The most important election of our lifetime or more media hype?

TomJ

Member
It's no secret the media likes to hype things. I remember a recent winter where they were breathlessly telling us about the pending storm of the century. We wound up with an inch of snow. I keep hearing about this being the most important election of our lifetime, and for once I don't think it's hype. I'm old enough (late 50's) to remember a time where there were differences between the parties, but they wound up governing somewhere close to the middle. That's changed with the rise of socialism in the Democratic Party. Last election Bernie Sanders, who describes himself as a socialist so it's not me labeling him with that, came close to beating Hillary for the nomination. There are those who believe he should have won the nomination had the party not intervened. He again came close to getting the nomination this time around. I won't guess as to what happened in the background to push Biden through, but the point is that a significant percentage of voters of one of our two major parties are voting for a socialist candidate. I'm guessing that much of this is a lack of understanding of what they're voting for as socialism has been rebranded with terms like "Democratic Socialism", "Fair Share" and demonizing the rich. If they truely understaood what they were voting for, as people who live in socialist countries do, I don't think it would have gained the traction it has.

IMO this election is about much more than Trump vs Biden. It's about socialism vs capitalism. I understand that capitalism has it's flaws as does anything man comes up with, but it's proven to be the best solution out there. It bears repeating that it is a flawed system and we should never stop trying to improve it, but I'm not comparing it to some vision of utopia that is unobtainable but to the other options that are out there. I'm first generation here. My parents came here from Poland immediately after WW2 after surviving horrors that I can't begin to understand, losing many family members to the Nazi's. They came here with nothing. My dad had the opportunity to go to college and worked as a mechanical engineer. Due to his health issues we grew up with not much money, but I and my siblings were able to improve our lives through oportunities and hard work. I was able to put myself through college, then law school and was able to start my own business, which has been successful for 20 years now. No one told me I wasn't allowed to do any of those things due to my lack of pedigree, and I was able to achieve whatever my talents and work ethic allowed. I want the same for my two sons as well as every person in this country. A government that wants to decide most, if not every facet of our lives, down to the size of soft drinks we're allowed to buy is not one that allows for that.

I get that President Trump rubs some people the wrong way. There are times I wish he used a little more tact. The Democrats seem to have made this the focus of the election, an attempt at misdirection as they don't want people to focus on the fact that socialists are driving much of their agenda. I only hope that enough voters are smart enough to see past that, as Democrats gaining the House, Senate and White House will change our country, possibly for good. That change will not be for the better.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
IMO this election is about much more than Trump vs Biden. It's about socialism vs capitalism.

This assertion is the problem. It's a false dichotomy. We are not purely capitalist, and we never will be again (if we ever were). We will also never become completely socialist. We are somewhere on a scale between the two extremes, and neither end of that scale is in any way pleasant for anyone but the elite.

Is this the most important election ever? Eh, maybe. But that's not saying much. The pendulum swing to and fro. Right now it's swinging farther than in the past. I'll keep my personal opinion of our current president to myself, as it will surely only lead to an argument. But 4 years either way isn't going to ruin the country, no matter what anyone might tell us.
 

TomJ

Member
This assertion is the problem. It's a false dichotomy. We are not purely capitalist, and we never will be again (if we ever were). We will also never become completely socialist. We are somewhere on a scale between the two extremes, and neither end of that scale is in any way pleasant for anyone but the elite.

Is this the most important election ever? Eh, maybe. But that's not saying much. The pendulum swing to and fro. Right now it's swinging farther than in the past. I'll keep my personal opinion of our current president to myself, as it will surely only lead to an argument. But 4 years either way isn't going to ruin the country, no matter what anyone might tell us.

Re-read what I wrote. First, I didn't say it's the most important election ever. That would include every election going back to the founding of our country. I said in our lifetime, meaning the last 50 to 60 years, or going back to the early 60's to be specific. Second, it's not about where we were or even are currently, but where the socialists who have gained a great deal of power in the Democratic party want to take us. As far as 4 years ruining a country, Democrats winning both houses of congress and the White House means them packing the Supreme Court and them pushing for statehood for Washington DC and Puerto Rico, which will go a long way towards them winning elections in the future. I have my issues with the Republican Party, but Democrats having all but a lock on power will ruin our country.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
Re-read what I wrote. First, I didn't say it's the most important election ever. That would include every election going back to the founding of our country. I said in our lifetime, meaning the last 50 to 60 years, or going back to the early 60's to be specific. Second, it's not about where we were or even are currently, but where the socialists who have gained a great deal of power in the Democratic party want to take us. As far as 4 years ruining a country, Democrats winning both houses of congress and the White House means them packing the Supreme Court and them pushing for statehood for Washington DC and Puerto Rico, which will go a long way towards them winning elections in the future. I have my issues with the Republican Party, but Democrats having all but a lock on power will ruin our country.

