the most important election of your lifetime: 2012 american general election thread

Yeah i don't buy this line, true or not.

I would very much like to not buy it, but I find that I can't glue enough fairy wings to my outfit to overcome reality's drag coefficient

no one on this thread refusing to vote is setting the world on fire resisting the government.

again, has anyone on this thread said he wouldn't vote at all?

Well it isn't actually true that by voting for Nader I am actually voting half a vote for W.

I told people not to vote I think

actually vs. effectively

I realise that one suggests a group will engage and the other will not, and maybe they'll work a little harder to get that group, but realistically that group isn't big enough to enact fundamental change unless there's some sort of Tea Party organization-like takeover, but that would probably only alienate the "moderate" Democratic voters - the majority, I would say. The American people just aren't with it.

xposts

Your vote only adds to the total of the party you vote for.

Whatever you think of Nader's policies, he was certainly a more progressive candidate than Gore, and despite him getting a pretty decent voter turnout, it didn't push the Dems to the left because they had to combat the Republican machine.

yes well if george bush is ahead by one vote, your 'not vote' is what wins him the election therefore it is not a neutral act, but again, it doesn't really matter

Imagine all the not votes Nader missed out on.

Gukbe, I'm suggesting an alternative to couch-riding on November 6th for people won't sully themselves with the Democratic Party. Your cynicism about the chance of real third party change is neither here nor there.

like its all fine and dandy for the norms to spend weeks on end contemplating who they will vote for but honestly everyone itt is pretty up on things, everyone itt knows that things will be 'marginally better' with dems in charge and that their individual vote is not 'a particularly important thing'. most people live in places where the chances that their individual vote affects the election is not just statistically unlikely, but statistically *pretty much impossible*. don't overthink it.

there are lots of cool things to argue about, this just isn't one.

If, as an American, you're depressed about the way your party is tending, the Tea Party provide a great example of how best to deal with it. Don't disengage. Don't endorse Quixotic third party candidates that only disempower the major party you might otherwise vote for. Band together in little cells and work like fucking CRAZY to get candidates you actually can support into the process at the local level. Rally and protest and organize tirelessly to force your party in the direction that suits you. I mean, I'm not an activist, so I'm not telling anyone that this is what they have to do, but it clearly can work. Tea Party activism had a significant impact on the fortunes and philosophies of the Republican party.

And I'm saying that the people who stay at home or go and vote for a third party aren't able to enact change that way, so in the end the result is the same, except of course that the person who goes out and votes for that third party will have a sense of self-satisfaction (assuming they're too ignorant to realise the actual damage their decision might have on the people by allowing Romney in).

xposts

well we're already talking about a group of people who are in it for self-satisfaction, gukbe. and i still like them more than people who don't engage at all.

contenderizer otm re: Tea Party activisim within the Democratic Party, even if I'm not as hopeful about the results.

I just see lazy vs smug and I can't figure out which is better/worse. Maybe smug, but here I go again, choosing the lesser of two evils. xpost

i figure it's better to work to make the democratic party what you want it to be than just to sit in the corner and sulk

Resisting the "when pigs fly" temptation re it changing, I see "working" as meaning OWS far more than any vote-as-gesture I can make (esp, as goddamn Shakey always points out, in NY).

I agree that ows is more important than voting

if only you could fit both in a day

of course i've never voted in my life so wdik

Well, to pick a concrete example, if it was possible to indicate with your vote that you'd prefer Ralph Nader but of the other two you'd rather Gore to Bush...

Nader in particular because his numbers would be higher were it not for all the people told that voting for him would be a waste. You don't even particularly need to want Nader as president for this to be a good idea, just a Democratic party spooked by Nader.

xpost to hell and back :)

agree that OWS is more important than voting for its potential, but i think voting is important

it's just such an idiotic binary

Contenderizer OTM on need for Dem Tea Party.

also the insanity of any ilxor avoiding a chance to be heard, even if they're just making noise

the problem with developing a "Dem Tea Party" is that libs seem much more chained-for-life to the party than the righty nuts are to "theirs." There are ILXors who have posted "fuck Obama" (or close enough) in the last 2 years who are heavily sighing and voting for him again.

we need an ALL OF THE ABOVE participatory policy, just like Bush and Obama's energy policy.

