Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Beware: 1%-Cons Conducting Anti-Voting Campaign, AGAIN!

Posted 6 months ago on May 3, 2014, 11:21 a.m. EST by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

"Both Parties Are the Same, Obama Failure, Benghazi, IRS, Blah, Carl Rove, blah blah!"

Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was

DON'T BE FOOLED, Don't get discouraged!

Before this November, Get Registered and get out the VOTE!!

2010 Never EVER Again!!!!!

We can't afford to teach newbies and ignoramuses how damaging and regressive republiCon Rule is again!!

If you don't FUCKING VOTE, YOU DON'T FUCKING COUNT!!!!!

252 Comments

252 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 months ago

EVERYONE SHOULD VOTE !!! But people should not think that that is all they should do !! They should look to empower themselves and maybe even try to inform, inspire, mobilise and organise for the 99% !

If you give the slightest fuk about your country & democracy in The US, then please watch the following video from Thom Hartmann in its entirety - but especially the five very powerful minutes from minute 23 :

The US 99% need to believe that there's hope and that Turkeys need not keep voting for Thanksgiving !!!

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 months ago

I agree = EVERYONE SHOULD VOTE !!!

Everyone should also take a moment to look at those running - incumbent as well as challengers - to see where they stand on important issues - like supporting KXL ( hang the bums whatever their affiliation )

Only by getting rid of ALL of the politicians who do not support sanity and clean progress - only then does this world stand a chance in hell of getting better for ALL.

[-] 5 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Yes, ''everyone should vote'' - no two ways about it ! However, in any choice of 'ONLY A or B' - just how do 'C or D or E or F', ever get a look in ?!! Democracy can Not just be about a choice of two, especially when both are bought and paid for by the same or very similar MIC, Corporate or Bankster interests !!!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 months ago

just how do 'C or D o E or F'

"Everyone should also take a moment to look at those running - incumbent as well as challengers - to see where they stand on important issues - like supporting KXL ( hang the bums whatever their affiliation )"

Bernie Sanders was not a fluke - nor - I think - Sawant..............

[-] 5 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

''Bernie Sanders was not a fluke - nor - I think - Sawant'' = Very Wise Words Indeed DKAt and also fyi :

per aspera ad astra ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 months ago

( EDIT ) 15.00 an hour - IS - the very least that should ( at this time ) be considered as a minimum wage = anywhere in the country. Tied to inflation/cost of living.

And no Bernie Sanders and Kashama Sawant were not flukes to be elected to office - but are still rare sane choices. Good to see sanity get elected instead of "disgusted with government" choices like Jessie V

EDIT -> Though Jessie V ( in my book ) is still a lot more sane of a choice than Boner or Bitchelle or Ayn Ryan/Rand or Scott or or or or even Harry's Reed or or or or or McCon-all or or or or

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

''Not A Zero Sum Game : The Case For A Higher Minimum Wage'', by Jabril Faraj :

Furthermore DKAt, I would humbly suggest that - Bernie Sanders and Kshama Sawant actually clearly show how people vote when given real alternatives to the status-quo CorpoRate Co-opted CanDidates !!

multum in parvo ...

[+] -4 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

And Bernie Sanders says, VOTE!!!

...Vote out and against any and all RepubliCONs and their evil initiatives and propositions!!!!!

Bernie has made it clear, there IS A HUGE difference between Cons & Dems!!!!

2010 Never EVER Again!!!!

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Yes, for sure the Independent Senator and self described 'democratic socialist', ''Bernie Sanders says, VOTE!!!'' & I agree with that - but a very large part of the problem for The 99% is that there are so few people Like Sen. Sanders to vote FOR !! D'you geddit - or is it just God Damned Dems uber alles ?!

Feel free to link to Bernie making things clear but IF you don't get that there are 'conservatives' inside The Democratic Party, especially On-The-Hill - then you're really not getting the reason OWS exists !!

ad iudicium ...

[-] -2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Bernie says Vote! Because the differences between Dems and Cons are gigantic! He's not asking for the country to just Vote for him! How sleazy you are!

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Hmmm, ''sleazy'' is dishonestly hitching The Corporate Captured Dem Party Machine and Pols to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) - 'cause he isn't one is he ?!!!

Of course Bernie will caucus with the likes of Elizabeth Warren & Alan Grayson .. but I'll bet he misses Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney and regrets that 99%-centred Dem Pols like them have no part in today's 'Dem Party Machine On The Hill' !!

Further - ''sleazy'' is pretending that there is not A Massive Difference between the well intentioned Dem Voters and the (mostly) millionaire Democrat Politicians OR pretending that many {most?!} of Dem Pols are somehow not conservatives or that they are not subject to the corrupting influence of The Banksters, Corporations & The US War Machine !

OWS is not about a tweedledumb and tweedledumber choice of just two Corporate Captured, Controlled and Corrupted Parties .. OWS is about 'democracy' and the ravages of modern high-finance ; low-morals 'crapitalism' - something no less facilitated by Blow Job Bill & Obummer as by any Republicunt POTUS.

ad iudicium ...

[+] -12 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

You're a Sleazy False Flag Plant for the 1%-GOP!!

You offer nothing but distraction and failure!!

[Removed]

[-] 6 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 months ago

Progressive Era

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_direct_democracy_in_the_United_States#Progressive_Era

Beginning in 1878, millions of American farmers began banding together to break the post-Civil War, small-farmer enslaving crop-lien system with co-operative economics. When they were bested by corrupt and abusive practices of the national financial sector, they attempted to improve their circumstances by forming the People's Party and engaging in populist politics. Again they were bested, this time by the country's mainstream two-party system. However, the Progressive Era had just begun. Before it ended, it would become one of the greatest democracy movements in recorded history.

Fired by the efforts of millions of farmers, exposes written by investigative journalists (the famous muckrakers), and correlations between special interests' abuses of farmers and special interests' abuses of urban workers, Progressives formed nationally connected citizen organizations to extend this democracy movement. From 1898 to 1918, the Progressives, supported by tens of millions of citizens, forced direct democracy petition components into the constitutions of twenty-six states.

The constitutional placement of direct democracy petition components was seen by those citizen majorities as necessary. Given the obvious corruption in state governments, the lack of sovereign public control over the output of state legislatures was seen as "the fundamental defect" in the nation's legislative machinery. Advocates insisted that the only way to make the founding fathers' vision work was to take the "misrepresentation" out of representative government with the sovereign people's direct legislation (Special Committee of the National Economic League, 1912 https://archive.org/stream/initiativerefere00nati#page/n0/mode/2up ). Nebraska adopted the referendum for municipal governments within its boundaries in 1897. South Dakota was the first state to adopt the referendum, in 1898, patterning its system after that of Switzerland. However, it was not all successful. Most notably, residents of Texas rejected the referendum because the version put on the ballot by the legislature required 20% of the vote. Other states where the constitutional amendments to place direct democracy failed include Mississippi, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. By 1918 enthusiasm waned and the next state to adopt the referendum was Florida 50 years later.

