Jump to content

Independent/Third Party 2020 Presidential Candidate "Mega"thread

bad_teammate

By bad_teammate
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

F250

F250 28910

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Schultz isn’t trying to start a movement and he doesn’t have much of an ideology from what I see except “not dem, not trump”.  He’s an opportunist.

However, I actually think there is room in America for a centrist party.   You just need the right people to come together and organize it.  Some centrist republicans and democrats get together with the financial support of a Bill Gates type and layout a core party ideology that distinguishes themselves from Trumpism and Progressives. 

I think that would be attractive to a good section of America. 

The problem with centrists is they have no ideology, no passion. It's difficult to get people to rally around a central tenet that is basically "we compromise." That makes for a terrible rallying cry.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patrick Bateman

Patrick Bateman 3933

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

For one, "M4A is untenable / un-workable". 

Reasonable Immigration reform, but not insane ideas on either side of the spectrum.

A heart for poor people and outrageous costs of schools and real estate, but nothing insane like free college for all and raise taxes for free apartments or whatever else insane people want.

 

These are opinions, not ideas.  There isn't one actionable idea in what you just listed.  Try again....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85662

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Interesting that he's come out swinging against the left and (so far as I know based on this thread) hasn't characterized the $1.5 trillion tax give away to him and his billionaire buddies as "untenable."

The candidate for Cookie. 

Democrats aren’t voting for this guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 22759

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Interesting that he's come out swinging against the left and (so far as I know based on this thread) hasn't characterized the $1.5 trillion tax give away to him and his billionaire buddies as "untenable."

I really, REALLY, think the left is overreacting to his bid.  The blowback so far has been encouraging, and he's doing his best to only appeal to right leaning folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
babysdaddy

babysdaddy 2730

Posted
Posted
Interesting that he's come out swinging against the left and (so far as I know based on this thread) hasn't characterized the $1.5 trillion tax give away to him and his billionaire buddies as "untenable."

He did on 60 min. Said he would not have done it or not given business a free ride or something
Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntorangebongos

burntorangebongos 10769

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, F250 said:

The problem with centrists is they have no ideology, no passion. It's difficult to get people to rally around a central tenet that is basically "we compromise." That makes for a terrible rallying cry.

 

Central tenet: I am the adult in the room. I will get government working like it should. Compromise is part of that. People used to understand that and worked to get as best a deal for their side as possible but concede something to those on the other side. It would be nice to see someone appeal to our better selves. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13233

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 hours ago, Patrick Bateman said:

There isn't one actionable idea in what you just listed.

Welcome to the world of the both sides and the centrist, the world where there are no actual ideas, beliefs, values, ethics, or goals.

The world where compromise is not something you do in order to achieve a desired policy goal, it's something you do because compromise itself is the goal.

The lack of actionable ideas is not a centrist bug, it's a centrist feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Llano Estacado

Llano Estacado 1257

Posted
Posted
Everyone bitches about the 2 party system and then hates on independents.  Okay 


I want an independent that siphons votes from the other party. Can’t let the other team win. Those mouth breathers are just a cult of personality they don’t care about policy. #bothsides

Kane and Kodos throw your vote away.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DigglerontheHoof

DigglerontheHoof 21264

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Llano Estacado said:

 


I want an independent that siphons votes from the other party. Can’t let the other team win. Those mouth breathers are just a cult of personality they don’t care about policy. #bothsides

Kane and Kodos throw your vote away.gif

 

I understand it, as it pertains to beating Dotus.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85662

Posted
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

Central tenet: I am the adult in the room. I will get government working like it should. Compromise is part of that. People used to understand that and worked to get as best a deal for their side as possible but concede something to those on the other side. It would be nice to see someone appeal to our better selves. 

Damnit, you just spoiled Beto's 2020 platform.  Vague and boring platitudes about compromise, working together and common decency.

Edited by Js1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 33218

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

For one, "M4A is untenable / un-workable". 

Reasonable Immigration reform, but not insane ideas on either side of the spectrum.

A heart for poor people and outrageous costs of schools and real estate, but nothing insane like free college for all and raise taxes for free apartments or whatever else insane people want.

 

 

9 hours ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Also, reasonable gun reform. Nothing to insane from the left while still acknowledging some small/incremental changes should be made.

