So, you're fed up with both parties

[Craig234]

This might not be the time for this, but what the heck. I strongly support voting for Biden, but this is to the people who hate both parties, whoever they vote for. I encourage them to vote for Biden, but this isn't about that.

This is about, what should they support as far as a party?

Too many almost desperately turn to the Libertarian Party. It's a bit like Scientology, a welcoming home. And it offers all flavors, trying to appeal to everyone. Want to be a ruthless corporate overlord supporter? A bleeding heart who just doesn't want the man oppressing him? All welcome.

I won't repeated my essay against Libertarians here, except to say it's a sucker trap. It's about nothing but plutocrats.

This is to encourage people to look further. There are good reason and bad reasons to have issues with 'both parties'.

They could also turn to the Green Party, as the 'we get Libertarians are bad' Party.

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives, as the group that is the most viable to fight the reasonable things people don't like about both parties.

If they feel like, whether they vote D or R they're still going to a lot of support for big money plutocracy, then the only way to fight that practically is for progressives to become the majority. The advocates against 'money owning politics' need to unify, and the place to unify as the only one that has a chance to do much is the progressive group.

Just encouraging people who turn to the Libertarian Party thinking it's the only 'third party' option to look harder. Progressives aren't technically a third party - but they're trying to take over the Democratic Party from within. And they really are IMO the only real chance to make change on big money.

 

[trouble13]

This might not be the time for this, but what the heck. I strongly support voting for Biden, but this is to the people who hate both parties, whoever they vote for. I encourage them to vote for Biden, but this isn't about that.

This is about, what should they support as far as a party?

Too many almost desperately turn to the Libertarian Party. It's a bit like Scientology, a welcoming home. And it offers all flavors, trying to appeal to everyone. Want to be a ruthless corporate overlord supporter? A bleeding heart who just doesn't want the man oppressing him? All welcome.

I won't repeated my essay against Libertarians here, except to say it's a sucker trap. It's about nothing but plutocrats.

This is to encourage people to look further. There are good reason and bad reasons to have issues with 'both parties'.

They could also turn to the Green Party, as the 'we get Libertarians are bad' Party.

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives, as the group that is the most viable to fight the reasonable things people don't like about both parties.

If they feel like, whether they vote D or R they're still going to a lot of support for big money plutocracy, then the only way to fight that practically is for progressives to become the majority. The advocates against 'money owning politics' need to unify, and the place to unify as the only one that has a chance to do much is the progressive group.

Just encouraging people who turn to the Libertarian Party thinking it's the only 'third party' option to look harder. Progressives aren't technically a third party - but they're trying to take over the Democratic Party from within. And they really are IMO the only real chance to make change on big money.

Progressives have been charge of both parties for far too long. Why would someone who dislikes both parties turn to the group who has been driving that bus?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Progressives have been charge of both parties for far too long. Why would someone who dislikes both parties turn to the group who has been driving that bus?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Progressives have not been in charge of the Republican party. The word you're looking for is Regressives.

You don't get to lazily blame progressives for all of America's problems.

 

[Triton]

Life hack: don't live in the ****hole that is the US.

 

[calamity]

This might not be the time for this, but what the heck. I strongly support voting for Biden, but this is to the people who hate both parties, whoever they vote for. I encourage them to vote for Biden, but this isn't about that.

This is about, what should they support as far as a party?

Too many almost desperately turn to the Libertarian Party. It's a bit like Scientology, a welcoming home. And it offers all flavors, trying to appeal to everyone. Want to be a ruthless corporate overlord supporter? A bleeding heart who just doesn't want the man oppressing him? All welcome.

I won't repeated my essay against Libertarians here, except to say it's a sucker trap. It's about nothing but plutocrats.

This is to encourage people to look further. There are good reason and bad reasons to have issues with 'both parties'.

They could also turn to the Green Party, as the 'we get Libertarians are bad' Party.

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives, as the group that is the most viable to fight the reasonable things people don't like about both parties.

If they feel like, whether they vote D or R they're still going to a lot of support for big money plutocracy, then the only way to fight that practically is for progressives to become the majority. The advocates against 'money owning politics' need to unify, and the place to unify as the only one that has a chance to do much is the progressive group.

