Even Bernie Sanders was smart enough to know he would have to run as a Democrat to stand any chance at all.
Never Trump
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
Even Bernie Sanders was smart enough to know he would have to run as a Democrat to stand any chance at all.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
"even"
Strong retort
I'll try to answer, but in all honesty I've really gotten tired of it all and my heart's just not in it like it used to be.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I'm down with this. What are bernies support numbers in Utah though? Could voting for bernie accomplish the same thing? Is voting for bernie even an option?
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I would urge you to look away from the labels of republican, democrat, libertarian, etc etc and look at the candidate and what they believe in and stand up for.
Seems like you are dismissing what hey hey is saying simply due to the republican label. That's not good.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
No big deal.
You spiked my curiosity. Most Americans, no matter what their political persuasion, don't think outside the constitution other than maybe a little thing here or there that they don't like. Very few people would advocate for a complete reordering of the country. I was honestly interested in what you had to say. If you would rather not that's cool too.
In my experience most libertarians are big business libertarians. They have a view that we should take the shackles off of entrepreneurs and "job creators" by reducing their tax burden and their regulatory hurdles.
My view of libertarianism is that it should serve the individual above all and it should serve all individuals well. It shouldn't set up a system of wolves and sheep. I think if you read many of the libertarian forums you will see that generally libertarians view themselves as exceptional people and want to live in a world where exceptional people can take advantage, without restraint, of all the less than exceptional people out there. Of course that's not what they'll say outright. But I would still want a government that protects people from lying, stealing, cheating, coercion and physical force, in all forms.
I'm not against big business, at all. But I started out as a libertarian with the idea that lying, cheating, stealing and coercion were bad and that other than that let people make their own choices. I always felt compelled to include coercion. I think that it is very possible, that in a truely libertarian society that large businesses could essentially create a slave class (more than already exists) that has fewer choices and fewer freedoms than we have in present day U.S..
I think there would need to be specific oversight to mitigate the coercive force that huge corporations could wield on individuals.
I also don't believe in limited liability (LLC). I think that companies should have to pay, in full, any individual that they harm in any quantifiable way. That would absolutely include the assets of the individuals who made the decisions that lead to harm. I think my view on this would absolutely stifle business as we know it in the U.S. today.
I think the only way for employees to survive in a libertarian society is to have powerful unions. I also think there would need to be consumer unions.
But ultimately, like I said, I don't see a path to real libertarianism in the U.S.. I think the right place to try libertarianism would be in a new human settlement, so basically, somewhere other than Earth. No revolution. I would be terrified if the U.S. constitution was dissolved. I wouldn't be willing to go down that path to experiment with libertarianism. I'm comfortable and happy with our current non-perfect system that disagrees with my ideology at times. I'd like to make our system work as best it can, not try to make it sort of resemble my ideological vision when it could never really do that.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
He's in favour of all this in the same way everyone on the Pacific coast is suddenly a Warriors fan. Started supporting gay marriage in 2011. Ending the war on drugs in the late 90s, after already being in the office for a term. I'm sure if I look hard enough, I'd be able to find when exactly he decided to become pro-choice. And of course, last but not the least, switching parties after his stint as a governor.
Yay, welcome to all the different bandwagons, Gary Johnson.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I agree with you about libertarians generally leaning towards those type of people. I think they are mistaken on what the effect of libertarianism would be. I don't think libertarianism should serve the individual and I think that that extreme individualism is what is wrong with libertarians but it doesn't really matter. The policy of less policy would increase the role and responsibility of non-government institutions and I think that's a good thing.
The power of huge corporations is actually quite fragile. Even with a government that serves big business and capital only 11% of the Fortune 500 companies that were on the original list in 1955 still are. Removing tax loopholes, ending bailouts of big businesses, and decreasing regulation that I see as keeping new comers out should only serve to increase this churn.
Labor Unions do more for their workforce than the government ever will. The thing is the government has to remain neutral for them to work well. In the era of the robber barons state and federal government was at all out war with the unions. They beat, shot, arrested, and even executed some of them. Nowadays they are either positively or negatively regulated and it is causing their downfall. In some states labor unions have such high hurdles that they hardly exist, in other states they have been given so much power that they have chased away the jobs they depend on. Still I would rather call my union when I had a beef with my employer than write a letter to my congressman. One of those organizations serves me while the other does not. It is my view that unions will be as healthy as they can be only when unions and employers have the same sort of customer/service provider relationship that works so well elsewhere. Government needs to get out of the way for this to happen.
I think the corporate machine and government go hand in hand. It seems most people think that. I find it odd then that those same people would turn around and say that the cure for corporate power is to give the government that serves those corporations more power.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
When did Obama begin supporting gay marriage?(IIRC it was after he was elected to his 2nd term and it was clear that the SCOTUS was going to legalize it. In other words well after Johnson by anyone's measure.) Has he done anything in 8 years to end the drug war? Has he ever advocated for legalizing marijuana?
JimLes
Well-Known Member
When the **** did I become an Obama supporter? This board sometimes, I swear.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
It doesn't matter who you support. Narcissistic much? Contrasting Obama's support to Johnsons shows that Johnson isn't the Johnny come lately that you are trying to portray him as. Name one other governor that supported the legalization of recreational marijuana in the nineties. Hell I can't think of one in 2016. Even Colorado's governor was against their MJ referendum but said that he would support the will of the voters. Srsly GJ has spoken out against the drug war for 20 years. That's not jumping on the bandwagon late that's way ahead of the curve.
I've been asking myself this question lately.
Do I want a liar, bully, robber baron, idiot as president, or a lying, subtle, sneaky, law breaker as president.
I hate to say it, but after considering the damage both could do to our country I think I lean towards Trump.
Mostly because I think he would have so many enemies if in office that he wouldn't be able to get anything done.
If Billary was in office, she would be able to do stuff and I am fairly convinced none of it would be good.
/backward sophie's choice
Do I want a liar, bully, robber baron, idiot as president, or a lying, subtle, sneaky, law breaker as president.
I hate to say it, but after considering the damage both could do to our country I think I lean towards Trump.
Mostly because I think he would have so many enemies if in office that he wouldn't be able to get anything done.
If Billary was in office, she would be able to do stuff and I am fairly convinced none of it would be good.
/backward sophie's choice
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Americans showing support for a candidate who thinks a judge's ancestry and/or faith hinders their ability to competent legal practice.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
yu know as Mormons I would figure some here would be familiar with how damaging bigotry can be. I suppose it's fine so long as it isn't directed towards them.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
So he's as bad as Obama and Hilary and that's a compliment?
Congratulations on being so ahead of the curve. But I don't see the point, if any, that you're trying to make.
If I agreed with every last thing Trump wanted to do in office I still would not, could not vote for him.
He has displayed such low character that I do not consider him fit for the office. He is flat out disgusting.