Initiative and referendum (I&R) citizen lawmaking spread across the United States because state legislatures were unresponsive in creating laws that the people needed to protect themselves from lobby groups, laissez-faire economics, and the era's robber barons. Additionally, while legislatures were quick to pass laws benefitting special interests, both legislatures and the courts were inflexible in their refusals to amend, repeal or adjudicate those laws in ways that would eliminate special interest advantages and end abuses of the majority.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Thanx ! Excellent history and links Leo !! But you'll note that my comment which you replied to, seems to have vanished. It was on BCT not long ago & was a comment totally in tune with core OWS tenets, so very troubling that it would be banned, censored, deleted or .. 'removed' !!! :-( So here it is again ;-)

Reply to : https://occupywallst.org/forum/beware-1-cons-conducting-anti-voting-campaign/#comment-1033704 - a glib reply comment from WSmith aka Wendy ; WendySquid ; JiffySmith - y los otros, lol.

==========================================================================

[-] 5 points by shadz66 (16492) 8 hours ago

Perhaps you're ''a Sleazy False Flag Plant for the'' .. 1% Pandering & Corporate Co-opted Democrap Party On The Hill !!! Or maybe you're just another duped and deluded parDisan !! YOU - ''offer nothing but distraction and failure'' .. I'd suggest and read the following for clear evidence and proof of exactly that, IF you have got the spine to do so, that is !

''What’s preventing the Democrats from becoming inspirational? They know all too well that by venturing too far to the left they could easily instigate a real mass movement. And such a movement is not easily controlled and would inevitably demand much more than the corporate-minded Democrats are willing to concede, which, at this point, is virtually nothing aside from musty rhetoric.

''Unlike the Republican’s populist turn to the right that created the now-defunct Tea Party, a true left turn would mean have the potential to rejuvenate the millions’ strong labor movement, while engaging tens of millions more into active political life, driving people to participate in mass marches, rallies, labor strikes and other forms of mass action.

''This was what happened during the “old populism” in U.S. history, which the Democrats are taking their trendy namesake from. The populist movement of the late 1800’s was a genuine mass movement of workers and farmers, which briefly aligned in an independent political party, the People’s Party, also known as the populists.

''The populist movement that included strike waves and local rural rebellions had nothing to do with the lifeless politics of the Democratic Party, and threatened the very foundation of America corporate power. The Democrats are keenly aware of this type of real populist “threat,” and they are willing to do anything to stop it.

''For example, the Occupy movement proved that the Democrats fear real left populism much more than they fear far-right populism. We now know that the Obama administration worked with numerous Democratic Party mayors and governors across the nation to undermine and destroy the Occupy movement through mass arrests, police violence and surveillance. And because Occupy succeeded in changing the national conversation about income inequality, the Democrats were forced to engage with the rhetoric of the movement they dismembered, and now use the plagiarized language as proof of their “populism.”

Hmmmmmm ..

e tenebris, lux ...

===========================================================================

fiat lux - ubique .. & as per OP, finally also consider : http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/24041-thomas-piketty-the-market-and-private-property-should-be-the-slaves-of-democracy [30:17m Video & Transcript] & : http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/30/savage-capitalism-back-radical-challenge !

pax ...

[+] -7 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Are you desperate or despotic?

If I was on the moderator board, you'd be labeled "R" for rightist, false-flag, anti-government, pro-1%-Republicon, propagandist. Allowed to post merely to educate others how devious the 1%-Cons operate.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 4 months ago

Unable to address the core points and pathologically unable to deal with ANY criticisms of The Dem Party Pols On The Hill, you do naught but reveal yourself for the shrill shill that you are !!! Get a wider view asap !! Sheesh !

ad iudicium ...

[-] -2 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 5 months ago

I wasn't aware that censorship was one of the tactics approved of by the 99%. Then again.

[-] -3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

The 1% despots don't really care if you bow down and worship (although they'd love it if you did), they have a reliable base of unreachable zombies who will Vote for them NO MATTER WHAT! In addition to their Voter Suppression and Counting - Election Fraud Schemes. They'd just like another 20 million or so Dems or Undecideds or Newbies or Indies to be discouraged, disappointed, mad or brainwashed enough not to Vote, again, like they did in 2010!!! That would make them have a very happy '14 election cycle ENDING!

2010 Never EVER Again!!!

[-] 6 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 months ago

Of Ultimate Importance

http://occupywallst.org/forum/of-ultimate-importance/

The 1% despots don't really care if you vote Democrat or Republican so long as you continue to vote for either one of their big money backed corporate representatives as they have a reliable base of unreachable zombies who will Vote for them NO MATTER WHAT!

So long as people reject the pursuit of democracy to rely upon the election of the corporate aristocracy, the 1% wins.

Those who advocate voting for the duopoly defend the corporate aristocracy.

[+] -6 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

So, Leo, on one side of your naive or traitorous mouth (I can't tell which) you advocate the pursuit of democracy! And on the other side you denounce the democratic process of electoral participation, Voting!

You're either completely mindfucked or completely evil. WRONG either way!

Pursue democracy people, VOTE!

Cheney-W repealed Wall Street regulatory laws and got us into bogus wars before they were in office one year. 1%-Cons and Teabaggers sabotaged congress and Obama and gerrymandered voting districts as soon as they were sworn-in after 20+ million Voters didn't Vote in 2010!!

The pursuit of democracy and Voting make a big difference, a HUGE DIFFERENCE! That's why the 1%-Cons pushed through Citizens United, so they could spend unlimited and undisclosed Billion$ to propagandize you to either Vote for their RepubliCon candidate or issue directly, or indirectly by Not Voting!

2010 Never EVER Again!! Unite, Vote and Win!!

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Looks like you're a 'protected person' around these parts !!! Is it nice to be a 'made man', huh ?!! If your delicate ears need to be protected from different opinions and analyses re. Dem Party Machine & Pols, then it means 'admin and/or mods' are arguably, somewhat compromised here, lolol & sssheeeeeesh !

minima maxima sunt ...

[-] -3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Look who's talking, Tokyo Rose!

Your anti-democracy/anti-government screed has gone uncensored since you infected this forum. What do you have to bitch about, you Sleazy False Flag Plant for the 1%-GOP!!

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 4 months ago

You'd have to be a mentally ill, shrill shill to think that I have anything to do with The GOP and you are deluded IF you think that - The Dem Party Machine & the Pols On The Hill are not Corporate Co-opted, Corrupted & Controled creatures of The 1% lackeys of The 0.01% Parasite Class !!! You fkn bumptious oaf !! Go get a fkn clue about ''democracy'' outside of the corrupted confines of duopoly ! Eg. read this :

''Capitalists spread prosperity only when threatened by global rivalry, radical movements and the risk of uprisings at home.''

