2 hours ago, Ipiggles said:

There is a majority along the middle lines, there is middle ground to be had. But the fringes of the 2 major parties have polarized the voting base. Is it time for a centrist party? 

I do think that most voters actually fall somewhere in the middle, or just left/right of center.  Typically, people don't agree with literally everything in the party platform there may be some slight disagreement.  Because of the 2 party majority and no viable additional options, people have to choose between 2 parties.  A lot of people just vote the same party their whole life no matter how bad the candidate is, because to them the other candidate/party is worse.  Some people are one issue voters if there's nothing else to win their vote they'll go with the candidate who stands for the one thing they care about most.  

The parties have both moved away from center or made their platforms and strategies about division and wedge issues.  It used to be that the biggest issues were economy, jobs, safety, education.  These days it's fabricated crisis, exaggeration, virtue signaling, or just demonizing the other side so you better vote for us.  

I don't see an end, I think it will get worse.  I had a glimmer of hope in 2016 when Gary Johnson ran - not because he was a great candidate, he was goofy, had gaffes, etc.  But I had hope because he got a lot of attention, was in town halls on the networks and more people were discovering who he was and at least hearing about him.  He wasn't going to win of course, but I thought it would generate more appetite for at least seeing alternative options to the 2 parties. But then we get into situations like 2020 where a lot of voters felt they just needed to get rid of Trump whether they actually like Biden or not.  People have a fear of voting 3rd party because it's really handing the election to (whichever candidate they don't like).

I think it would take a very popular person with the draw similar to what Trump had who could fund their own campaign and go against the 2 party structure, utilize social media and have good talking points and strategy to get people's attention...and for the major party candidates to not be very good so people take a look at the alternative.  It's a huge uphill climb and I don't know if it will ever happen.  Too many people fear it and shut it down saying they have no chance, you can't risk the other side winning, etc.  Actually, if all the people who don't really like the 2 major party candidates voted 3rd party, they'd get a lot of votes but people don't risk it...and usually there isn't a strong enough candidate to win over votes.

11 minutes ago, NOTW said:

I do think that most voters actually fall somewhere in the middle, or just left/right of center.  Typically, people don't agree with literally everything in the party platform there may be some slight disagreement.  Because of the 2 party majority and no viable additional options, people have to choose between 2 parties.  A lot of people just vote the same party their whole life no matter how bad the candidate is, because to them the other candidate/party is worse.  Some people are one issue voters if there's nothing else to win their vote they'll go with the candidate who stands for the one thing they care about most.  

The parties have both moved away from center or made their platforms and strategies about division and wedge issues.  It used to be that the biggest issues were economy, jobs, safety, education.  These days it's fabricated crisis, exaggeration, virtue signaling, or just demonizing the other side so you better vote for us.  

I don't see an end, I think it will get worse.  I had a glimmer of hope in 2016 when Gary Johnson ran - not because he was a great candidate, he was goofy, had gaffes, etc.  But I had hope because he got a lot of attention, was in town halls on the networks and more people were discovering who he was and at least hearing about him.  He wasn't going to win of course, but I thought it would generate more appetite for at least seeing alternative options to the 2 parties. But then we get into situations like 2020 where a lot of voters felt they just needed to get rid of Trump whether they actually like Biden or not.  People have a fear of voting 3rd party because it's really handing the election to (whichever candidate they don't like).

I think it would take a very popular person with the draw similar to what Trump had who could fund their own campaign and go against the 2 party structure, utilize social media and have good talking points and strategy to get people's attention...and for the major party candidates to not be very good so people take a look at the alternative.  It's a huge uphill climb and I don't know if it will ever happen.  Too many people fear it and shut it down saying they have no chance, you can't risk the other side winning, etc.  Actually, if all the people who don't really like the 2 major party candidates voted 3rd party, they'd get a lot of votes but people don't risk it...and usually there isn't a strong enough candidate to win over votes.

Fighting both parties, one who controls most MSM narratives, the other controls the minority outlets, will make it nearly impossible. 

To me a centrist party would need to be built from defections from both parties. A significant number of highly prominent and reasonable politicians from both sides would need to form a "better america coalition" in order to be able to actually have a chance. But the only way that even stands a chance is if MSM stops being partisan and actually  just delivers the facts. 

 

2 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

Fighting both parties, one who controls most MSM narratives, the other controls the minority outlets, will make it nearly impossible. 

To me a centrist party would need to be built from defections from both parties. A significant number of highly prominent and reasonable politicians from both sides would need to form a "better america coalition" in order to be able to actually have a chance. But the only way they even stands a chance is if MSM stops being partisan and actually  just delivers the facts. 

 

  I'm sure they'll wake up one day and decide they no longer want to make any money.

 

10 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

Fighting both parties, one who controls most MSM narratives, the other controls the minority outlets, will make it nearly impossible. 

To me a centrist party would need to be built from defections from both parties. A significant number of highly prominent and reasonable politicians from both sides would need to form a "better america coalition" in order to be able to actually have a chance. But the only way they even stands a chance is if MSM stops being partisan and actually  just delivers the facts. 

