2020 election thread

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,240
31,620
1,743
oklahoma city
Right after the civil war is when the reps and Dems pretty much became entrenched...before then there were several instances of one party being replaced by another. That seems impossible today even though most of us agree that both parties suck and that there is at least one 3rd party that could pull voters from both...why is that.

I'm not saying the concept of a two party system is bad, I'm saying our current one is out of freaking control and we the people seem hell bent on keeping it that way. Ticks me off.
Yang advocated ranked-choice voting and democracy dollars and had a lot of other shake-the-system ideas but his mistake was pushing only the UBI. If ever there is going to be a third party candidate that wins (except possibly a billionaire celeb which has its own issues) ranked-choice voting and a change in campaign finance need to occur.

Otherwise, we are like someone sitting at Tucker's eating a massive burger and complaining that we can't lose weight.
 
Nov 23, 2007
1,219
790
1,743
I'm undecided. I'm figuring out if I am voting tactically for the Libertarian party to maintain their ballot access when I don't think the current libertarian candidate is very engaging, or if I am voting for Biden as the more anti-Trump move even though Biden is well, Biden. It doesn't much matter voting in Oklahoma so I don't want to make it sound like I am deeply pondering this.

But, I am fasting today so the starving thing is spot on!
I don’t think that someone who is ardently anti-Trump is “undecided.”

It’s similar to disliking both team in the OU-Texas game: You can say that you just won’t watch or that you hope that a big bird swoops down, steals the ball and the game doesn’t count; but in reality one team or the other will win.

A sane person roots for OU to lose every time, even though it’s against Texas. That’s not really undecided.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,959
16,940
1,743
Tulsa, OK
Trump will get the next SCOTUS pick in before the election and he has effectively stacked the SCOTUS to be more conservative (which I think is a good thing).

Why vote for Trump again if he is all of those things? He did his job and filled the SCOTUS. That legacy will long outlive him and further conservative values more than any POTUS could do alone. Trump got his job done he needed to do in 4 years. Vote Biden, take the hit for 4 years. Know the SCOTUS is in your favor and put forward a better GOP candidate in 4 to get rid of Biden.
I can't vote for a Democrat on a national level right now...they are just too far out in radical left field for me. And I refuse to vote for any candidate, R or D, who has been in DC for 40 years.

I could easily get to the polling place and decide to vote Libertarian though. As Steross said Trump's going to win oklahoma anyway.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,240
31,620
1,743
oklahoma city
I agree with that. Look at California...But I would argue that Oklahomans typically make better decisions regarding state regulation and taxation than do mostly Blue states. I'd agree that it's better to have balanced governance but would argue that in absence of that I would rather have small government policy (i.e. business friendly, and low taxation) that SHOULD BE typical of red state America. Once again, I agree that balanced governance is best. My fear with the federal elections is that we go hard Blue in two of the three branches (this was my concern with Trump all along because of his bombastic nature personally quite plausibly causing a left swing), I'd prefer the feds be balanced but conservative and right leaning.
With first-hand knowledge of the long term high-salary, low knowledge devastation that is happening to our state agencies as we speak, I'm just going to have to disagree that right is better than left on that. People are people. The extreme partisans seek power for themselves and see the other side as the enemy. That desire harms the people as they are a pawn in the power struggle.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
30,659
10,141
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
I could easily get to the polling place and decide to vote Libertarian though. As Steross said Trump's going to win oklahoma anyway.
True Trump will win Oklahoma. Tulsa which is about the bluest part of Oklahoma was won by Trump by 50K+ votes in 2016. Biden may trim that voting margin a bit this year but Tulsa will still go to Trump by a wide margin.

About the only viable option in Oklahoma is to vote 3rd party to keep them on the ballot if you can't bring yourself to vote for Trump
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,240
31,620
1,743
oklahoma city
I don’t think that someone who is ardently anti-Trump is “undecided.”