''The 1% are not about to expropriate themselves, even if asked nicely. And they have spent the past 30 years creating a lock on media and politics to ensure no one will do so through electoral means.''

''Since no one in their right mind would wish to revive anything like the Soviet Union, we are not going to see anything like the mid-century social democracy created to combat it either. If we want an alternative to stagnation, impoverishment and ecological devastation, we're just'' going to have to figure out a way to unplug the machine and start again.''

ad iudicium ...

[+] -6 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 4 months ago

OK, Tokyo Rose.

Just keep denying, while you keep smearing Dems!

People with brains know.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 4 months ago

''People with brains know'' an ass sucking parDisan Dem Shill - when they see one !

Being up a dirty creek without a paddle while simultaneously being in & selling The 99% down - a river in Egypt is an illusory, desperate and weak position - at the very best !!

It is also counter to OWS' core positions fyi & for sure 'vote' .. but unless folk can find candidates like Alan Grayson ; Bernie Sanders ; Cynthia McKinney ; Dennis Kucinich ; Elizabeth Warren or Kshama Sawant to vote for - then be under NO illusions about The 1% Co-opted ; 0.1% Corrupted & the 0.01% Controlled Dem Party Machine & Pols On The Hill !!!

Here's a wee suggestion ; stop engaging me with your ever shallow, snide b-s in the hope that I'll stop slapping you upside the head with 99%-Centric Facts.

veritas vos liberabit ...

[+] -4 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 4 months ago

'66, What brains just RepubliCon Plant!

Don't listen to the blathering BS just get registered and get out the VOTES!!

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

and a democratic house and congress fails to pass a government issuance option

[-] -1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

1%-Con Filibuster, Gridlock, Sabotage and a complicit MSM has everything to do with that.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 2 months ago

Students fighting repub efforts to take away voting rights

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/25899-students-step-up-efforts-to-protect-youth-vote

Solidarity

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 weeks ago

Rights violation update!

Arkansas Repub candidate kicked off voting rolls because of extreme repub voting rules passed by repubs! Reaping what they sow.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/10/02/3575137/arkansas-attorney-general-voter-registration/

"Ironically, the RNLA has been instrumental in pushing mass voter purges across the country, specifically defending the right to purge voters within 90 days of the election."

Too funny! Instant karma!

[-] -2 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 weeks ago

Protect your rights!

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119708/republican-voter-suppression-efforts-aim-stymie-democratic-plans

"So the question isn’t just whether Democrats can find their drop-off supporters and turn them out to the polls, but, assuming that plan is successful, whether Republicans will let them vote when they get there."

They can't win without suppressing the vote.

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

I submit, it must be mandatory that everyone MUST vote. No "however" about it.

Who we vote for (A B C or D) is our business.

You are talkin about our fucked up election/campaign/party duopoly. So there is much to fix to give all candidates an opportunity to be heard, not just A & B.

But that is not relevant to who should vote. Expand the vote. We don't have to vote A or B.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-voter-id-steve-chapman-oped-0515-20140515,0,3729590.column

So fight against all voter suppression. And stop wavering. No ifs, and, buts, or howevers about it

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Did you just say .. ''duopoly'' ?!!! That's really rather interesting imo !! And whoTF is ''wavering'' btw ?!

https://occupywallst.org/article/end-fast-food-swindle-fastfoodglobal-day-action/#comment-1032467 .

Re. ''voter suppression'' I have not been shy on that matter - even IF memories are a bit short around these parts, lol. Ergo, I strongly recommend the following :

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

You don't have to prove anything to me.

If you say you support expanding and/or mandatory voting, as well as oppose voter suppression I can't truly say otherwise.

If you say "everyone 'should' vote, but" or ".. however" (waver) I will simply repeat we MUST expand & make mandatory the vote, & must identify and denounce all voter suppression efforts.

It is imperative if we hope to succeed in taking back the peoples govt from the corp oligarchs.

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Is your memory getting short ?!!! Are you tiring here ?!! Steady there !

Re. 'voting' etc. what did I say on that and how did you reply ... here :

https://occupywallst.org/article/end-fast-food-swindle-fastfoodglobal-day-action/#comment-1032467 ?

Where we can agree, let's not then seek to construct any differences.

respice, adspice, prospice ...

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

I think in the end ALL people know that voting is a precious civil right.

Acknowledging the sacrifice so many have made, requires that we then fight for every single voters rights.

And defeat all efforts to take anyones away.

We need those voters for protests that will be needed after the election

Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus vntosissimis exponebantur ad necem

Don't be offended supposed to be funny. But I don't know latin so it could be anything.

[-] 1 points by Narley (284) 6 months ago

Not being sarcastic. I’ve voted in every national, state and local election for forty-five years. It hasn’t made a difference, not even a little bit. I will continue to vote, but I’m not naive enough to believe we can vote our way out of this mess. In politics everyone is trying to sell you something. The one that does the best sales job wins. It’s smoke and mirrors. Big business and the lobbyists chose our politicians, and pretty much control them. I don’t know the solution. OWS says we have the answer, The tea Party says we have the answers, the libertarians say they have the answer. But the masses aren’t listening, and probably never will.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 months ago

That said - opting out is NOT an option - getting the proper individuals to run and getting them support "is" a never ending ( and seldom carried out ) necessity.

There will always be a government - who makes up that government and who gets and stays involved will always matter.

The population only has itself to blame for how crappy things are - due to apathy - non-involvement.

[-] 1 points by Narley (284) 6 months ago

You are right. I’m not really as cynical as I sounded in my original post. As I said before, I will continue to vote. And I whole heartedly agree we get the government we deserve due to apathy.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 2 months ago

"It is time for the Republican Party to look into the mirror, examine its soul, consider its commitment to the principles of our democracy, and stop all these voter suppression tactics that put politics above policy … partisanship above principle."

http://mtstandard.com/news/democracy-a-casualty-of-voter-suppression-politics/article_862c7076-2759-11e4-b16d-0019bb2963f4.html

Repubs can learn from Africans.

http://saharareporters.com/2014/08/08/republicans-can-learn-lot-nigeria-voter-suppression-dr-wumi-akintide

Imagine that.

[-] -2 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Voting is required but not the end of our work.

taking our representatives back from the Oligarchs will take years.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-05-14/voter-id-still-means-voter-suppression

fighting voter suppression is critical if we hope to succeed against the oligarchs.

But there is much more work required beyond voting.

[-] -3 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

'Moral Mondays' v Vote suppression

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Michigan-Nation-Must-Look-by-Robert-Weiner-Conyers-John_Labor-Rights_Medicaid_Medicaid-Expansion-140711-211.html

Grassroots, likeminded, progressive activism that should be emulated everywhere.