Also, I get the feeling that he can only do better for climate/environment, though I admit I don't want him pushing too hard the other way for business reasons.

Unsurprisingly, you answered a request to list some ideas by not listing a single actual policy proposal or idea. Just mindless platitudes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Llano Estacado

Llano Estacado 1257

Posted
Posted
I understand it, as it pertains to beating Dotus.   


And millions of GOP never-trumpers or at least Non-trumpkins understood it as it pertained to “Hilla-beast”.

Meanwhile Gary Johnson is biting his tongue (literally), and asking what Aleppo is, can’t remember Fox or Jung-Un...

Not to go to far out on ledge Brisket, but can Mountain Dew Camacho run yet?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, F250 said:

The problem with centrists is they have no ideology, no passion.

In normal times this would be true but these are not normal times.  The move of the Republicans to planet stupid with Trump has created a vacuum on the political spectrum for people that reject trump’s anti-American politics but can’t warm up to the democrats.  

Centrists do and can have an ideology.  It’s just so basic that it’s hard to recognize.  The Rotary four way test could be a centrist ideology:

  • Is it the TRUTH?
  • Is it FAIR to all concerned?
  • Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?
  • Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned?

Throw in some principles from other civic organizations and you have good foundation for a centrist ideology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29782

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

I see some people comparing this guy to Perot but Perot was pretty famous by 1992 and he also wasn't a bog standard neoliberal (he opposed NAFTA, for instance) like Schultz. I don't see anything coming from this.  

At least Perot actually had somewhat of a platform: 1) oppose NAFTA and 2) balance the budget.

Listening to an interview with Schultz this morning on NPR, he flat out said he was running based on his rags to riches life story and explicitly stated that it was NOT because of his business background.

After criticizing Warren for wanting to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for new programs, he then went on to refuse to answer a question about his willingness to raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.

He didn't put forth a single policy idea and I simply cannot see what distinguishes him other than he figured out that the best way to sell over-priced coffee was to sell *the idea* of drinking gourmet coffee in a cafe-style environment while not treating is employees like shit. Yeah, that makes him better than most corporate titans.

When asked about how he would get other corporations to focus on both shareholder value while also treating their employees fairly, he said he'd use his personal influence to appeal to their morality (rather than strengthening labor protection laws).

Man, I just won't get the appeal until he actually lays out a platform than I can objectively consider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Why must one have to have an ideology?  

I imagine everyone has a political ideology of some kind or another, although it may be vague and incoherent.  I like Andrew Heywood's definition of political ideology:

Quote

All ideologies therefore (a) offer an account of the existing order, usually in the form of a ‘world-view’, (b) advance a model of a desired future, a vision of the ‘good society’, and (c) explain how political change can and should be brought about – how to get from (a) to (b). 

 

Edited by Fozzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 22759

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, bolverk said:

At least Perot actually had somewhat of a platform: 1) oppose NAFTA and 2) balance the budget.

Listening to an interview with Schultz this morning on NPR, he flat out said he was running based on his rags to riches life story and explicitly stated that it was NOT because of his business background.

 After criticizing Warren for wanting to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for new programs, he then went on to refuse to answer a question about his willingness to raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.

 He didn't put forth a single policy idea and I simply cannot see what distinguishes him other than he figured out that the best way to sell over-priced coffee was to sell *the idea* of drinking gourmet coffee in a cafe-style environment while not treating is employees like shit. Yeah, that makes him better than most corporate titans.

When asked about how he would get other corporations to focus on both shareholder value while also treating their employees fairly, he said he'd use his personal influence to appeal to their morality (rather than strengthening labor protection laws).

Man, I just won't get the appeal until he actually lays out a platform than I can objectively consider.

There's nothing "independent" or different about him, he just wants the notoriety of running for President and is too chickenshit to enter a primary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13233

Posted
  • Author
Posted
14 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Why must one have to have an ideology?  

Who doesn't have an ideology? Are there people out there who seriously think, "democracy, monarchism, authoritarianism... meh it's all whatever"? It's a unicorn.

A centrist is merely someone who has the luxury of thinking the status quo is neutral.

But, as our friend Howard said, you can't be neutral on a moving train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DigglerontheHoof

DigglerontheHoof 21264

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Who doesn't have an ideology? Are there people out there who seriously think, "democracy, monarchism, authoritarianism... meh it's all whatever"? It's a unicorn.