It’s similar to disliking both team in the OU-Texas game: You can say that you just won’t watch or that you hope that a big bird swoops down, steals the ball and the game doesn’t count; but in reality one team or the other will win.

A sane person roots for OU to lose every time, even though it’s against Texas. That’s not really undecided.
Fair enough. I have decided that despite some good policy, Trump is harmful our nation and I simply cannot support that. The paucity of other good options is why I am "undecided."
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,240
31,620
1,743
oklahoma city
Vote Libertarian! A 5% finish would do wonders for ballot access and give us public matching funds for the next election. Change has gotta start somewhere.
Libertarians taking public matching funds?:D
Isn't that like democrats taking money from big pharma? Oh yeah, they do that.

If the Libertarian party would listen to me, which they won't, they need to get away from this BS that seems like a libertarian litmus test. I think many Americans lean libertarian. But, very, very few Americans believe in libertarian answers to every single problem. At times, government is needed. When libertarians give answers like, "There is no need for pollution regulation as it is not in the best interest of an individual to be a polluter as that will become known and hurt the person's business....blah, blah" they hurt their own cause. Libertarian should be an ideal, not a mandate.
 

Jostate

Bluecolla's sock
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
20,844
14,714
1,743
Libertarians taking public matching funds?:D
Isn't that like democrats taking money from big pharma? Oh yeah, they do that.

If the Libertarian party would listen to me, which they won't, they need to get away from this BS that seems like a libertarian litmus test. I think many Americans lean libertarian. But, very, very few Americans believe in libertarian answers to every single problem. At times, government is needed. When libertarians give answers like, "There is no need for pollution regulation as it is not in the best interest of an individual to be a polluter as that will become known and hurt the person's business....blah, blah" they hurt their own cause. Libertarian should be an ideal, not a mandate.
I've discovered saying you are a libertarian is like saying you like jazz music. It means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. I say I'm kind of a libertarian, then my Bro in law who is a Democrat and a half says "I'm a libertarian". I enjoy the common ground feel to it so we high five and move on. We agree on very little so we can't both be right.
 

pokes16

Banned
Banned
Oct 16, 2003
7,337
6,395
1,743
Tulsa
Biden wanted breaks every 30 minutes. Trump said No (And that has never been the case anyway)
And Trump wanted both candidates checked for electronic devices/ear piece etc. Biden said No

https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1310968669694865408?s=20
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,240
31,620
1,743
oklahoma city
I've discovered saying you are a libertarian is like saying you like jazz music. It means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. I say I'm kind of a libertarian, then my Bro in law who is a Democrat and a half says "I'm a libertarian". I enjoy the common ground feel to it so we high five and move on. We agree on very little so we can't both be right.
Libertarian if you look at it means very small government. Libertarian if you don't bother to really look but are hipster means that you want legal drugs.
 
Mar 11, 2006
2,866
1,877
1,743
I've discovered saying you are a libertarian is like saying you like jazz music. It means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. I say I'm kind of a libertarian, then my Bro in law who is a Democrat and a half says "I'm a libertarian". I enjoy the common ground feel to it so we high five and move on. We agree on very little so we can't both be right.
I consider myself a libertarian (albeit a law and order libertarian). But it does seem to mean different things to different people.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
22,627
9,781
1,743
Earth
Fair enough. I have decided that despite some good policy, Trump is harmful our nation and I simply cannot support that. The paucity of other good options is why I am "undecided."
The problem I have is that I see the D's, at least the loud voices currently, as even more destructive to the nation. I felt we needed a purge in terms of Washington DC because Obama had 8 years of stacking things one way and we needed to move the other way. Trump has had some time to restack the deck for the R's but I'm not ready to stop winning in terms of appointments and others (not named Trump) that are in charge of things on the Hill. I'm particularly impressed with the William Barr and the VP both. This is my issue with the other side, not Biden, he's surrounded by radicals who have gobbled up power because of TDS rather than any real policy needs, wants or decisions. So, once again, it's very likely I hold my nose and vote for Trump...I can't cast a vote for the other side because I see them as very damaging.
 