[+] -5 points by 99nproud (2697) 2 weeks ago

Repub rights violations upheld!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/09/1335373/-Supreme-Court-allows-North-Carolina-voting-restrictions-to-go-into-effect?detail=email

"Groups challenging the law urged the justices to let the appeals court’s ruling stand. The state law, they said, had “surgically eliminated the precise forms of registration and voting that had enabled significant expansion of African-Americans’ civic participation in North Carolina over the previous decade.”

Obviously racist Repub pols assaulting voting rights.

Retire ALL vote suppressing pols

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

Repubs attacking our rights!!

"It turns out that AFP has sent hundreds of thousands of these error-ridden, confusing voter registration forms in North Carolina, and both local elections offices and the state board of elections have been swamped with phone calls from confused voters. The forms had numerous bits of misinformation, from filing deadlines to where to send the completed forms to who to contact for more information. The scope of this misinformation is massive, considering it's gone to hundreds of thousands of voters, and has resulted in an investigation by the state, after the state Democratic Party filed an official complaint. Deliberately misinforming voters is a felony."

http://www.dailykos.com/?detail=action#

Kochheads cheating 'cause they can't win fairly on the issues.

"Infuriating"

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 month ago

" Lawson says that, as of now, no one is accusing the Kochs of deliberately misinforming voters on registration information to suppress the vote, which is a felony. Yeah, sure they're not disseminating incorrect information on purpose. It's not like they have unlimited resources to use to research how voter registration works in North Carolina and to inform voters. Which they didn't do, also according to Lawson. The Board works with political groups to avoid this kind of thing. AFP didn't contact them. "

Kochs try to register a cat to vote in North Carolina

by Joan McCarterFollow

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

"These Republican, ALEC, Americans for Prosperity, and Koch brother attacks on America’s democracy are not solely targeting African Americans; they are targeting working-class Americans who are working longer hours to survive and have issues making it to the polls on Election Day. Regardless if it is eliminating early voting, sending out phony polling place and voter registration information, or threatening armed intimidation of voters, Republicans are attacking America’s fragile democracy."

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/09/29/republican-midterm-tactic-destroying-democracy.html

It's neverending.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 month ago

ALEC, Americans for Prosperity, and Koch brother attacks on America’s democracy are not solely targeting African Americans; they are targeting working-class Americans who are working longer hours to survive

{ targeting working-class Americans } And Heritage and CATO and and and and and and and and and

Absolutely - it is most notable/obvious/apparent/blatant/open in red-states - but - is also being pushed in ALL States - It is just being pushed more on the down-low ( in tactics/approach ) in States with lesser concentrations ( less obvious/pronounced ) of the struggling poor - lower class - middle class.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

Agreed. Everywhere! And wherever these forces are active, a counterforce must rise to the challenge.

Occupy, absolutely, & all like minded groups/individuals, etc.

Here's an Ohio Upd.:

"a conservative supreme cutting early voting rights"

http://newsone.com/3057747/voter-suppression-update/

Ohio needs to grow their movement baby!

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 month ago

On Thousands of diverse groups and Hundreds of Thousands of Individuals coming together in active support for a better world for ALL ->

https://occupywallst.org/forum/sunday-september-21st-nyc-the-peoples-climate-marc/#comment-1048926

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 month ago

HK - yet another face of the economic tyranny of the selfists.

Stand strong people of HK and the rest of the world as well.

[-] 2 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

And another illustration of people power in action.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 month ago

And the violent actions of TPTB through their surrogates - the police as well as military in their attempts to quash legitimate protest.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

I love these HK Occupiers.

"Resign! Or we will occupy buildings"

http://mashable.com/2014/10/01/scholarism-occupy-buildings-hong-kong/

Damn, Brave, with audacity, & authority.

Solidarity & good thoughts for 'Occupy Central' in HK.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 4 weeks ago

The HK protestors = China's Best and Brightest

China's Best and Brightest = Fully educated to compete in the world market place

China's Best and Brightest = Put in a quarantined ( from the rest of China ) environment to take full advantage of capitalism for China's PTB to reap/siphon-off the profits.

China's Best and Brightest = are tired of being used.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 weeks ago

From U.C. to HK. 50 years of free speech movement.

http://www.berkeleyside.com/2014/10/02/photos-rally-on-uc-berkeley-campus-marks-50th-anniversary-of-the-free-speech-movement-student-protests/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/china-warns-hong-kong-protesters-of-unimaginable-consequences/2014/10/02/245eb391-e506-4c24-9cdc-f1c62528e6fb_story.html

"While Hong Kong’s chief, Lueng Chin-yin, dismissed the calls from the street that he step down by midnight, he offered one concession by assigning his second in command official to seek talks with demonstrators."

Stay strong HK

[+] -5 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 weeks ago

Retire repubs attacking voting rights!!

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/10/09/354995983/supreme-court-halts-wisconsin-voter-id-law-texas-law-on-hold-too

Courts block republican efforts to suppress minority, young peoples vote.

All (peaceful)ways, Always.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

Mandatory voting is the answer!

Wisconsin voter suppression:

http://truth-out.org/news/item/26401-tens-of-thousands-of-wi-students-face-new-voting-hurdles

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Thom Hartman on the unconstitutional, desperate attempt at voter suppression :

"And finally... While Red states are working hard to disenfranchise voters, one state is trying to get more people to the polls. Last week, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn announced his support for a same-day registration bill, after that legislation cleared both state houses. This new law will allow voters to register or update their information on the same day they cast a ballot, and similar laws have boosted turnout by as much as 14 percent in an election. Same-day registration actually benefits the very groups that other states are trying to keep from voting. Minorities, low-income Americans, and young voters all participate at higher numbers in states where they can register and vote on the same day. Some states are working hard to keep voter turnout as low as possible, because Republicans know their leverage in election goes up as the voting population goes down. Thankfully, lawmakers in Illinois prefer that everyone who wants to vote has the best chance to participate in our democracy. Hopefully more states will follow their lead.

And that's the way it is - for the week of June 9, 2014 – I'm Thom Hartmann – on the Economic and Labor News"

From your link Shadzy:

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/24267-on-the-news-with-thom-hartmann-president-obama-announces-an-order-to-help-americans-pay-student-loans-and-more

Love me some Thom Hartman.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 4 months ago

Re. Thom Hartmann ; good quote and excerpt. In compliment :

amor vincit omnia ...

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 4 months ago

''There is no better proof in 2014 of how invaluable the right to vote is than the amount of money currently being spent on efforts to take it away.

''From voter ID laws, to the curtailing of early voting, to dark money groups disseminating misinformation, around the country, a staggering amount of wealth and influence is quietly being funneled into campaigns to keep people from exercising their Constitutional right to vote.