Just encouraging people who turn to the Libertarian Party thinking it's the only 'third party' option to look harder. Progressives aren't technically a third party - but they're trying to take over the Democratic Party from within. And they really are IMO the only real chance to make change on big money.

Growing older, I have become much more progressive, putting a lot of value on the New Deal. I praise SCOTUS decisions like Brown, Roe v Wade, Lawrence, Obergefell and the ruling on ACA while barking at Citizens United, Heller and Masterpiece Cakeshop.

In short, I am now far less conservative than in the past and hold the opinion that libertarian is simply something selfish people in their twenties can like. I am not a fan of socialism, per se, but certainly do not see a problem with government providing safety nets and stepping in to restrict the power of money in politics, media, and labor (minimum wages, right to organize, regulations and oversight like OSHA, EPA etc. are all good things, IMO). In other words, I am OK with the government assisting on social issues, especially as they pertain to civil rights, health and well being.

Working extensively in automation has also taught me to respect the idea of guaranteed income at the expense of capital, which in my opinion has acquired far too much power over the past 30 years. We see that in the growth of income/wealth disparity, where evermore productivity is taken out of the sweat of workers who see ever smaller pieces of the pie while the owners of capital rake in monstrous gains. There should be limits on both sides of that equation, of course, but right now the balance is out of whack.

 

[Luther]

Progressives have not been in charge of the Republican party. The word you're looking for is Regressives.

You don't get to lazily blame progressives for all of America's problems.

Progressives have not been in charge of the Republican party.

You mean the progressive ruin that we now have hasn't got any Republican votes in the past?

Think again

 

[bluesmoke]

Progressives have been charge of both parties for far too long. Why would someone who dislikes both parties turn to the group who has been driving that bus?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

As said on another post, regressives run the Rep party, though I use the term Trumplican party. Progressives do not run the Dem party but have some and growing influence.

 

[OrphanSlug]

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives

(Fair warning, edited your post to fit my response.)

The problem with "progressives" is two fold, depending on which progressive you talk to you may get a different list of wants and a different list of solutions to obtain them. And even if you boil it down to "make change on big money" with the intention of various redistribution efforts you still have no choice but to use the power of governance to marginalize your opposition. One of the biggest separations between classical liberalism and modern liberalism, or progressivism, is social and economic constructs through collectivism under government authority.

Now you can laundry list out a series of high level wants most on the left would agree to: universal healthcare of some flavor, paths to citizenship, renewable energy to remove dependence on fossil fuels, more spending on education and less on the military industrial complex, legal reforms, more workers rights and benefits, gun control, what have you. But at the end of the day you still have the same fights you have been fighting for sometime now.

"Trying to take over the Democratic Party from within" has not resulted in much either. Sure there are a few Congressional seats here and there, especially in the House, that appealed to those you could say are the face of the progressivism in some regard. AOC, Barbara Lee, Pramila Jayapal, Bernie Sanders, Ayanna Pressley, John Lewis - RIP, arguably a few others, etc. The issue is on a national scale the movement is not getting very far and some may argue DNC insider shenanigans have shown why. Hillary's disastrous and embarrassing loss in 2016, yet being helped by the DNC past Sanders in her primary. Somewhat again today seeing "liberal" response across the nation pushing Biden past the likes of Sanders, Warren, Yang, etc. Arguably the more "progressive" did not help them and Biden going with Harris might... repeat might... see 2016 happen all over again.

If there is one thing this nation has proved politically, even with all the economic and social evolutions to date, is these movements do not shift the nation overall but rather create a larger divide between extreme right and extreme left. And it leaves an increasing number of people detached from either party. Trying to move the party further left only moves the division further apart leaving by the numbers even more in the middle feeling unrepresented even if progressive wants somehow benefit them in the long run.

The elephant in the room is the further left or right one goes the more likely to see militant angry behavior, neither side being welcoming but ultimately putting up litmus test after litmus test be included in the ideology. Far right Republicans do this all the time as evidenced by the right wing pundits, commentators, and FoxNews lunatics laughing out of existence the so called Growth and Opportunity Project after watching 2012 collapse for them. Far left Democrats also do this all the time as evidenced by the very message some will go with suggesting anyone that disagrees with them in any regard is the problem even if they are Democrats (or left leaning Independents.) On a long enough timeline all social and economic evolutions (or "revolutions") have ended up militant, taking the original emphasis on helping people freedoms and a sense of equality replacing it with aristocracy, authority, and organizing people in a haze of envisioned outcomes for the "good" of those under them.