Last edited:

okstate987

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 17, 2009
7,846
4,774
1,743
Somewhere
Libertarians taking public matching funds?:D
Isn't that like democrats taking money from big pharma? Oh yeah, they do that.

If the Libertarian party would listen to me, which they won't, they need to get away from this BS that seems like a libertarian litmus test. I think many Americans lean libertarian. But, very, very few Americans believe in libertarian answers to every single problem. At times, government is needed. When libertarians give answers like, "There is no need for pollution regulation as it is not in the best interest of an individual to be a polluter as that will become known and hurt the person's business....blah, blah" they hurt their own cause. Libertarian should be an ideal, not a mandate.
I disagree. It is important to gatekeep to an extent, as so many people like to claim that they are libertarian, when they support a whole number of policies that are the antithesis of libertarianism, or support Trump, who again is a socially conservative, economically liberal politician. Literally the opposite of a libertarian.

I think that pollution is a violation of the NAP, which would then mean that some standards and restrictions should be in place.

I don't like the idea of taking public matching funds, but they already face such an uphill battle, so a few concessions must be made.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,240
31,620
1,743
oklahoma city
I disagree. It is important to gatekeep to an extent, as so many people like to claim that they are libertarian, when they support a whole number of policies that are the antithesis of libertarianism, or support Trump, who again is a socially conservative, economically liberal politician. Literally the opposite of a libertarian.

I think that pollution is a violation of the NAP, which would then mean that some standards and restrictions should be in place.

I don't like the idea of taking public matching funds, but they already face such an uphill battle, so a few concessions must be made.
Well then, I think that needs to be explained better as that is a frequent banner of libertarians that I talk to. Just as you want to toss people who want some policies, maybe you should toss those that break the NAP. Often, they claim that the courts would take care of it. But that is too late for that type of thing.

I'll vote for JJ as I like you and want other real choices. But, without someone like Yang coming in and getting RCV and a real change in campaign finance, I can't ever see libertarians breaking 5%.
 

okstate987

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 17, 2009
7,846
4,774
1,743
Somewhere
Well then, I think that needs to be explained better as that is a frequent banner of libertarians that I talk to. Just as you want to toss people who want some policies, maybe you should toss those that break the NAP. Often, they claim that the courts would take care of it. But that is too late for that type of thing.

I'll vote for JJ as I like you and want other real choices. But, without someone like Yang coming in and getting RCV and a real change in campaign finance, I can't ever see libertarians breaking 5%.
I would agree, but you also have to consider the libertarians you talk to are likely from Oklahoma, so they are going to be more conservative than the average libertarian--if they are one at all. :p

On social issues, there is a good amount of overlap with progressives, and both libertarians and progressives are in favor of RCV.

Where they differ is on economics, where the libertarian party is the only economically conservative party left in the country. There are some libertarian arguments for a UBI, but typically they would involve replacing existing programs with it, rather than adding the UBI to them.
 
Last edited:

okstate987

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 17, 2009
7,846
4,774
1,743
Somewhere
I consider myself a libertarian (albeit a law and order libertarian). But it does seem to mean different things to different people.
A law and order libertarian doesn't exist. "Law and Order" is a less pejorative way of saying authoritarian or statist. You don't mind crushing others as long as your side is not the one being crushed.

Those values are at odds with libertarianism, which value civil liberties and individualism. Based on your post history, you are clearly a paleoconservative.
 
Last edited:

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,959
16,940
1,743
Tulsa, OK
From the article: Joe Biden’s handlers several days ago agreed to a pre-debate inspection for electronic earpieces but today abruptly reversed themselves and declined.

So does this mean that they plan to use an earpiece to tell him what to say during the debate?
If they are not, it seems silly to allow this conspiracy theory to continue. It only hurts Biden.