 

Depending on the candidate, the media would generate buzz if they are likable and fear monger if they are worried they will steal votes from their candidate.  Libertarians have certain views that are too extreme, the majority aren't buying the taxation is theft, abolish the IRS stuff in practicality.  

It's interesting because from a marketing standpoint there is a voting block ripe for the taking.  A centrist candidate who stands for classic liberal principles like freedom, civil rights, reasonable care for environmental issues (not fear mongering that the world will end in 8 years or that climate change is rooted in racism or misogyny), fiscal responsibility that requires bi-partisan work to reduce debt and manage spending more wisely, balance a strong military but reduce foreign intervention and regime change, respect for all Americans and not focus so much on labels and categories but focus on the things that unite us.  Focus on economy, jobs, investing in schools, infrastructure, etc.  I even think public health care option just like public education is becoming more attractive and not the conservative turn off it used to be.  Forget the fringe/wedge issues and look for common ground in the middle.  But the culture and media and voter appetite for being partisan and being on the "correct moral" side just feeds on the division.

And I will say, I've seen a couple Democratic candidates that are closer to this than anyone on the right except maybe Amash.

4 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Depending on the candidate, the media would generate buzz if they are likable and fear monger if they are worried they will steal votes from their candidate.  Libertarians have certain views that are too extreme, the majority aren't buying the taxation is theft, abolish the IRS stuff in practicality.  

It's interesting because from a marketing standpoint there is a voting block ripe for the taking.  A centrist candidate who stands for classic liberal principles like freedom, civil rights, reasonable care for environmental issues (not fear mongering that the world will end in 8 years or that climate change is rooted in racism or misogyny), fiscal responsibility that requires bi-partisan work to reduce debt and manage spending more wisely, balance a strong military but reduce foreign intervention and regime change, respect for all Americans and not focus so much on labels and categories but focus on the things that unite us.  Focus on economy, jobs, investing in schools, infrastructure, etc.  I even think public health care option just like public education is becoming more attractive and not the conservative turn off it used to be.  Forget the fringe/wedge issues and look for common ground in the middle.  But the culture and media and voter appetite for being partisan and being on the "correct moral" side just feeds on the division.

couldn't agree more. 

21 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Depending on the candidate, the media would generate buzz if they are likable and fear monger if they are worried they will steal votes from their candidate.  Libertarians have certain views that are too extreme, the majority aren't buying the taxation is theft, abolish the IRS stuff in practicality.  

It's interesting because from a marketing standpoint there is a voting block ripe for the taking.  A centrist candidate who stands for classic liberal principles like freedom, civil rights, reasonable care for environmental issues (not fear mongering that the world will end in 8 years or that climate change is rooted in racism or misogyny), fiscal responsibility that requires bi-partisan work to reduce debt and manage spending more wisely, balance a strong military but reduce foreign intervention and regime change, respect for all Americans and not focus so much on labels and categories but focus on the things that unite us.  Focus on economy, jobs, investing in schools, infrastructure, etc.  I even think public health care option just like public education is becoming more attractive and not the conservative turn off it used to be.  Forget the fringe/wedge issues and look for common ground in the middle.  But the culture and media and voter appetite for being partisan and being on the "correct moral" side just feeds on the division.

And I will say, I've seen a couple Democratic candidates that are closer to this than anyone on the right except maybe Amash.

These are good posts but you realize you’re have a conversation with a guy who just used the term "red pilled”, right?

26 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Depending on the candidate, the media would generate buzz if they are likable and fear monger if they are worried they will steal votes from their candidate.  Libertarians have certain views that are too extreme, the majority aren't buying the taxation is theft, abolish the IRS stuff in practicality.  

It's interesting because from a marketing standpoint there is a voting block ripe for the taking.  A centrist candidate who stands for classic liberal principles like freedom, civil rights, reasonable care for environmental issues (not fear mongering that the world will end in 8 years or that climate change is rooted in racism or misogyny), fiscal responsibility that requires bi-partisan work to reduce debt and manage spending more wisely, balance a strong military but reduce foreign intervention and regime change, respect for all Americans and not focus so much on labels and categories but focus on the things that unite us.  Focus on economy, jobs, investing in schools, infrastructure, etc.  I even think public health care option just like public education is becoming more attractive and not the conservative turn off it used to be.  Forget the fringe/wedge issues and look for common ground in the middle.  But the culture and media and voter appetite for being partisan and being on the "correct moral" side just feeds on the division.

And I will say, I've seen a couple Democratic candidates that are closer to this than anyone on the right except maybe Amash.

Pretty simple really but right now we are in the "lock&load" phase and there is no obvious path out.

17 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

These are good posts but you realize you’re have a conversation with a guy who just used the term "red pilled”, right?

But everyone gets to read my wisdom and benefit, you're welcome!  

22 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Pretty simple really but right now we are in the "lock&load" phase and there is no obvious path out.

I would like to point out that its been 4-5 years and you're still the only person using this term.  