Are there any Dems running that might fit in with an equivalent Dem Tea Party? Elizabeth Warren, maybe?

chained to the party as is, I meant

xp

I want to see Warren in action as an officeholder before we can guess.

libs tend to be more practical, which is certainly an issue in this case. will be interested to see how the Tea Party does in the upcoming election as well as 2014. There's a risk of alienating the "moderates", and as this country is mostly made up of those waffling morons, they might be necessary in elections.

Maybe the comparison is inapposite but no one would say that Eugene Debs' vote totals in 1912 represented the failure of socialism to make an imprint. The power of his insurgency forced Wilson and TR to the left such that if they didn't reckon with the socialists' demands we might have the threat of genuine revolution in a few years. The point is that third or fourth parties, as contenderizer said, take hard work and years of detail mastering, and if done well they influence the two-party system.

Ideally, OWS would be the Dem Tea Party. Problem is that it seems too proud of its oppositionalism to take up the mantle.

Is there like a crazy liberal Koch family member that OWS could recruit?

Do any of you even follow politics in countries where there are real 3rd party spoiler chances?

I'm happy that OWS hasn't aligned itself with the Dems. If it really works, the Dems will have to come to them, which gives them much more power.

Libs don't need a Koch member. We've got GEORGE SOROS, who is already the puppetmaster for the long-term socialist takeover designs of the Democratic Party.

Anyone read Barney Frank's, er, frank interview from a couple days ago? He addresses specifically the work that feeds grass roots movements.

A:I believe very strongly that people on the left are too prone to do things that are emotionally satisfying and not politically useful. I have a rule, and it’s true of Occupy, it’s true of the gay-rights movement: If you care deeply about a cause, and you are engaged in an activity on behalf of that cause that is great fun and makes you feel good and warm and enthusiastic, you’re probably not helping, because you’re out there with your friends, and political work is much tougher and harder. And I think it’s now clear that it is the disciplined political work that we’ve been able to do that’s won us victories. I am going to write about the history of the LGBT movement partly to make the point that, in America at least, this is the way you do progressive causes.

Q: So if you look at something like Pride Weekend—

A:Pride Weekend was very important early on because people didn’t know who we were. The hiddenness was a problem. Today, pride has no political role. It’s a fun thing for people.

I'm happy that OWS hasn't aligned itself with the Dems. If it really works, the Dems will have to come to them, which gives them much more power.

yes agreed but it does need to corral a few political supporters. We need the equivalent of a Jon Corzine proselytizing for it.

the problem with bringing up Debs is that the entrenched political/corporate forces have had almost a century to consolidate their power in such a way that I'm not sure that would happen again anytime soon.

Ideally, OWS would be the Dem Tea Party.

haha, HOOS to thread.

Barney Frank wants everything to the left of Santorum allied w/ the Democrats, no surprise.

I am guessing that "Become a political party" is waaaay down the list of OWS's plans.

We need the equivalent of a Jon Corzine proselytizing for it.

Man, I hope youre talking about fortune and not political skills.

libs tend to be more practical

Okay, now I feel old.

actually my mistake: I meant DeMint.

Anyone starting a Dem Tea Party should probably take the opportunity to read a few dozen books about the Civil Rights movement first - Tea Party as far as I can tell has gotten this far because it is the first bare-feet revolutionary thing to happen to the Republicans in a long time.

If, as an American, you're depressed about the way your party is tending, the Tea Party provide a great example of how best to deal with it.

this is a weird thing to say. The Tea Party has accomplished nothing to speak of legislatively, and is essentially crippling the national electoral chances of the GOP as a whole.

also get a weird or disingenuous vibe from Frank that everybody active in OWS is "having great fun" by sleeping w/ rats, getting clubbed and pepper-sprayed, etc.

what fun!

OWS + grassroots work is more important/significant than voting imho so good on Morbz and Aero (and anybody else I may have forgotten)

my main issue with OWS is they've largely already lost the PR battle and are now scuffling at the margins. May have missed the window of opportunity to gain the sympathies of the larger electorate and impact party platforms.

I didn't care for the remark either. The more interesting stuff I didn't paste.

this is a weird thing to say. The Tea Party has accomplished nothing to speak of legislatively, and is essentially crippling the national electoral chances of the GOP as a whole.

i'd say they accomplished a good deal on a state level (ahem, wisconsin), and the fact that they ran aground is, to my mind, a product of the fact that they were successful in advancing critically flawed policies and philosophies. organizational model is still a good one.