''There is nothing new about this. In many ways, voter suppression is a tactic nearly as old as our republic itself; an enduring legacy of the many forms of oppression that are inextricable from the story of our founding. Contemporary schemes to disenfranchise American voters may be the most sophisticated, covert, and cynically exploitative in political memory. But they are, in many ways, more of the same -- just the most recent additions to America’s ugly and often brutal history of voter suppression.''

Excerpted from your interesting link & in compliment :

e tenebris, lux ?

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

VOTE!! defeat vote suppressing politicians.

Nevada republicans FAIL!!!

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/06/18/3450206/nevada-voter-suppression-initiative-crashes-and-burns/

Is this the Paul Weyrich you posted?

http://gawker.com/paul-weyrich-tried-to-found-the-political-religious-rig-1583242586

Peace!

Protest, VOTE!! Repeat!

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 4 months ago

Yep, THAT Paul Weyrich !!! Therefore, also perhaps see ...

''Voter ID’s supporters typically justify such laws by claiming they are necessary to prevent people from showing up at the polls pretending to be someone else. This form of voter fraud, however, is practically non-existent. Indeed, a statewide investigation by Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz (R) — a leading supporter of voter ID — uncovered exactly zero cases of voter impersonation fraud in that state. Studies of voter fraud in other states reached similar results.'' - from your 'thinkprogress.org' link.

Finally, I very strongly recommend : ''American Democracy - "Murder, Spies And Voting Lies" :

fallaces sunt rerum species ...

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Weyrich embodies, illustrates confirms the reasons why we must institute mandatory/compulsory voting.

Offensive and ought to be required viewing/reading.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 4 months ago

From Tom Hartmann and re. ''Offensive and ought to be required viewing/reading'', see :

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Lawsuit simply 'red meat' for caucus extremists.

Generally (regardless of current partisan realities) I support the necessary effort to check executive branch power.

Politically I encourage lawsuit/impeachment as it will only hurt oligarchs interests and bolster interests of the 99%.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/06/26/morning-plum-john-boehner-scratches-gop-bases-impeachment-itch/

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/boehner-lawsuit-double-edged-sword-article-1.1849571

This is gonna be fun.

[-] 5 points by shadz66 (19985) 3 months ago

Uh oh !!! You got me !! Didn't open your links ... so it's up to you if you're going to do the same to this !

But it is kinda interesting. Have ''fun'' & Happy 4th July @ u & yours & All OWSers. Solidarity to you all.

pax ...

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

Great link. Here's another topic related bit.

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/01/christian_right_secession_fantasy_spooky_neo_confederate_talk_grows_louder_at_the_fringes/

Wow. Give 'em enough rope!

Thnks for the holiday wishes. Hope your weekend was filled with enjoyment & agitation

Peace. (Redcoat!)

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 3 months ago

Hmmm .. ''enjoyment & agitation'' !!! I like that !! A lot ! From your very interesting link, I quote :

''No one envisioned the Bundy Ranch standoff before it occurred. No one envisioned the Oklahoma City bombing in advance, either. But there have been people warning us that these sorts of things can happen. And now we’re being warned that, with the addition of religion to the mix, something far more toxic could well lie ahead. Remember, these are people who believe they’re fulfilling God’s plan. When things don’t go their way, it’s hard to grasp the depth of their disappointment — and anger. Until it isn’t. And then, it’s too late.''

Interesting ME / ''IS'' parallels, imo !!! The same parallels can also be found in The Zionist-Apartheid Enitity too !! Anyone else tired of all this Abrahamic Mumbo Jumbo ?! How can anyone claim unique access to eternal & universal spiritual truths, just due to the accident of birth, conversion or education ?

ad iudicium ...

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

It is an old (ancient) model for controlling/inciting people & illustrates how so many people suffer from low information, & misdirected anger.

Ludicrous

[-] -2 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

Great articles as always, but to get back on topic:

http://www.camelcitydispatch.com/voter-suppression-hearings-continue-in-winston-salem-8954/

Just keepin us honest.

(responding here cause ran out of replies)

[-] -1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 6 months ago

Sure. Later.

With the WORST VOTER TURNOUT in the world... One step at a time.

GET OUT THE EXTRA VOTE, because we let the Cons redistrict by not showing up in census year 2010!!

Then we can build the guillotines.

[-] -2 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 months ago

Never mind the whole video - did you just watch those 5 minutes - from minute 23 ?! You are a bit of a political parDy strategist here, right ?!! So rather than just dismissing my comment point blank please watch Thom Hartmann's extremely interesting ''Daily Take'' segment & btw, I am not sure how you are going appeal to the 50% who don't vote my going further to the right !!!

But TH thinks the exact opposite is possible so please do us both a favour & watch. You never know, maybe we can either agree or even discuss it without being abusive lol.

fiat lux ...

[-] -1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

VOTE now! That's all that matters!

Where were/are your alternatives before and after elections!??

The timing is so very funny.

[-] 0 points by wickerman (62) 5 months ago

Here's the timing issue. I have been voting, and listening to politicians for many years now. I can't afford groceries now, and I work two jobs with the wife working one. We are trying to get the farm off the ground, and just found out that not only is insurance going to cost nearly $1000.00 but my wonderful government mandated inspection could cost as much as $2000.00. I am stretched so thin I can't stretch any more. What I've been doing isn't working. It's time to stand up.

[-] -3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Get out the Vote!

RepubliCons (cons) have infiltrated and sabotaged all levels of government, neighborhood, city, county, state and federal. Whatever you think is Dem doing is most probably Conned.

WTFU, Register and get out the Vote!

[-] 1 points by wickerman (62) 5 months ago

Cause it's worked so well in the past? Voting is important, but when you are given a choice between an apple and an orange, which do you choose? As far as the 1% are concerned it doesn't matter because they own them both.

[-] -3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

No, we have the lowest Voter (and highest Big $$) turnout, and almost the worst propaganda, in the world. So, idiot, our survival as a people is pure luck and diminishing due entirely to OUR ABJECT NEGLIGENCE!!!!!

[-] -2 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Thom Hartmann seems to be a bit of a stranger to you it seems !!! So again :

This was an excellent show but minutes 23-28 are a bit of a brain-jolter ! Go on, try to give it a go now !!

The US 99% need to believe that there's hope and that Turkeys need not keep voting for Thanksgiving !!!

fiat lux ...

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Get people Registered and Voting in November!

Shada66 your election time protests have become obviously subversive, you hate democracy, just say it! Before or after elections you do/say nothing to promote third parties. You just advocate Voting futility come election season. You're simply a fraud and saboteur, come clean! Admit it!

Get people Registered and Voting in November!

