Sunday, August 7, 2016

The Fix Is In

Rasty has been watching the political commentaries almost non-stop for the past couple weeks, chortling over the anti-Trump jokes.  He's seriously worried that Trump will be elected, on the grounds that the average voter has the IQ of a fence-post.  In vain do I keep telling him not to worry, Trump won't be elected;  the Democratic National Committee has been planning this gambit for years, the fix is in, the election is rigged, and Hillary will be our next POTUS.  How do I know?  Hey, I lived for 12 years in Chicago, dealing with local and grassroots politics, and I know for a fact that Democrats are much better at stealing elections than Republicans are.  Republicans tend to cheat on elections by cutting people off the voting rolls and "losing" ballots, while Democrats cheat by inflating the voting rolls and stuffing ballot boxes.  I was registered to vote in Chicago, and I'm probably still voting there.  Yeah, Hillary's going to get it.

For you political naifs out there who wonder why this will be a disaster, I recommend that you go up on the Internet and carefully search Hillary's real political history, not just what her flaks advertize.  She has a very long history of lying like a rug, lying when she doesn't have to, lying about matters large and small.  She also has a record of chasing political power by means open and covert, and trimming her political policies to get it;  what she's for one year she's against the next, so long as it's politically popular, and none dare call it flip-flopping.  Her record on real support of women's issues varies from spotty to downright nasty, and far from being "the people's candidate", she's disturbingly cozy with crony capitalism;  where do you think she (and Bill) get those hundred-thousand-dollar "speaking fees"?  But above all, she has constantly shown a tendency to ignore, evade, and end-run the Constitution.  Yes, a Trump presidency would be a catastrophe, but Hillary will do her best to be a disaster.

So what can we do in the face of this oncoming train-wreck?

Well, we can vote for anything but Democrats for congressional offices: not necessarily Republicans, but Libertarians, Independents, and Greens -- they're all on the ballot this year.  Getting a mixed non-Democrat Congress will put the brakes on Hillary's tendency to wipe her butt with the Constitution without guaranteeing Republican deadlocks.  And let's hear no knee-jerk squall about "wasting your vote";  the Libertarians and even Greens have shown remarkable increases in the polls as more voters become disgusted with the Democrat and Republican candidates.  Breaking the long media policy of blacking out any mention of the third parties, CNN a few days ago gave the Libertarian candidates an open hearing on its Town Hall program.  Johnson and Wells made an excellent showing, answering questions from both the MC and the audience with a marvelous sane clarity that won them a standing ovation.  I suspect the Libertarians' percentage in the polls went up as a result, because the mainstream media carefully avoided mentioning them -- or their appearance on the program, or the current standing of the Libertarian Party, the next morning.  And the Greens have been showing political ads all over the major networks.  So have independent candidates for offices from senator on down.  The old media wall of silence is crumbling, and voter predictability with it.

More to the point, if any of those third-parties can get 15% in the opinion polls, they can get into the televised presidential debates.  In the debates, the Libertarians are likely to show themselves as a beacon of shining sanity, honesty, and responsibility in a sea of politics-as-usual   In that case, they just might collect enough of the final vote to give us that desperately-needed anything-but-Democrat Congress.

Cross your fingers -- and vote Libertarian.

--Leslie <;)))><         


... said...

Gary Johnson had my vote, however I just learned he's supporting the TPP. Mind you, the article stating that uses a quote that's neither fully in nor fully out... and he's not up for answering when you ask him on the matter. So my vote is stayed.

I've noticed that a lot of Bernie people went to the green party after he belly upped. I just learned Jill's stance: ending college debt, and a lot of other free stuff. And I'm thinkin'... so... you're voting for a free ride maybe?

There's another person, a Vietnam vet, I just learned of tonight. But I have a migraine and can't think straight to look him back up. He didn't look that bad, though. Supported the war on terror, but the rest looked okay. I'll be checking into him more.

Paradoctor said...

All parties exist by virtue of their convenient inner hypocrisies. The Republicans are the conservatives who do not conserve: the Democrats are the liberals who do not liberate; the Libertarians are really Propertarians; and the Greens are the watermelon party, green outside and red inside.

Leslie Fish said...