There is real reason why the biggest political party in the US today are those that do not want to be a member of a political party, and if there is any truth at all to the political pendulum nature of this nation handing the keys to the kingdom from right to left and then back we can conclude that progressive "take over the Democratic Party from within" will make the party less appealing to the very people you need to appeal to.

Taking on "big money" did not work out so well for the so called "we are the 99 percent" occupiers, that movement went on for only so long until their own hypocrisy and ultimate wants did not help the 99%. Trying to rebrand the idea as "Democratic Socialism" or progressivism or any other buzzword picked next has the same faults. You need business, you need private enterprise, you need entrepreneurship and investment. The rest of the world operates with a mixed model mentality, to achieve economic and social advancement for as many as possible. The far left does not care about these things anymore than the far right, that is your problem and as dismissive as you may be deep down you know you need moderates to advance anything and your litmus tests purposefully exclude them.

 

[PoS]

This might not be the time for this, but what the heck. I strongly support voting for Biden, but this is to the people who hate both parties, whoever they vote for. I encourage them to vote for Biden, but this isn't about that.

This is about, what should they support as far as a party?

Too many almost desperately turn to the Libertarian Party. It's a bit like Scientology, a welcoming home. And it offers all flavors, trying to appeal to everyone. Want to be a ruthless corporate overlord supporter? A bleeding heart who just doesn't want the man oppressing him? All welcome.

I won't repeated my essay against Libertarians here, except to say it's a sucker trap. It's about nothing but plutocrats.

This is to encourage people to look further. There are good reason and bad reasons to have issues with 'both parties'.

They could also turn to the Green Party, as the 'we get Libertarians are bad' Party.

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives, as the group that is the most viable to fight the reasonable things people don't like about both parties.

If they feel like, whether they vote D or R they're still going to a lot of support for big money plutocracy, then the only way to fight that practically is for progressives to become the majority. The advocates against 'money owning politics' need to unify, and the place to unify as the only one that has a chance to do much is the progressive group.

Just encouraging people who turn to the Libertarian Party thinking it's the only 'third party' option to look harder. Progressives aren't technically a third party - but they're trying to take over the Democratic Party from within. And they really are IMO the only real chance to make change on big money.

Its funny that the people who spew hate against Libertarians dont know a thing about what they stand for. This OP is a direct example of it.

 

[Mycroft]

This might not be the time for this, but what the heck. I strongly support voting for Biden, but this is to the people who hate both parties, whoever they vote for. I encourage them to vote for Biden, but this isn't about that.

This is about, what should they support as far as a party?

Too many almost desperately turn to the Libertarian Party. It's a bit like Scientology, a welcoming home. And it offers all flavors, trying to appeal to everyone. Want to be a ruthless corporate overlord supporter? A bleeding heart who just doesn't want the man oppressing him? All welcome.

I won't repeated my essay against Libertarians here, except to say it's a sucker trap. It's about nothing but plutocrats.

This is to encourage people to look further. There are good reason and bad reasons to have issues with 'both parties'.

They could also turn to the Green Party, as the 'we get Libertarians are bad' Party.

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives, as the group that is the most viable to fight the reasonable things people don't like about both parties.

If they feel like, whether they vote D or R they're still going to a lot of support for big money plutocracy, then the only way to fight that practically is for progressives to become the majority. The advocates against 'money owning politics' need to unify, and the place to unify as the only one that has a chance to do much is the progressive group.

Just encouraging people who turn to the Libertarian Party thinking it's the only 'third party' option to look harder. Progressives aren't technically a third party - but they're trying to take over the Democratic Party from within. And they really are IMO the only real chance to make change on big money.

The biggest problem with your solution of siding with "Progressives" in order to eliminate the big money in politics is that you will then have to accept the progressive's agenda...especially the radical leftwing nutjob agenda.

The second biggest problem is that the progressives are wedded to the Democratic Party...which is controlled by the very same plutocrats you seem to want to eliminate.