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

So wtf does it say at the top of this thread ?! Your crass and baseless accusations emanate from a uni-dimensional, binary-obsessed, graceless, hyterical damaged brain !! You're another multiple-monikered DNC nutter 'Class Enemy' & de facto 1%-enabler and so much for your demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy !!!

You are unable to see that there are several roads to the same destination or to build bridges & I've had your number for a long time now .. 'WendySquid / JiffySmith' !!! Take a lesson now from your fellow DNC co-opters and stooges on this OWS forum .. come looking for me and I'll guarantee you'll find me and if you do want to trade accusations & analysis, then gird your loins & prep to take the hits !! This is OWS mthrfkr, where we're expected to think 'the unthinkable for The Duopoly-Deluded' .. so do what you have to do but be mindful of the consequences of your abusive, baseless, cranky & deluded personal insults !

''The US 99% need to believe that there's hope and that Turkeys need not keep voting for Thanksgiving !''

e tenebris, lux ...

[+] -5 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

It SAYS beware of False Flag (fellow travelers) like YOU: Shadz66!

You treacherous witch!

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 5 months ago

Another postcard from the edge of sanity !!! Thanx !! Readers will be able to follow the narrative of this thread & note what was said & by who - even IF you can't ! In the meantime, perhaps try to consider :

Demand ''the release of the NATO 3 and Cecily McMillan and all others imprisoned in the United States as the result of political frame-ups. The defense of democratic rights and the abolition of police-state measures must be linked to the independent mobilization of the working class in opposition to the political representatives of the corporate and financial aristocracy and the capitalist system they defend.'' All this - like the persecution of 'Occupy' - on your hallowed Dem POTUS' watch btw.

fiat lux et fiat justitia ...

[+] -5 points by wickerman (62) 5 months ago

WSmith, I think I'll forgive you, not that I gave it much concern anyway. I understand now where you seem to be coming from. I hadn't thought of the upcoming elections, and how that would explain people being skeptical of new comenters. I don't see why my position on any issue other than the one we are discussing makes any difference at all though. Like I've said before I am not right, or left, some of both. It seems to matter to you though. I don't know if we'd get along at all if we met in person, but I don't see how that matters if we can come together to address issues that we do agree on.

[-] -1 points by wickerman (62) 5 months ago

I'm new here, and may have an outside perspective. Further to the left further to the right, that is the exact opposite of what would appeal to people like myself. This isn't about blanket statements like left or right. I hold some views that would be called left, and some that would be called right, can we not take it on an issue by issue basis? If we can't agree on one issue lets leave it alone. Lets concentrate on the things that we all want to change.

[-] 4 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 months ago

Like get the money out?

http://www.occupy.com/article/vermont-calls-constitutional-convention-get-money-out-politics

I agree, and this is a step in the correct direction..

[-] -3 points by wickerman (62) 5 months ago

That would be one issue. It may be the root of several others.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 months ago

Without a single doubt, it is.

Perhaps it is good that the After Party was launched in detroit, just kin time for Netroots Nation.

http://www.eclectablog.com/2014/05/netroots-nation-announces-its-panel-line-up-for-detroit-and-it-is-spectacular.html

I sure many of those issues will be discussed at length.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by amarante (8) 5 months ago

I notice your new here wickerman.....so tell me where 'ya frum. You ain't from ParDisan-ville ...are ya?... and looking to join your depraved co-opting amigos & become yet another one of their Democrap, Neocon Sock Puppet....well are 'ya wickerman?

This is how you get banned Renny...and you don't even have to do any cussing.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

cussing makes it harder to promote friends

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Fuck u!

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

lol

[-] -1 points by wickerman (62) 5 months ago

I don't consider myself partisan. I think there are issues that we would disagree on, sorta the nature of the world isn't it? I do think that if we can't come together on somethings that we are all going to lose big time. I think of myself as an average working class American, my views don't align fully with the left or the right, some of both really. Most of the people I talk to on a daily basis fall sorta where I do. I am not sure if your comment is meant to be a provocation or not, if it is I'm not biting. All that I know, is that I am feed up with the way things are going in this country. Fighting among ourselves isn't going to fix it.

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

When "we" come together on things there are always going to be others who come together on other things or just plain opposing things. For, against or in-between the myriad of issues (war, poverty, gun slaughter, laws, regulations, equality, humanity, theocracy, public health care, etc). That makes us all "Partisans." Where do you fall, besides expressing truth??

[-] -1 points by wickerman (62) 5 months ago

I'm working class. Where I fall depends on the issue, and the proposed solution. I have voted Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, and Green party. I don't think that any of them truly represent the working class though.

[-] -2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

The Democratic Party represents the working class, but the majority of the working class does not support the Democratic Party or bother to Vote. Kind of a fucked up situation. A party that supports you, but you don't support it.

Change the fucked up situation: VOTE!!!

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Go fuck your pompous bogus self!!

[-] -1 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

wow again! can this possibly be your idea of how to build a movement or would you be one of those who are trying to destroy it? not only are you aggressively ignorant you are also really obnoxious - that is a bad combination! now respond to my other comment and say your sorry - say that you realize it is time to educate yourself. come on now - you can do it - or you can go the dog route and make some stupid obscene comment

[-] -2 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

How outrageous is this?

http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/05/05/67572.htm

http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2014/05/06/national-commentator-nc-voter-suppression-a-more-important-outrage-than-sterling-or-bundy/

We cannot let up a moment against the cancer of racism crippling our culture and people.

Identify, & vote out all racist representatives!!.

[-] -3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Just get everyone you know to Vote in November, idiot!!

[-] 3 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

And who should we vote FOR. Those liberal dems I imagine - like war hawk john Kerry. Holding the hand of poor embattled Israel and shaking his fist at the evil putin

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Anti-1% laws, initiatives, propositions, and officials. Isn't that obvious!!!?

The 1% is waging Class War against the 99%, WTFU, we're LOSING!!

2010 Never EVER Again!!

[-] 2 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

not too many to vote for are there? I doubt there will be many anti 1% propositions on the nj ballot and for sure not many anti 1% pols in nj to vote for in 2014 - and how about 2016 ms Clinton the war horse???

[-] 2 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

NJ progressives for the 99%!!

http://articles.philly.com/2014-05-18/news/49914582_1_christie-spokesman-kevin-roberts-sweeney-governor

"Raise taxes on the millionaires" "Progressive, caring about people"

And other assorted anti 1% Jersey bits.:

http://www.theday.com/article/20140519/NWS13/305199949/1070/FRONTPAGE

http://www.northjersey.com/news/how-much-credit-should-the-occupy-movement-get-1.1005834

In my opinion anti 1% momentum is growing everywhere. New Jersey included.