"Watermelon"? *Snicker* Gotta remember that one. Personally, I'd love to see the election a tight race between the Libertarians and the Greens; I actually saw that in a local Phoenix election a few years back. Either way, Johnson and Wells are a couple of very smart cookies; if you showed them good reason to oppose the TPP, they'd do it -- but you'd have to show them good solid evidence. The Greens, obviously, put the ecology first; again, show them good evidence that a free ride for everybody would be an ecological disaster, and they'll change policy (I believe they're planning to pay for all those free college tuitions by taxing the 1% out of existence, but of course they know they can't say that in public).

... said...

A lot of people have been trying to get Gary to see reason about the TPP, so he's lost my vote. Time to find someone else to support, but not someone who believes in handouts. You can plan to tax the 1% until oblivion: won't happen so long as there is no separation of corporate and state. People forget the President of the United States isn't supposed to be a dictator. Checks, balances, deals behind closed doors, and all that come into play. I've been eyeballing other countries that have these commodities for "free" and they're anything but free. The people there are quite heavily taxed. My taxes are already about 50% of my income (as with a lot of people), when all is said and done. I can't afford any more taxes.

I've been reading some of the parts that people are saying are bad in the TPP: with the way the law is usually interpreted on the corporate side, I'd say it's got a lot of dangerous potential. It's more worried about corporate interests than that of the people and free trade. For example in the small section that covers public domain, it only establishes that the copyright limits shall be what they already are: 70 years after the death of the author and/or after the creation of the work depending on circumstances. They've completely ignored any mention of fair use, which such an omission can work to the people's disfavor. This makes it a game changer.

It also specifies that an internet provider shall not be held accountable for taking down internet service/a website for alleged copyright violations providing they take measures such as warning people before or AFTER they've denied service. When I think of all the times I've been accused by my service provider for downloading illegally when I've done no such thing, or have been talked to like trash by companies because they decided I was stealing MY OWN ARTWORK... well... I dislike this a lot. It takes away our right as the people to retaliate if we're falsely accused all in the interest of corporate rights. If my internet is shut down, there goes my livelihood - and this is going to take away my right to do anything about that.

I'm currently digging at the part that supposedly takes away our right to tinker with our own devices. I'm not seeing that, but I've seen plenty of other stuff to not want anything to do with it.

Technomad said...

I don't know, Leslie. Hillary has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory before. Remember 2008? That was supposed to be her coronation year, when the Shessiah would come and save us all from the evil grip of Chimpy McBushitler. Unfortunately for her, the Democratic caucus-goers and the like turned out to be more interested in a Chicago wardheeler who combined a Kennedyesque aura with a black (or blackish) skin. OOOH, were the Hillary crowd mad! Remember PUMA---"Party Unity, My Ass?"

I discount anything the mainstream media says about Trump being soooo unpopular. They are pro-Hillary almost to a man (or woman, or whatever-the-heck) and despise the sort of people who are pro-Trump.

Hillary's a bad candidate in a lot of ways: unlikeable, with more than enough scandals in her past to sink almost anybody else, and a poor campaigner. Whatever his other faults, Bill Clinton had the talent to make people like him, but Hillary, not so much. Add in real concerns about her health and bitterness from the Bernie crowd about having (as they see it) been euchred out of a fair chance at the nomination, and you have a recipe for defeat.

Leslie Fish said...

I don't expect that Johnson will actually win, but enough votes for him would make the LP a serious contender, enough to scare the Rep/Dems into *listening* to the voters, for a change. Hillary's political machine, this time, is good enough to get her elected (hell, the whole DNC is behind her!), and don't discount the media's ability to show up every flaw Trump has got, and he has plenty. We really have to concentrate on the Senate/Congress elections. Again, the LP won't get a majority, but if it can get *enough* seats (or even enough votes), they'll be able to swing some measurable clout. The point is to put Congressional brakes on Hillary's tendency to wipe her butt with the Constitution; her attempts to erase the 2nd amendment, just by itself, would set off a massive passive resistance close to civil war. The LP candidates will reliably stick to their principles, but -- being a real minority -- they'll be willing to listen to the citizens.

Technomad said...

You know what's ironic? The GOP establishment that's soooo fussed about nasty ol' Donald Trump could have avoided him easily, by merely listening to the Tea Party and treating it with respect, instead of either laughing it off, allowing the corrupt, Democratic-dominated IRS to destroy it, or subverting it into the GOP. Kind of like how the white establishment in the 1960s listened to MLK; they knew that when he was gone, there were others (Malcolm X, for example) behind him who were a lot harder to deal with.