Can't be a Jedi if you support Trump...?
Uzima Moto wrote: Personally, IMO the only political position a practitioner of the Light could endorse is one of Liberty and Justice, and the maintenance of the balance between them.. which would exclude more than just Trump..
Democracy can't be the virtue, like any other system of govermnent, it can be corrupted into Despotism.. even while maintaining "democratic processes"..
Two-Party domination of federal politics(one-party states vs one-party states), legal protection of corporate persons and special classes, the requirement of government permission and licensing to exercise your rights, regulations used as entrenchments by Corporate Monopolists.. all of these are forms of Despotism that have been established "democratically"..
I guess I'm a bit more flexible.
What can you do about 2 party domination? You can't force people to vote for a third party just because you think it would be better. And yes, I voted Green party for president in the last election... in Ohio (which I knew would be red anyway). Point is, democracy is a virtue because people even have the freedom to choose the wrong (and sometimes stupid) thing. But how you fight against that is by being part of the conversation. I don't personally think it matters how many parties there are. It matters how many ideas their are. There is a state, I forge which, where they voted for a guy without really knowing his party affiliation because they simply liked his ideas. That's what it should be about. Ideas. However, the vehicle to freely execute those ideas has to be democracy because if not, its someone else's ideas that don't have even consider the best interest of voters. A king doesn't have to care at all about his people because he can crush almost any rebellion. All he has to do is take care of his lords/court; the elite. The problem with democracy in the US is the influence of money. And that's something we can all fight against, regardless of party affiliation.
Kobos wrote: I half agree Rex, I try "try" to vote on principal as possible. Last election I wrote in Bernie because I could not in good faith vote for Hillary. Particularly given, I still hold the opinion she was given the nomination unfairly. However, as far as this campaign has begun I cannot believe how much Bernie has shifted from the principles he was consistent on in his tenure as a senator. I was a big fan of Tulsi Gabbard but again it kinda looks like we are going to get left wing elite (Biden) as the choice again. This leaves me at the point of vote to beat Trump, for someone I believe is not competent to be the president. Meaning his cabinet will run the country entirely, I believe George HW Bush is an example of a cabinet running the country and that concerns me. Either side it comes from, people not elected running the republic bothers me (yes it happens every Persident it is just a matter of how far). So right now I do not know where I stand as a moderate voter and that is not an uncommon view point on a national level.w
Much Love, Respect, and Peace,
That fully agrees with me. You're not apolitical, you're displeased with the candidates. If you genuinely can't justify voting for one of the big two candidates, vote third party.
If you voted Bernie, and were a Gabbard fan up until now (she's essentially out of the race, unless she runs third party or as a VP), register as a Democrat so you can be counted in polls and primaries. Donate like $5 to candidates you like, since a number of individual (not PAC) donors are often required for remaining in a primary race.
Not voting is worse than taking 30 seconds to write in the candidate who best represents your beliefs. If you don't vote, you really ought to relinquish your ability to complain about the results of an election
IP Team Lead
TM: Carlos Martinez
ὁ δὲ ἀμυχηδόν νεξέταστος βίος γίγνομαι βιωτὸς ἀνθρώπῳ
Deimos wrote: Zealot: Just out of curiosity, what sites would you suggest I look into for a factual account of the Russia Gate stuff?
This is probably the most complete resource you're going to find. It even includes claims by Anastasia Vashukevich. One thing to remember is that the people involved weren't trying to get caught so there wasn't physical evidence to prove they were conspiring. So instead they were trying to get people to flip on each other and use that testimony but even that can only go so far because not everyone who might flip knew enough about what each other were doing. Manafort was probably more in bed with the Russians than anyone, including Trump, ever realized. The fact that he volunteered to work for free wasn't enough of a clue for them. We also have Jared asking for a secret communications channel with the Kremlin that couldn't be monitored by U.S. agencies. But again, without people being put under oath and having enough leverage to get them to flip its going to be too hard to catch them. This is the problem with crime families in general. It's very difficult to actually link everything back to the top guy. And Cohen explained this in his testimony, saying that Trump doesn't give explicit orders in order to have that kind of plausible deniability. That's why when he tells his aids to go ahead and break the law to get the border wall built before the election and he'll pardon them, he can play it off like it was a joke when in reality that's what he wants them to do.
A lot of people don't seem to understand that the burden of proof needed in court is a higher bar than proving that there was quid pro quo. Russian adoption was code for the Magnitsky Act. These sanctions froze assets of individuals who are believed to be holding money for Putin himself. So the reality is that Putin had more than enough motivation to help Trump get elected without the kind of conspiring that people were looking for. He just needed to know that if he helped Trump that there was a good possibility Trump would undo these sanctions. And that's why Flynn was involved and talking about sanctions before Trump got into office. And the fact that Trump personally has debt in Deutche bank means that Putin can basically freeze his assets or use some regulation to cause him to forfeit and I don't know how much of Trump's assets could basically be taken if he can no longer get loans or if there's some other way they can "repossess" his assets. But doing anything like that would be very public and would seriously damage any potential relations with the US and the G7 and almost ensure the Matnitsky Act remained permanent. So even though Putin has him by the balls it would also reveal too much if he were to actually squeeze.