A centrist is merely someone who has the luxury of thinking the status quo is neutral.

But, as our friend Howard said, you can't be neutral on a moving train.

In that sense, yes, I prefer democracy.  I'm speaking more of the "right" and "left" as it exists in US politics.  I prefer to look at issues in more pragmatic ways than ideological ways.  That was more my point.  

Everything in American politics has devolved into Team Red v. Team Blue and it's tiresome and ineffective, imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skyline

Skyline 325

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

Central tenet: I am the adult in the room. I will get government working like it should. Compromise is part of that. People used to understand that and worked to get as best a deal for their side as possible but concede something to those on the other side. It would be nice to see someone appeal to our better selves. 

This only works in an ideal world though. A centrist going up against Donald Trump, or another bad faith actor, would end up caving to get any sort of compromise. If Trump's proven anything, its that candidates have the ability to shift Overton windows. They don't have to operate under the guise of moderation anymore. We saw this in action on the left with Bernie. Why should one side commit to caving against the other? That's the problem with centrism right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19035

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I have been a fan of his since his bow tie days. He has the right message when it comes to curbing illegal immigration and he hates neocons just like me. I was a Pat Buchanan supporter when I was in college when he was considered fringe. His views are finally ascendant in the GOP. Tucker can help kill Bush/Romney wing of the GOP once and for all. If I was going to start a 3rd party, I’d get guys like Nigel Farage, Geert Wilders, Raheem Hassan and others I respect and admire to create a working class based party that would hammer home the need to curb immigration sharply in exchange for things like a public buy in health insurance option , better wages and better social cohesion. Need an articulate voice like Tucker to make it happen. Can’t have free health care with a horde of illegals. It’s one or the other.

How would it be free?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13233

Posted
  • Author
Posted
41 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

 I'm speaking more of the "right" and "left" as it exists in US politics.  I prefer to look at issues in more pragmatic ways than ideological ways.  That was more my point. 

The huge problem here is that you're inaccurately and conservatively narrowing the scope of what's possible.

Trigger warning to Hugo, but look at this clip for an example of what "pragmatism" looks like as an ideology and how it is functionally nonsense...

Three years later, basically every single nominee from her party is pushing single-payer, universal healthcare.

We cannot predict what will happen and we are extremely inaccurate measurement tools for determining what is possible.

Quote

Everything in American politics has devolved into Team Red v. Team Blue and it's tiresome and ineffective, imo. 

Everyone's tired of it. Very few people are actually happy with rampant partisanship, they just fight in it because that's how the sausage is made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29782

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

It's like you don't even remember when he shut down Starbucks across the country for sensitivity training after someone called the cops on a PoC for hanging out and not buying coffee.

That training wasn't for the employee but the customer. In other words, it was an attempt at maintaining market position with that as part of a public relations campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13233

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, happyfunball said:

I assume this is to moderate the dems and protect the elite class and their tax cuts. 

Yes, and it's fairly explicit. When Schultz was asked what pushed him into the race, he mentioned one thing only: the proposed 70% top income tax rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13233

Posted
  • Author
Posted

from the article...

Schultz started the fight, calling Warren’s plan to create a new tax on the capital assets of wealthy households “ridiculous” during a Tuesday morning interview with NPR.

“When I see Elizabeth Warren come out with a ridiculous plan of taxing wealthy people a surtax of 2 percent because it makes a good headline, or sends out a tweet, when she knows for a fact that is not something that’s ever going to be passed, this is what’s wrong. You can’t just attack these things in a punitive way by punishing people,” he said.

Bad idea, Howard. Really, really bad idea.

He is exactly the kind of person and class of person that lets Warren fight exactly the fight she loves to fight. He's talking about an insanely intelligent and experienced woman like she's an idiot, and holy hell he's handing her a bullhorn and 10-ft-tall pulpit.

He's a perfect foil for her. He's not a right-wing demagogue, so she doesn't have to be distracted by his racism or misogyny, she can just use her razor wit to go directly after his class. Man, I'm excited.

A billionaire whining about being "punished" for potentially having to only have enough money to live in insane luxury for 1,000 years instead of 1,500 years. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...