"You been ta Joizey? I been ta Joizey"

[-] 1 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

we agree - anti 1% is growing but has been around for a long time but no way to express itself (not much anyway) until occupy. not sure voting for a dem for governor will be much help but we will see - too many talk a good game but do not deliver. Clinton and Obama to name just two. all pols claim to support "the people" - very few say I am for rich people - we need to watch what they do not what they say.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Changing the national (planetary) dialogue is the 1st step in achieving the successes that will benefit the 99%.

Some pols talk the talk. Those that do not (against min wage, taxhikes on 1%, climate chg deniers) must be defeated. Those pols that do talk the talk must be supported and their feet then held to the fire.

So we must of course watch (listen) to what pols say (we can tell them what they gotta say too y'know), but most importantly we must pressure all pols to support the policies that will benefit the 99%.

protest, vote, and then protest again.

So the lip service

[-] 3 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

so can you put up some evidence for your opinion. this is an incorrect reading of history - Finally, I assure you Protest, & Voting is the only thing that has ever succeeded in achieving progress. - can you tell us about voting and real change - sure fdr did much good but only because he was afraid that the country would go commie. lbj got civil rights passed but only after many deaths and uprising. voting for lbj did not do it - the organizing and disruption did. emma goldman was right about voting - look it up - kid. if by protest you mean the organizing of the populists or the sit down strikes or freedom rides then you are half right. seems a funny word to use for a sit down strike - protest. so show us where voting changed something and yes your age matters - it would explain much about how you think - also moral Mondays is good

[-] 2 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Didn't you just make my argument for me. All protests have required an elected leader who listens or is pushed.

Only way it's ever gone. Civil rights laws would have never happened if we elected Goldwater.

Right?

[-] 1 points by noendnsite (4) from Queens, NY 5 months ago

Replying here. So let's see,,,It's "Protest"...then Vote all the *Democraps & Repelicans out!! Then "Protest again...right??

[-] 4 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Vote how you like. Hopefully based on the issues.

But never stop protesting to force whoever is in office to pass the policies that benefit the 99%.

[-] 1 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

I have a question for you - how old are you? and your line of -protest, vote, and then protest again - where has it gotten us - we have been going backwards since 1964 - on tax policy and economic issues life was better for most back then. they do not hear your protests - it is mostly a waste of time since you have no alternative - you elected your man in 2008 - change you can believe in - and what did you get. did he walk the picket line in Madison - sure taxes on the top up by 3%?? a health care policy written by the corporations (their stocks went up right? wonder why) and still shipping jobs overseas- take a look at the tpp - the secret tpp! look at that one and tell me how much better the dems are for us. i have no more time for you - start a real discussion and i will engage but this is boring

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Occupy supports Moral Mondays

Who I elected in 2008 is irrelevant, my voting in the past or future is not your business. My age and any personal info is just a distraction.

Finally, I assure you Protest, & Voting is the only thing that has ever succeeded in achieving progress.

Right?

in regards to jobs see this data:

https://occupywallst.org/forum/good-jobs-how-do-we-get-them-back-who-is-standing-/

Regardless of all these desperate attempts to avoid the substance of this thread, let me give you a little pertinent info.:

http://www.southernstudies.org/2014/05/as-moral-mondays-resume-leaders-seek-to-block-nc-v.html

Occupy supports moral Mondays

http://occupywallstreet.net/story/liberal-protest-would-shock-right-moral-monday

Peace

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

After this much electorate neglect and subsequent 1% exploitation and entrenchment, we're stuck with compromises and lesser evils. But all cognizant decisions and choices are. Perfection doesn't exist and the differences between Dems and Cons are gigantic!

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

we're stuck with compromises and lesser evils.

that is choice presented by both parties and the media

[-] -2 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

thank you for your opinion - I do not see it that way

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Which way?

The Awful damage caused by electorate neglect? (which enabled the 1% exploitation & entrenchment of the 1%)

OR

The Gigantic differences between Cons and Dems? (Cons jeopardize/rob/murder the country and citizens for partisan gain ~ Dems don't)

[-] 3 points by flip (7174) 5 months ago

gigantic differences - plenty of info on tpp and drones and banks and on and on where the dems line up with the gop

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

yet i keep posting

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

And the 1%-GOP and their MSM (with exaggeration, omission and lies) make sure you confuse the two parties as the same so you will be duped into apathy and disengagement.

[-] 3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 4 months ago

Listen to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren: Register and Vote and get everyone else to do the same!!!

Americans Not Voting is what the 1% pays big CU bucks to achieve!!!

[-] 2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 2 months ago

And don't be fooled by these Both-Same idiots.

If they (Dems & Cons) were the same, the Kochs & 1% wouldn't spend so much electing Cons, the 1%-GOP would not have installed a 1%-SCOTUS, who wouldn't have ruled into law Citizens United and repealed key portions of the Civil Rights Act.

The both-samers would have you believe the corporate influence is equal, just like union influence is equal.

Don't be played AGAIN!

2010 Never EVER Again!!

Get 'em registered and get out the Vote, this NOVEMBER, 2014!

[-] 2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 4 months ago

One thing you won't see: What RepubliCons Have in Their PLATFORM!

FASCISM!!

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 3 hours ago

Don't be suppressed, get out the VOTE!!!

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

Jartocracy? fantasy

voter suppression-important!!

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 1 month ago

Climate denying pols behind voter suppression.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=10814

Fight them by joining the Peoples Climate March on 9/21

http://peoplesclimate.org/march/

Be counted

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6441) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

If you don't vote it don't matter, and neither do you!

[-] 2 points by flip (7174) 2 months ago

that is not a very ows sentiment - you are entitled to your opinion but try to remember where you are. this is not the dnc cheer leading site you are usually on

[-] -1 points by factsrfun (6441) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

oh my lord!! is it YOU the keeper of the true path? could it be?

[-] 4 points by flip (7174) 1 month ago

just stating the obvious - this site is brought to you by various radicals

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6441) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

And here I thought the people at OWS wanted to matter, do you think they prefer to just take what they get, like a lot of other non-voters or "hobby" voters? Really? I didn't' think that was the case.

[-] 2 points by flip (7174) 1 month ago

we have had this (boring) discussion before - read emma goldman - carefully and let me know if you learn anything. you think voting is the answer - you think you can see the future - you think you know the TRUTH. i think you are wrong on all counts - can we leave it there?

[-] 1 points by MattHolck0 (1733) 1 month ago

voting is the answer

but people must represent their votes with their name

else how would they know they are counted

[-] 0 points by flip (7174) 1 month ago

well we need someone to vote FOR

[-] 1 points by MattHolck0 (1733) 1 month ago

we can just vote on issues

[-] 0 points by flip (7174) 1 month ago

really? how?

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6441) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

I know you get bored every time the subject of real, actual change comes up, but then what can you expect from people that look at Al Gore and W Bush and can find NO DIFFERENCE between the two, I mean that's one dumb, boring person there.

