’s why they keep on making such bold claims, because they know they’ll never be in power to fulfil their bold claims.

[JohnBitCo]

https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336

https://youtu.be/b4H-0S89pxU

On it's surface I like the idea but I haven't put much thought into it yet.

This does not happen in a democracy environment. If both the parties merge there will be no need of the election. It will be hard for them to remain patriotic because then they will try to exploit the power because there will be no opposition who will stop them. This is not possible practically and you cannot change the way of how the USA president is elected.

[Spendulus]

https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336

https://youtu.be/b4H-0S89pxU

On it's surface I like the idea but I haven't put much thought into it yet.

The entire comment thread looks fake, and the article is pure lofty, unspecific speech.

Generally, a 3rd party has an effect calculated to move an advantage to one of the two large percentage parties, one of which will win.

@spendulus it’s quiet possible that those are paid comments as one can easily buy those comments online for few dollars, and further politicians have their own private social media team which buys these, but then again it’s difficult to prove this as we don’t have the required proof.
....

There's really no need to "Prove it." Often in this forum you see people trying to "prove things" with ridiculous stretches of logic and truth. The comment thread looks and feels fake. That's enough to say.

[franky1]

problem is that there are not just 2 opinions of just centre left and centre right

each 50 states have different ethics, morals, desires and needs
those in NY are more of the capitalist money guys. they want freedoms to take all oppertunities to increase wealth. able to create monopolies and franchise their idea's under licence with incomes received by all that use their idea..
but they also want all the legislation restrictions that oppose freedoms to protect their idea's
even they cant agree on freedoms or restrictions


yet other states in the farming regions care more about land and freedom to control their own crops and not have capitalists manage them. helping their neighbours but not wanting to manage their neighbours
but they also want all the insurances and assurances that if they have a bad crop someone is their to manage and protect them.
again. cant agree

then theres the freedom states that just want to have barbecues go skiiing and surfing without a care in the world. they just wanna do a good enough job that pays for a fun happy lifestyle
they want to be able to go to coffee shops without big queues, but dont want to work in the coffee shop to help with the queue.. again they cant agree

there are jsut some jobs that no one wants to do. the 12 hour back labouring jobs. and so they want the freedom to import staff from other places todo the work. but at same time they dont want those immigrants to stay or have freedoms themselves.

which then comes to the human rights of travel/shelter and slavery. deciding one group of people is better than another human and only some groups are classed as full humans that get rights

.....
trying to get such diverse mindsets too unite into just 2 factions is harder than the article writer pretends to make it

[af_newbie]

https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336

https://youtu.be/b4H-0S89pxU

On it's surface I like the idea but I haven't put much thought into it yet.

The political system needs to undergo some fundamental changes for this to work.

First of all, political donations should be limited to $1000 per physical person of voting age.  No corporate/business donations should be allowed. A federal registration to keep track of political candidates and their donations is required.

Lobbying should be banned and criminalized.  Any candidate who takes donations outside of what is allowed should be automatically disqualified for life.

All candidates should be selected based on merit.  A 'Political Olympiad' exam winners would be my choice.

All government employees should be hired based on merit in their corresponding fields.

This will eliminate lawyers and lobbyists running departments they have no expertise in, HHS comes to mind.

[Viper1]

The comment thread looks and feels fake.

What is it about it that looks "fake"? When he first "announced" this idea on Joe Rogan, he through out Yang and another guy as potential candidates. A lot of the "Yang Gang" is apparently on board with the idea and have been promoting it from what I've seen. I don't know a lot about Yang other than the UBI thing and I don't know who the other guy is that he brought up for the "right" other than apparently he was/is military or something.

[Spendulus]

The comment thread looks and feels fake.

What is it about it that looks "fake"? When he first "announced" this idea on Joe Rogan, he through out Yang and another guy as potential candidates. A lot of the "Yang Gang" is apparently on board with the idea and have been promoting it from what I've seen. I don't know a lot about Yang other than the UBI thing and I don't know who the other guy is that he brought up for the "right" other than apparently he was/is military or something.

Wait, so I can't opinionate? Sure I can elaborate.

The extent of vagueness in the "proposal" is matched only by the extent of positive comments. For WHAT, EXACTLY?

But without thinking or critical examination, Orange Man = Bad, right?

Here's another comment for you. Fuck that.

[Spendulus]

https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336

https://youtu.be/b4H-0S89pxU

On it's surface I like the idea but I haven't put much thought into it yet.

The political system needs to undergo some fundamental changes for this to work.