 

1 hour ago, NOTW said:

Depending on the candidate, the media would generate buzz if they are likable and fear monger if they are worried they will steal votes from their candidate.  Libertarians have certain views that are too extreme, the majority aren't buying the taxation is theft, abolish the IRS stuff in practicality.  

It's interesting because from a marketing standpoint there is a voting block ripe for the taking.  A centrist candidate who stands for classic liberal principles like freedom, civil rights, reasonable care for environmental issues (not fear mongering that the world will end in 8 years or that climate change is rooted in racism or misogyny), fiscal responsibility that requires bi-partisan work to reduce debt and manage spending more wisely, balance a strong military but reduce foreign intervention and regime change, respect for all Americans and not focus so much on labels and categories but focus on the things that unite us.  Focus on economy, jobs, investing in schools, infrastructure, etc.  I even think public health care option just like public education is becoming more attractive and not the conservative turn off it used to be.  Forget the fringe/wedge issues and look for common ground in the middle.  But the culture and media and voter appetite for being partisan and being on the "correct moral" side just feeds on the division.

And I will say, I've seen a couple Democratic candidates that are closer to this than anyone on the right except maybe Amash.

The problem is always the same -- most people are stupid and are somehow getting dumber. Being on the left or the right gives them a feeling of belonging to something, and therefore they unite behind their hatred of the other side. Views on policy issues are meaningless. If you're a Trump Republican, then everyone on the left is a socialist looking to destroy America and take away all freedom. If you're on the left, then all Republicans are racist rubes who vote against their own economic interests. It's this ability to look down on others that conveys a feeling of superiority to these people that they don't get anywhere else in their lives. They won't give that feeling up.

Your solution requires a rational, educated electorate that actually cares about issues. Good luck with that. 

1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

The problem is always the same -- most people are stupid and are somehow getting dumber. Being on the left or the right gives them a feeling of belonging to something, and therefore they unite behind their hatred of the other side. Views on policy issues are meaningless. If you're a Trump Republican, then everyone on the left is a socialist looking to destroy America and take away all freedom. If you're on the left, then all Republicans are racist rubes who vote against their own economic interests. It's this ability to look down on others that conveys a feeling of superiority to these people that they don't get anywhere else in their lives. They won't give that feeling up.

Your solution requires a rational, educated electorate that actually cares about issues. Good luck with that. 

I agree, and that's why it won't happen.  Like hoping Howie nails these draft picks, we can at least dream.  

2 minutes ago, NOTW said:

I agree, and that's why it won't happen.  Like hoping Howie nails these draft picks, we can at least dream.  

We could go on for hours about how social media has exacerbated the problem by allowing people to isolate themselves from differing opinions while also attacking the other side safely through anonymity. And how politicians are playing to this and making things worse. 

Or we could just accept -- most people are really stupid. We get the leaders we deserve.

7 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

No.  They do own it yes, but they don't believe it.  On the other hand they absolutely enable it by not calling it out more often and with more clarity and strength.

I remember having this same discussion about the Republicans not calling out the idiocy of their fringe with enough muster and frequency.  In the end it was too little and too late and they were subsequently consumed by the fringe.  Of course there is no version of Trump on the left, yet.

They absolutely do believe it. Just look at the policies they put in place. Just look at what they are doing in schools. The idea that this is all theater is laughable. 

55 minutes ago, paco said:

I would like to point out that its been 4-5 years and you're still the only person using this term.  

 

No one else is allowed to use it.  It is my term dude.

33 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

No one else is allowed to use it.  It is my term dude.

If a term is used and everyone ignores it, did the tree really fall in the woods?

Just now, paco said:

If a term is used and everyone ignores it, did the tree really fall in the woods?

It did in my woods and of course here you are posting about it

It's amazing how quickly women become women again when the abortion debate starts back up.  

Just part and parcel of belonging to the dumbest cult in human history. 

2 hours ago, Kz! said:

It's amazing how quickly women become women again when the abortion debate starts back up.  

Just part and parcel of belonging to the dumbest cult in human history. 

Not only that, this line of argument that men can't tell women abortion is wrong...well a lot of women are pro life, they have eggs and fetuses so their argument carries weight.  Women who have been pregnant, felt the baby kick and move inside them, heard the heartbeat, etc. speaking from first hand experience that are pro life and think abortion is wrong...well...

The wheels on the bus, do indeed, go around, so, while embarrassing to our nation, it's also probably the most honest thing she's ever said.

 

 

1 hour ago, The_Omega said:

The wheels on the bus, do indeed, go around, so, while embarrassing to our nation, it's also probably the most honest thing she's ever said.

 

 

 

FING OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!! 😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡

 

2 hours ago, The_Omega said:

The wheels on the bus, do indeed, go around, so, while embarrassing to our nation, it's also probably the most honest thing she's ever said.

 

 

 

Did she pass out Kamala cookies to the press this time as well?  

 

 

Checking in on Hollywood:

 

21 hours ago, NOTW said:

 

Did she pass out Kamala cookies to the press this time as well?  

I think her baker recently quit.

Rage Against the Machine are coming to Raleigh next summer. $335 for lower level, $125 for the very last row in the arena. Those anti-capitalists sure do love them some money.