Typical, Boring, Binary US Politics

The election is now over.....

Most people have already stopped paying attention to anything remotely political. Everyone is in their camps, left and right. It's so, so boring and predictable. I thought Democrats had learned from the past mistakes, and thought Trump supporters would buck the billionaire political establishment Trump is dead set on putting in power.

Are you an R, or a D? It's all that seems to matter to the masses while the nation continues to crumble.

"my guy is in, all is well now...." or "Obama was fine but now APOCALYPSE!".

If you fit ANYWHERE in between these two moronic extremes, let's be friends!

 

Trump is going to wind back 20-30 years of liberal progression. I'm ecstatic.

 

Define "liberal progression".

- - - Updated - - -

Define "liberal progression".

 

Anything from liberal judges, laws, SCOTUS that aim to disenfranchise business, implement redistributive economics, stoke racial flames, and forcefully change the demographics of the country to suit their needs and no one else.

 

So you are referring to the civil rights act? Child labor laws? Weekends? 8 hour work day? National holidays? Overtime pay?

 

Nordic Democrat , We need more people like you and less partisans

 

Thanks, likewise. Partisanship has made nearly everyone blind.

 

Some of those things alright. I believe everyone should be the same in the eyes of the law. Child labor laws obviously should stay.

I'm questionable on how I feel about price fixing in resources and in pay.

I prefer smart, efficient laws that maximize private businesses to thrive in free AND fair competition.

 

Aha! This is the crux of the debates for the last 80 years, what is free AND fair, and what balance a society must strike. Very interesting debates to be had, unfortunately we are caught in the binary political system where one side will lie and screw you, no matter which side you choose.

What do you feel is the right balance?

 

I am an independent that rejects both the RNC and the DNC as both are only interested in furthering their own partisan interests.

 

Excellent to see you're a free thinker! Good work *salute*

 

Conversation has been dumbed down by the mainstream media. Look at what they tried to do to Trump, slandered him all the way the White House while he ran on fresh ideas.

I largely blame the overuse of identity politics of the left the last few decades.

 

I definitely agree it has been dumbed down, but this has been the case for a long time. I think the media enabled Trump, there is no way he could have made it past the primary if journalism was actually the standard, as opposed to playing the ratings game.

Identity politics is an issue on the contemporary left, but isn't responsible for journalists not doing their jobs.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much what I think: Many people here can only define what is "Democrat" or what is "Republican". All the other terms, right, left, progressive, conservative, authoritarian, libertarian, they've got them all in a blurry hodgepodge seasonned at the present day's sensibilities.

Case in points: Many leftist were convinced that being progressive was to coo over the bankers and the 1%ers when HRC headed the Democrat ticket. Likewise, being pro-peace with the Russian regime is now a firm "Republican" value. Many people let their party of choice dictate their ideals rather than having the trouble to define them themselves.

 

It was amazing to see people whom I considered to be left of center supporting Clinton, ignoring facts, and all the rest. I suppose I saw this more since this was my more natural "wing", but I observe it in my father as well who is a life long Republican.

 

Trump connected on economic issues. That is why he won states that used to be blue. Blue collar, union guys in the Rust Belt went Trump and it won him the election.

I don't think there was much stopping Trump.

 

You're exactly right, Trump hit the populist note which got Obama himself elected, though at the time the message was much fuzzier and less clear in peoples minds. The only way to have stopped Trump was to nominate Sanders.

Case example, Austria!

 

How do you think the 2020 Democratic primary shapes up?

Trump v Clinton II is not out of the question in my mind. Clinton is resilient like that.

 

If Democrats choose Clinton AGAIN I think I will jump off a cliff hahahaha. In all seriousness, they had better not nominate another neo-liberal candidate. It appears by choosing Schumer and Pelosi to lead, they haven't learned a thing. Our two party system rewards NOT changing, as evidenced from the Republican 2012 "autopsy". They doubled down and won, which is what I assume Democrats will do.

Either way, the general public still loses until we DEMAND an end to the two party system.

 

You would prefer a proportional voting system?

 

Absolutely, though a proportional system wouldn't have spared us either Presidential candidate this time around. Even more important than a proportional representation system would be to literally outlaw money in politics. It's the number one corrupting influence on politicians.

 

I equate money to free speech...

However, knowing where that money came from should be publicly disclosed.

 

My response to that would be in the form of a question....do you believe the constitution applies equally, to every citizen? If yes, money cannot be speech, simply because if money IS speech, rich people have more speech than poor people, etc. So this cannot be applied equally for all citizens.

 

Do you think Trump shouldn't have been able to use his own money to finance his campaign?

Constitution doesn't imply equal outcome, only equal opportunity.

 

Right, but equal opportunity and equal outcome are very, very important and nuanced when discussing practical things like speech. Should government guarantee equal "outcome" of income? No. Should it guarantee equal "opportunity"? Yes. That works because it's tangible.

Liken it to civil rights, does the constitution guarantee only the opportunity to life, liberty and happiness, or does it guarantee citizens are entitled to, the aforementioned? Not easy questions to answer.

Sorry for not answering your question right away, but no, I don't think private money should be allowed into our political system, because this would mean wealthy people have more of a voice. It's like shareholders, which is not how a democracy (or republic) should be run.