• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump's motorcade has arrived in Beverly Park for a $35,000-minimum fundraiser

Well I know its easier said then done, but hey if more Americans considered the value of a US without the two party system, that would be a start.

Well, we've got approximately 25% of the country who are rabid liberal and approximately 25% of the country who are rabid conservative, and approximately 50% of the country who are in the more moderate range but, the problem is, there is no party that represents the 50% and usually all third parties favor the extremes, not the middle. So, the middle 50% are constantly forced to choose between the lesser of two evils or have their votes not count. And, that's exactly what happened in the 2016 election. We had the two worst nominees in the history of the country and the people in the middle decided that Trump was the lesser of the two evils. If we redid the election today and these people decided that, in hindsight, Hillary was the lesser of the two evils, it still doesn't change the fact that Hillary was still evil. The were both evil choices.
 
Well, we've got approximately 25% of the country who are rabid liberal and approximately 25% of the country who are rabid conservative, and approximately 50% of the country who are in the more moderate range but, the problem is, there is no party that represents the 50% and usually all third parties favor the extremes, not the middle. So, the middle 50% are constantly forced to choose between the lesser of two evils or have their votes not count. And, that's exactly what happened in the 2016 election. We had the two worst nominees in the history of the country and the people in the middle decided that Trump was the lesser of the two evils. If we redid the election today and these people decided that, in hindsight, Hillary was the lesser of the two evils, it still doesn't change the fact that Hillary was still evil. The were both evil choices.

Well I liked Bernie Sanders better then both of them, but that's just me. The 2 party system creates structural corruption, the problems it creates go far beyond Clinton and Trump. The 2 party system has been failing to create better options for a while now, getting rid of it would at least create more options for voters. I do not consider Hilliary Clinton a true progressive, she is just a neo liberal shill and Trumo used that against her.
 
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

What if the houses piss them off?

















(In other words, don't make the mistake of assuming that people with certain leans liked Hillary)
 
The outsider gimmick ended when he appointed a bunch of Goldman Sachs people to his cabinet.

Oh, he may have been a political insider, but for decades and decades he was on the other side of it; the wealthy private citizen using money to move politicians about, etc.
 
Jesus, dude...


If you're suggesting that you can post stuff about Hillary that is comparable to what Trump did, you are actually agreeing with his point. You are not disputing it, as you seem to think you were.

At least you admit that Hillary would have been every bit the disaster that Trump is.
 
Well I liked Bernie Sanders better then both of them, but that's just me. The 2 party system creates structural corruption, the problems it creates go far beyond Clinton and Trump. The 2 party system has been failing to create better options for a while now, getting rid of it would at least create more options for voters. I do not consider Hilliary Clinton a true progressive, she is just a neo liberal shill and Trumo used that against her.

In other words, you are in the left 25%, you just hate your party option. No different than the opposing 25% who are Libertarians or part of the Freedom Caucus, who hate their party option. That's what's wrong with the country. We need to get rid of both 25%'s and leave only the middle 50%. Flush Bernie.
 
In other words, you are in the left 25%, you just hate your party option. No different than the opposing 25% who are Libertarians or part of the Freedom Caucus, who hate their party option. That's what's wrong with the country. We need to get rid of both 25%'s and leave only the middle 50%. Flush Bernie.

Hilliary Clinton was essentially the middle (people saying she was too left wing, I do not see it) and neither of us like her, despite being in the middle between our outlooks.

Clinton is the ultimate middle politican, she flip flops all the time and lets the polls determine her views that day and Trump beat her, because her third way failed.

You say flush Bernie, but who would you rather see, Biden, an out of touch old man who gets into Twitter fights with Trump to the point they both threaten to beat each other up? No thanks.

Cleaning up the swamp will take men of principal, not middle road neo liberals like Clinton or Biden.
 
Hilliary Clinton was essentially the middle (people saying she was too left wing, I do not see it) and neither of us like her, despite being in the middle between our outlooks.

Clinton is the ultimate middle politican, she flip flops all the time and lets the polls determine her views that day and Trump beat her, because her third way failed.

You say flush Bernie, but who would you rather see, Biden, an out of touch old man who gets into Twitter fights with Trump to the point they both threaten to beat each other up? No thanks.

Cleaning up the swamp will take men of principal, not middle road neo liberals like Clinton or Biden.

Hillary was the middle of the Democratic party, not the middle of the country as a whole.
 
Hillary was the middle of the Democratic party, not the middle of the country as a whole.

And what's the Democratic party? Pretty worthless as entity when its controlled by neo liberals like Pelosi Schumer. Its not a real progressive party with those people in charge.

Here's the big problem, the US political spectrum is so what of whack, any Democrat to takes a step outside of the center is considered a dangerous radical, meanwhile the GOP can make itself into the National Front and people seem think that is okay.
 
And what's the Democratic party? Pretty worthless as entity when its controlled by neo liberals like Pelosi Schumer. Its not a real progressive party with those people in charge.

Here's the big problem, the US political spectrum is so what of whack, any Democrat to takes a step outside of the center is considered a dangerous radical, meanwhile the GOP can make itself into the National Front and people seem think that is okay.

The Democratic party isn't one bit different than the Republican party - both have their extremist factions who are too chicken **** to run on their own party because they know they can't win - enter Bernie, Jill Stein, the so called Libertarians, Tea Party, and the Freedom Caucus.
 
The Democratic party isn't one bit different than the Republican party - both have their extremist factions who are too chicken **** to run on their own party because they know they can't win - enter Bernie, Jill Stein, the so called Libertarians, Tea Party, and the Freedom Caucus.

Except the GOP has been pulling further to the right for decades, a bet Reagan would be considered a RINO now. The GOP have far more common with the National Front then any Tory party, heck a member of the National Front was invited to CPAC, the GOP is more akin to a far right reactionary party then any sort of center right conservative party we see else where in the West.

Meanwhile the Dems try to portray a mediocre politician like Hillary Clinton like some progressive champion, when she is some neo liberal who voted for the Iraq war and did have some potential corruption scandals in her closet. The Dems would have to run Noam Chomsky to be as left you accuse it to be, meanwhile the GOP just runs far right reactionaries like Steve King and no one bats an eye. I listened to a documentary about some the stuff the Clinton foundation did in Haiti, that's a good reason why I do not like her and why I think the leadership of the Dems are out of touch crooked neo liberals.

I don't blame Bernie Sanders for trying to change the 2 party system from within, it may not have worked, but it was worth a try.
 
Except the GOP has been pulling further to the right for decades, a bet Reagan would be considered a RINO now. The GOP have far more common with the National Front then any Tory party, heck a member of the National Front was invited to CPAC, the GOP is more akin to a far right reactionary party then any sort of center right conservative party we see else where in the West.

Meanwhile the Dems try to portray a mediocre politician like Hillary Clinton like some progressive champion, when she is some neo liberal who voted for the Iraq war and did have some potential corruption scandals in her closet. The Dems would have to run Noam Chomsky to be as left you accuse it to be, meanwhile the GOP just runs far right reactionaries like Steve King and no one bats an eye. I listened to a documentary about some the stuff the Clinton foundation did in Haiti, that's a good reason why I do not like her and why I think the leadership of the Dems are out of touch crooked neo liberals.

I don't blame Bernie Sanders for trying to change the 2 party system from within, it may not have worked, but it was worth a try.

The Democratic party has been pulling farther left for decades. That's why we have gridlock. Both sides have been pulling toward the extremes.
 
Back
Top Bottom