The Third Man: So, vote Republican obviously.
thamike: Deftoons: Take a look at Romney and Obama's larger corporate sponsors (read: Goldman Sachs and other banking firms) and try typing that again without looking like the most gullible voter on the planet.They are nothing alike, Romney and Obama. Only an ignoramusdeep thinking rugged individualist would think that because their biggest sponsors are also the groups with the most money, they are by default interchangeable people.
JohnnyC: HotIgneous Intruder: A neoliberal is nothing but a neoconservative from Chicago.Account created: 2011-10-21 10:53:51OH hey! Fresh out from under your bridge, eh? How about a steaming hot cup of STFU? I'll put some tasty mini-marshmallows in it for ya. We love when new folks show up and say blatantly trollish things that are devoid of meaning or consideration. It's SO COOL!...
Magruda: The level of cognitive dissonance displayed by people who say they support change yet fight against it is astounding. You say you have the same goals but you don't like thier tactics, but unless those tactics harm your efforts your objection only helps your supposed common enemy. To not see this you must either be extremely stupid or a liar.
sprawl15: Magruda: Meanwhile telling us it is a waste of time to advocate for them?It absolutely is.The problem is systemic - without a fundamental change to our voting system, third parties at best act a spoiler and produce the type of government you want the least. Take a simple situation; 30% of the electorate are Democrats, 30% are Greens, 40% are Republican. What is the optimal voting strategy for Democrats and Greens? Under our system, if they vote their values they get nothing and the GOP takes over. Under a proportional representation system, they get exactly the representation they hold among the populace and hold a general liberal majority in congress despite the differences in their values - which would lead to the Greens voting against Democrats when they want to check certain policies.
kingoomieiii: It's fine to disagree with Obama on that shiat, but if you think any of it will get better under Romney, you're not paying attention.
Magruda: Which is why it continues.
FedExPope: Genevieve Marie: Honestly, there are a lot of progressives that are less than thrilled with Obama's approach to this stuff, but I mean, what are we going to do? We can either vote for the guy who we mostly like except on this issue, or we can vote for the guy who is a total garbage monster on every issue, including this one.Or yea, yea we can strike a meaningless blow at the heart of the two party system by voting for a third party candidate that will get 1 or 2% of the vote, but many of us prefer to be more pragmatic about it.Except that on almost every issue regarding civil liberties, Obama has been garbage as well. It's not about disagreeing on just one issue. Numerous issues including the ones in the article have been black eyes on his first term, at least to those people holding him to a decent standard of a progressive. His half-hearted attempt at support for gay marriage can barely count. I'm sick of hearing people continuing the mistakes of supporting a broken system and calling that pragmatic. Pragmatism is about what works and what's practical and clearly the system we have isn't working any more.
hubiestubert: The sad thing is: we are stuck with detentions. We cannot try the folks that the Bush Administration put into Gitmo. We can't. Not because we don't want to, but because the chain of evidence, and the whole of their incarceration would get them sprung in minutes in the US justice system. We are stuck with this mess, because GW wanted to get folks, not try them.
hubiestubert: Our prisons already hold several terrorists. We HAVE tried them. We cannot do so in many of the cases in Gitmo, because things were run without any thought to what to do with folks after we got them. Now, we can't let them go, but we can't try them, so these folks are in legal Limbo. GW handed Obama the tiger, and now he has to hold on just as tight. That isn't quite the same as endorsing what has been done, that's dealing with the mess handed to you. In for a penny, in for a pound. And oddly enough, a lot folks understand this. Including many of our partners overseas.
hubiestubert: There is a bit of a difference as dealing with the issues handed to you, and advocating it from the get go. And if folks are so happy with the policies that Obama has been forced to go along with, why aren't they supporting the guy who has been much more aggressive in combating terrorists, as opposed to changing horses midstream with a guy who waffles more than an IHOP?
kingoomieiii: It's fine to disagree with Obama on that shiat
FedExPope: but if Obama is the best we can do
Aaron Haynes: Obama and Romney have incredibly different positions and would have incredibly different administrations. "They're virtually the same" is absolute horseshiat.That said, there are several issues the two major parties fail to address, and it's alarming to say the least that there's no real choice on things like drone strikes or drug policy. But just because your most important issues aren't being represented doesn't mean the election's outcome has no consequences.
fusillade762: I read a David Brooks editorial that basically boiled down to "You should vote for Romney because Obama won't be able to get anything done due to congressional obstructionism from the GOP".
James F. Campbell: Democrats failed to stop the Republicans from advancing their authoritarian policies, so vote Republican.
The Great EZE: The Third Man: So, vote Republican obviously.Such a tactic would NEVER work on a Romney supporter. Mostly because Romney doesn't have a stance on anything but also because Romney supporters only care about getting the near out of their White House.
slayer199: The point is there's little real difference between the 2 other than rhetoric.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Mar 27 2017 21:07:16
Runtime: 0.435 sec (435 ms)