There are other problems involved with your solution, but I have a better solution: Get as far away from BOTH Parties as you can. When you are a part of either herd, you have to take what the elites in those herds tell you to take.

Think and choose for yourself.

 

[Luckyone]

This might not be the time for this, but what the heck. I strongly support voting for Biden, but this is to the people who hate both parties, whoever they vote for. I encourage them to vote for Biden, but this isn't about that.

This is about, what should they support as far as a party?

Too many almost desperately turn to the Libertarian Party. It's a bit like Scientology, a welcoming home. And it offers all flavors, trying to appeal to everyone. Want to be a ruthless corporate overlord supporter? A bleeding heart who just doesn't want the man oppressing him? All welcome.

I won't repeated my essay against Libertarians here, except to say it's a sucker trap. It's about nothing but plutocrats.

This is to encourage people to look further. There are good reason and bad reasons to have issues with 'both parties'.

They could also turn to the Green Party, as the 'we get Libertarians are bad' Party.

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives, as the group that is the most viable to fight the reasonable things people don't like about both parties.

If they feel like, whether they vote D or R they're still going to a lot of support for big money plutocracy, then the only way to fight that practically is for progressives to become the majority. The advocates against 'money owning politics' need to unify, and the place to unify as the only one that has a chance to do much is the progressive group.

Just encouraging people who turn to the Libertarian Party thinking it's the only 'third party' option to look harder. Progressives aren't technically a third party - but they're trying to take over the Democratic Party from within. And they really are IMO the only real chance to make change on big money.

Let all of us be honest with ourselves for once. There is no perfect party anywhere. Humans are fallible and therefore party's will be fallible as well. It is a human condition that has forever existed and will continue to exist forever.

From the moment we are born we are faced with choices and generally neither of the choices is perfect. As such, we need to choose the best of the choices possible. It is just like choosing your mate. You choose who has more good than bad and marry that person, knowing full well that there will always be disagreements and arguments in your life. If you have more good than bad, you have chosen well.

We have two choices right now and those are Republicans or Democrats and no other "viable" ones. You need to choose one based on which one is best for you personally. Nonetheless, you know full well that happiness will never be complete with either party............just like a marriage..............and unless you want to live alone in an island, you need to choose even when it is a constant pain to do so.

 

[Irwin Corey]

Its funny that the people who spew hate against Libertarians dont know a thing about what they stand for. This OP is a direct example of it.

The Koch's were highly involved in the Libertarian Party, even their nonminee for VP in 1980, until they realized the Libertairians would never have a hope in hell of winning at the National level; at which time they started the Tea Party and all the varrious sub-organizations that eventually took over the Republican's. I don't think the OP is that farr off, they are a fringe group that has only ever had dubious success, and at one time (at least) were the party of Plutocrats. Their founding documents theorectically align themselves with the principals of the founding fathers, which is good in theory but hasn't amounted to much in practice. Anyway they were controlled by plutocrats and as with Republicans unless you're one of the .01% that's voting aginst your own best interest.

 

[PoS]

The Koch's were highly involved in the Libertarian Party, even their nonminee for VP in 1980, until they realized the Libertairians would never have a hope in hell of winning at the National level; at which time they started the Tea Party and all the varrious sub-organizations that eventually took over the Republican's. I don't think the OP is that farr off, they are a fringe group that has only ever had dubious success, and at one time (at least) were the party of Plutocrats. Their founding documents theorectically align themselves with the principals of the founding fathers, which is good in theory but hasn't amounted to much in practice. Anyway they were controlled by plutocrats and as with Republicans unless you're one of the .01% that's voting aginst your own best interest.

LOL are you kidding me? The LP is completely against plutocracy. The two parties that are factually controlled by plutocrats are the GOP and the Dems- this has been proven time and time again. I shall grant you the LP isnt much in power, but thats only because the other two parties and the MSM are cheating to deny them proper airtime and representation.

 

[Irwin Corey]

LOL are you kidding me? The LP is completely against plutocracy. The two parties that are factually controlled by plutocrats are the GOP and the Dems- this has been proven time and time again. I shall grant you the LP isnt much in power, but thats only because the other two parties and the MSM are cheating to deny them proper airtime and representation.

I didn't say they are now controlled by plutocrats, but they were. Libertarians are to politics what military music is to music; listen to them long enough and you'll get a head ache.