So we disagree. Oh well. I can't see much in the way of facts or data with which to judge the potential possibilities. If people strongly disagree with what the government does, they will take to the streets. I guess maybe we'll see. Or maybe we won't.
 

George P

Well-known member
It is about the current US against the Socialist/Communist/Nazi/Bilderberg NWO types; in other words freedom versus tyranny and slavery.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
It is about the current US against the Socialist/Communist/Nazi/Bilderberg NWO types; in other words freedom versus tyranny and slavery.
The current US with its massive social programs like social security, medicare, public education, the military, etc?
I'm sorry, your list of 'others' is pretty non-sensical. Socialists are not Communists. Nazis were fascists who are the sworn enemies of both socialists and communists. And then you throw in nebulous references to anti-semitic conspiracy theories and the like just for good measure.

but really, if you want to tell us its freedom vs. tyranny, who do you think is more capable of securing freedom? A democratic government with safeguards, or unrestrained capitalism with no checks on its power to coerce people?
 

Magnum

Well-known member
Socialists are not Communists
Socialism is the intermediate between capitalism & communism. It's how they get you ready to accept what's coming down the pipe at you. It's Marxist stuff. Last I checked we were all for crushing communism, socialism is the same bs just communism light.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
Socialism is the intermediate between capitalism & communism. It's how they get you ready to accept what's coming down the pipe at you. It's Marxist stuff. Last I checked we were all for crushing communism, socialism is the same bs just communism light.
well yeah, if it was still the 1850s. And Marx never really defined what socialism was other than the transfer of industry to the ownership of the people at some point. It was highly dependent on the people and the place. The reason it was so radical in Russia is because Russia was really the last of the old Feudal states in the world at the end of the 19th century. Most other nations had transitioned into at least some form of Democracy, be it a limited monarchy or a full on republic. The colonial era was coming to a close, but Russia really missed the boat on that one. Russia was ripped right from a feudal system with nobility, to a modern economic system of the late 19th century overnight. Russia would continue this breakneck pace of modernization (at the expense of its people) right up until the latter half of the 20th century. They went from an agrarian backwater to modern industrial nation in less than 30 years!
Other nations had a much softer run at socialism because they had already liberalized, more or less guided by themes from the Enlightenment. Market economies grew all over the place. The USA was not immune from this either. In fact, one of the primary reasons the USA was able to expand the way it did was because of the US government expending tax dollars on things like land giveaways in Oklahoma and paying for railroads which private capital wouldn't have risked. The USA was more than happy to engage in socialism to benefit itself. Of course, it also was willing to be a militaristic genocidal asshole at the behest of guys like Andrew Jackson. see: Trail of Tears.

and I could make a solid argument that many places that proclaim themselves to be communist or socialist, simply aren't. Guys like Maduro and Chavez are often pointed to as the poster children for socialism, but when you look at what they did, you realize they are just dictatorial strongmen. Chavez blunted that with hefty social spending but when it comes to transferring the wealth and prosperity of a nation's natural resources to the people, Venezuela failed. Socialism didn't succeed there, corruption and corporatism did.
You mention Marx and call socialism "communism light" but don't mention that Marx assumed that by the time a socialist transition was complete, the state would be relegated to the "museum of antiquities along side the bronze axe."
That is a quote from Frederich Engels btw, Marx' right hand man, so to speak. In the most literal sense, true Marxist communists believe in less government than most American libertarians. In fact, they'd likely find themselves with a whole lot of common ground if Libertarians could get over the red scare BS from the 50s and Marxists could admit that markets are actually pretty useful.
 