First of all, political donations should be limited to $1000 per physical person of voting age.  No corporate/business donations should be allowed. A federal registration to keep track of political candidates and their donations is required.

Lobbying should be banned and criminalized.  Any candidate who takes donations outside of what is allowed should be automatically disqualified for life.

All candidates should be selected based on merit.  A 'Political Olympiad' exam winners would be my choice.

All government employees should be hired based on merit in their corresponding fields.

This will eliminate lawyers and lobbyists running departments they have no expertise in, HHS comes to mind.

Like it or not, you've just described a sort of Utopian ideals, and those always, like perpetual motion fantasies or Maxist theology, fail to work in actual practice.

Not that I don't agree with your proposed reforms, but breaking apart a power system in one place causes another to arise elsewhere, which is oftentimes worse.

[Viper1]

The comment thread looks and feels fake.

What is it about it that looks "fake"? When he first "announced" this idea on Joe Rogan, he through out Yang and another guy as potential candidates. A lot of the "Yang Gang" is apparently on board with the idea and have been promoting it from what I've seen. I don't know a lot about Yang other than the UBI thing and I don't know who the other guy is that he brought up for the "right" other than apparently he was/is military or something.

Wait, so I can't opinionate? Sure I can elaborate.

The extent of vagueness in the "proposal" is matched only by the extent of positive comments. For WHAT, EXACTLY?

But without thinking or critical examination, Orange Man = Bad, right?

Here's another comment for you. Fuck that.

You insecure or something? I didn't say anything about whether or not you can express your opinion. I simply asked what you thought was fake about them.

What made you suddenly jump to "orange man bad"? You seriously need to step out of your bubble sometimes. The people behind the idea and that are supporting it are of the feeling that both old fools are bad.

As for the vagueness, what exactly is vague about it. Run two guys that work as a partnership that would theoretically govern more from the center and that aren't beholden to the political parties.

[suchmoon]

As for the vagueness, what exactly is vague about it. Run two guys that work as a partnership that would theoretically govern more from the center and that aren't beholden to the political parties.

Well, for one - who are the "guys"?

Someone posted in the Kanye thread that the deadline for independent candidates to file for November ballot has passed in a few states. I can't be bothered to check but that sounds about right (I know Michigan deadline is mid-July and you need 30k signatures from different congressional districts). So this effort sounds even more retarded than Kanye's announcement since we don't even know who the supposed candidates would be and can't practice writing their names.

[Viper1]

As for the vagueness, what exactly is vague about it. Run two guys that work as a partnership that would theoretically govern more from the center and that aren't beholden to the political parties.

Well, for one - who are the "guys"?

Someone posted in the Kanye thread that the deadline for independent candidates to file for November ballot has passed in a few states. I can't be bothered to check but that sounds about right (I know Michigan deadline is mid-July and you need 30k signatures from different congressional districts). So this effort sounds even more retarded than Kanye's announcement since we don't even know who the supposed candidates would be and can't practice writing their names.

Who it will be hasn't been determined.

It would take you 4 months to practice writing a name? Really? That's your big issue?

I figured it would be too late for this sort of thing as the masses just wouldn't be able to get on board quick enough. Having said that, there's a lot of people on the left that don't want to vote for Biden, especially the younger voters so it could take off. Regardless, there's some people trying to do something different. Something that could change things at least in some small way. But if you're happy with the options and the status quo, then by all means don't bother looking into it more. I'm not here to hold anyone's hand but to let people know there's potentially another option besides Trump, Biden, not voting, writing in someone not even writing etc etc.

[suchmoon]

It would take you 4 months to practice writing a name? Really? That's your big issue?

Me? No. I'm only allowed to pay taxes but not to vote. However millennials and zoomers need some practice - I don't think they'll be able to thumb-type the candidate's name.

Jokes aside, the issue is obviously that  it's way too late for the 2020 election. Even write-in campaigns are required to file some paperwork in most states, and some states don't allow write-ins. So this campaign is dead in the water. If Trump's campaign wasn't such a disjointed shitshow I'd suspect they came up with this idea as this only helps Trump, but I don't think they're smart enough for that.

[Spendulus]

....

As for the vagueness, what exactly is vague about it. Run two guys that work as a partnership that would theoretically govern more from the center and that aren't beholden to the political parties.

EVERYTHING is vague about it, no doubt on purpose.

However I'll give you a sort-of analogy that's been tried and tested. The City Manager, runs the city and keeps it out of the hands of the elected and partisan Mayor.