 

[PoS]

I didn't say they are now controlled by plutocrats, but they were. Libertarians are to politics what military music is to music; listen to them long enough and you'll get a head ache.

Your silly stereotyping is not only false, its ridiculous and purely ignorant. Its like saying Chinese eat rats. or Jews are misers.

 

[Irwin Corey]

Your silly stereotyping is not only false, its ridiculous and purely ignorant. Its like saying Chinese eat rats. or Jews are misers.

Oh, I get it you're a Libertarian. You won't live long enough to see a Libertarian President.

 

[PoS]

Oh, I get it you're a Libertarian. You won't live long enough to see a Libertarian President.

We'll see wont we? Im sure a lot of people werent expecting a black POTUS ten years ago.

 

[Irwin Corey]

We'll see wont we? Im sure a lot of people werent expecting a black POTUS ten years ago.

Well, IF you ever want a chance at a Libertarian President you better vote for Joe Biden this election, 4 more years of tRump and their won't be a USA for your Libertarian to be president of.

 

[PoS]

Well, IF you ever want a chance at a Libertarian President you better vote for Joe Biden this election, 4 more years of tRump and their won't be a USA for your Libertarian to be president of.

Hell no: Im voting Jo Jorgensen because I stand by my principles.

 

[Irwin Corey]

Hell no: Im voting Jo Jorgensen because I stand by my principles.

He has no chance of doing anything but help get Donald Trump reelected. Standing by your principles is counter productive to your pincipals.

 

[Drawdown]

I will vote for Howie. He wrote a real Green New Deal before AOC stole and perverted it. He picked an African-American female running mate first. He is old, not petrified like Biden. He has never created 60 new death penalty cases. He is progressive. The only thing progressive about Biden is his dementia.

 

[mike2810]

Its funny that the people who spew hate against Libertarians dont know a thing about what they stand for. This OP is a direct example of it.

Maybe the Libertarians are failing in getting their message out. So what are some good sources to learn about the Party.

 

[H. E. Panqui]

Hell no: Im voting Jo Jorgensen because I stand by my principles.

...in my experience, many of the sharper 'big L' 'Libertarians' left the party/lost their excitement when 'THE LP' was apparently taken over and trashed by a small bunch of miserable gd fool republicans, who in 2008 nominated for president a stinking 'pro-war on drugs' republican butthead named bob barr... many of the smart people were outraged and left the party and all the gd republican fools stayed.... leaving a concentration of gd republican/'conservative' fools who effectively control the party... it's so bad now that even rotten republican liars like glenn beck and alex jones openly call themselves 'libertarian' without any protest from LP 'leadership'... the party is effectively a toilet for the stinking republican party....

...just a thought...

 

[RabidAlpaca]

You mean the progressive ruin that we now have hasn't got any Republican votes in the past?

Think again

LOL! Today I learned Trump is a progressive. :lamo

 

[Ikari]

This might not be the time for this, but what the heck. I strongly support voting for Biden, but this is to the people who hate both parties, whoever they vote for. I encourage them to vote for Biden, but this isn't about that.

This is about, what should they support as far as a party?

Too many almost desperately turn to the Libertarian Party. It's a bit like Scientology, a welcoming home. And it offers all flavors, trying to appeal to everyone. Want to be a ruthless corporate overlord supporter? A bleeding heart who just doesn't want the man oppressing him? All welcome.

I won't repeated my essay against Libertarians here, except to say it's a sucker trap. It's about nothing but plutocrats.

This is to encourage people to look further. There are good reason and bad reasons to have issues with 'both parties'.

They could also turn to the Green Party, as the 'we get Libertarians are bad' Party.

But I'd encourage them to look at the progressives, as the group that is the most viable to fight the reasonable things people don't like about both parties.

If they feel like, whether they vote D or R they're still going to a lot of support for big money plutocracy, then the only way to fight that practically is for progressives to become the majority. The advocates against 'money owning politics' need to unify, and the place to unify as the only one that has a chance to do much is the progressive group.

Just encouraging people who turn to the Libertarian Party thinking it's the only 'third party' option to look harder. Progressives aren't technically a third party - but they're trying to take over the Democratic Party from within. And they really are IMO the only real chance to make change on big money.