The Last Outlaw

New member
Not that I am a fan of Biden/Harris or the Democratic Party( or Trump/Pence and the Republican Party), but what the guy above me pointed out about all the socialist programs we have here is absolutely true. We can thank socialism for everything from the highway system to the military and public schools. Hell, SOCIAL Security has it in its name. We have always been a mix of socialism and capitalism, that ain't gonna change.
 
Last edited:

budlite_909

New member
i think that all elections are important for one's lifetime, especially if one were to die soon after an election. any election allows for a registered voter to get out and voice his/her objections or fondness for either a particular political party, or person, or bond issue, or law(s).

to not get out and vote, (no matter the particulars) is to pretty much cheat and slap in the face, all the fine dead or alive service people that fought for our freedom and right to do so.

i can be said that hundreds of thousands of our service vets, made sure we get to keep these rights.

also, even if it is just for local dog catcher, your right to keep or fire that person was bestowed upon you to speak up (vote), other wise, what does the preacher say at a wedding..??


"speak (vote) now, or forever hold your piece"

don't wanna vote..??

then ya's got NO RIGHT to complain the outcome...!!!!!!!

all elections are important for our lifetime, of freedoms
 

TomJ

Member
In the case of the presidential election, what if you feel that both major candidates are wrong?
Look at their track record of the policies they've implemented. Look at what they've done, not what they're saying they'll do and vote for the one who'd policies benefit the country the most, or conversely will do the least amount of harm if you believe they're both wrong. Again, if that's what you believe your choices are sometimes we just need to ride out a 4 year term with as little damage as possible.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
In the case of the presidential election, what if you feel that both major candidates are wrong?
We're in a winner-take-all system without any sort of preferential election method. It will always distill down to two candidates.
Pick the lesser of two evils, because strategic voting must be employed. If you vote 3rd party, you invariably take a potential vote away from a candidate who is better positioned to beat the one you like the least.

i.e. A vote for the Libertarian Party candidate usually takes a vote away from the Republican who might really need those votes (especially in swing states) to defeat the Democrat you don't like.
If you're in a safe state, do whatever the hell you like, your vote just doesn't matter very much.

This question is a whole can of worms on why we need to eliminate the electoral college in favor of a preferential voting method with a Condorcet winner.

 
Last edited:

The Last Outlaw

New member
I refuse to choose the lesser of two evils. The real problem with our political system is that we only have two viable parties. As far as I know, we are the only first world country with only two choices that are strong enough to win.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
I refuse to choose the lesser of two evils. The real problem with our political system is that we only have two viable parties. As far as I know, we are the only first world country with only two choices that are strong enough to win.
That's how our political system is set up. It's not a problem, it's a feature. Winner take all, or First past the post systems like ours mathematically trend downwards to two parties. This is the reason you have to choose the lesser of two evils, or accept that you are throwing away your vote. Or worse, you are passively helping the candidate you might actually dislike more by weakening the chances of the opponent who is most likely to defeat the guy you really dislike.
Other countries recognized the problem a long time ago and did something about it. Many Americans recognized the problem a long time ago but were prevented from doing anything about it.
The last real attempt at eliminating the electoral college died back in the 1970s. Because there is such opposition to reforming the EC, other states have effectively worked around it and the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is 3/4 of the way to being put into effect. Which is really a bad way to do things, but when one group who claims to want electoral reform, actively fights against it, this is what we get.

The solution is to eliminate the electoral college in favor of a preferential national ballot with a condorcet winner. It allows for different parties to gain traction without the obstruction from the entrenched parties. You no longer have to vote strategically because you are not limited to just one vote.
 

Good Ol' Boy

New member
Its the most important election because its the first time full on communism is on the ballot.

The left are outed and acting in a no holds bar situation. We've also never had the media corruption and probable coupe scenario like we have now before, along with the promise of mass civil unrest.

This has been a long time coming as the ideological subversion has been happening in this country for quite a while now.
 

Ivy Mike

Member
Its the most important election because its the first time full on communism is on the ballot.

The left are outed and acting in a no holds bar situation. We've also never had the media corruption and probable coupe scenario like we have now before, along with the promise of mass civil unrest.

This has been a long time coming as the ideological subversion has been happening in this country for quite a while now.
Full on communism? Like actual Karl Marx communism?
Shit! He wants less government than the Libertarians! Sign me up!

or are you one of those boomer types who thinks any social program is the evil commie stuff?
 
Top