[-] 3 points by flip (7174) 1 month ago

before i respond to you i must say that i notice you could not respond to my last question - remember?? when you claimed that just because you attack one side it does not mean that you support the other side! remember that comment by you - do you? my question remains unanswered - it was does that apply to me also??? couldn't answer that could you? shows a complete lack of integrity - that has no business here at ows. so i think you should own up to your mistakes and stay or go away! now to your most recent comment - you are boring because no matter what i write you have only one answer - Al Gore and W Bush and can find NO DIFFERENCE between the two, - even though i have told you too many times what i think. i assume you are not dumb but for sure you are boring.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6441) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

oh I just got around to it you are so needy flip, but yes my efforts help elect the Dems but i don't defend their actions just as your actions help elect the GOP even though you don't defend them, I acknowledge that telling the truth means less GOP and more Dems and I am prepared to discuss one against the other but to compare one and only one to some ideal fiction of your mind is useless bullshit.

So yes I charge you for helping to elect the GOP and hold you accountable for what they do.

[-] 3 points by flip (7174) 1 month ago

now i call bullshit - your first answer was good - i am needy? bullshit - 5 days and you have been all over the site in that time - you would have never answered unless i had called you on it - dance all you like everyone here knows who you are. as far as telling the truth electing dems - huh? are you implying that my facts are in doubt. come on - you were close to becoming are straight shooter - now back to bullshitter

[-] -2 points by factsrfun (6441) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

old shit falls to the bottom you didn't know that? yes you are needy.

now that we have established that you indeed help elect the GOP would you care to explain why?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 4 months ago

Related : Paste this on high end cars trucks and suv's:

Our "Stop Corporate Welfare" sticker is a big hit -- and we owe it all to over 16,000 of our members who voted on our survey to help pick their favorite stickers.

1,135 bold progressives from all 50 states and DC have claimed a copy of this progressive bumper sticker just in the last week.

Chip in $3, and we'll send it to you for free.

You'll definitely want to be the first in your neighborhood with it!

Thanks for being a bold progressive.

-- Kenton Ngo, PCCC Organizer Want to support our work? Ed Schultz called us "The top progressive group in the country"! And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in $3 here.

Paid for by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee PAC (www.BoldProgressives.org) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Contributions to the PCCC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.


One problem with this e-mail =

chip in three bucks and we will send it free.

ummm that's not really free.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2736) 4 months ago

If I went by what they say I'm a liberal...the problem is its just a wrestling match ever watch WWF? They work for the same people and they are all putting on a show..hoping we don't notice the price of the beer and popcorn. I watched Obama tell a graduating class today that they won't just be competing with each other they will be competing with the world...he failed to mention they will be competing with slave labor and despite any education if there are no jobs they won't be competing at all...partnering with Communistic regimes is a good thing how? It's only good if you're on the profit end of it...namely the one percent , so go out get an education from any bank you can so you can start your service sector career 30 k in the hole. Debt is good for business owners it makes you more indentured and gives them more control.

[-] 2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 3 months ago

Yes, whatever.

Now get everyone you know, or come in contact with, registered, out and Voting!!!

2010, Never EVER Again!!

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

[-] -2 points by WSmith (4706) from Cornelius, OR 15 hours ago

So, Leo, on one side of your naive or traitorous mouth (I can't tell which) you advocate the pursuit of democracy! And on the other side you denounce the democratic process of electoral participation, Voting!

You're either completely mindfucked or completely evil. WRONG either way!

Pursue democracy people, VOTE!

Cheney-W repealed Wall Street regulatory laws and got us into bogus wars before they were in office one year. 1%-Cons and Teabaggers sabotaged congress and Obama and gerrymandered voting districts as soon as they were sworn-in after 20+ million Voters didn't Vote in 2010!!

The pursuit of democracy and Voting make a big difference, a HUGE DIFFERENCE! That's why the 1%-Cons pushed through Citizens United, so they could spend unlimited and undisclosed Billion$ to propagandize you to either Vote for their RepubliCon candidate or issue directly, or indirectly by Not Voting!

2010 Never EVER Again!! Unite, Vote and Win!!

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink


So, WSmith, on one side of your traitorous mouth you advocate the support for corporate backed unaccountable representatives! And on the other side you denounce the pursuit of democracy that involves the actual participation of people Voting on the issues themselves!

You're either completely mindfucked or completely evil. WRONG either way!

Pursue democracy people, ORGANIZE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSES! http://occupywallst.org/forum/omni-organizing-municipal-national-initiatives/

The elected duopoly mayor and city council members of Seattle have colluded with big business to make the passing of a $15 minimum wage meaningless. Non-duopoly council member Kshama Sawant stands alone in resorting to democracy for the People to overcome yet another duopoly betrayal.

All municipalities throughout the nation can do what is now going to be done in Seattle. All people throughout the nation can sign petitions to actually participate in voting on $15 Now in their own municipalities without duopoly obstruction.

WSmith,

You KNOW that voting for unaccountable corporate backed candidates doesn't serve the interests of the People.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/#comment-947155

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

You KNOW the duopoly problem is nothing new and that the pursuit of democracy has been the only solution for over a hundred years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_direct_democracy_in_the_United_States#Progressive_Era

https://archive.org/stream/initiativerefere00nati#page/n0/mode/2up

So you KNOW that claiming to pursue democracy by advocating voting for corporate backed unaccountable candidates is a LIE.

Democracy is the Rule of the People, not the Rule of the Unaccountable Corporate Representatives. Your lying about pursuing democracy is so obvious that it's obvious that there's no real intention to deceive in telling such lies. Your only intention on the forum of a movement that advocates direct action including direct democracy and does not advocate duopoly support is obviously as a disruption. A means of attack from a political party that seeks no challenge or exposure from individuals throughout the country who can't be fooled or subdued into accepting the traditional party line.

And here's the PROOF.

Identify the candidates you advocate voting for who adhere to the affirmations presented in FreeDA http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/

Either you can and there are candidates throughout the country worth voting for who won't submit to representing corporate interests or you can't and you're obviously just another supporter of the corporate run status quo.

[-] 3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 4 months ago

At some point you're going to have to come up with your own material, for your Anti-Voting Campaign!

Both-Same and Unicorns are bankrupt propositions, we know.

But don't lead others down the path of 2000, 2004 & 2010 when People Voted deliberately and inadvertently (but abjectly erroneously) against their own best interests. Because we are all living through the pain and retrogression of those mistakes to this day.

We do have representative democracy, because our founding fathers knew we were a busy people, but they did not foresee brainwashed and wage-slaved people. People can't even manage to vote once every two years. Voting on daily legislation is fucking ridiculous! It's a bogus scam to fool people to not VOTE now! Voting is ALWAYS our only hope against Citizen United campaign funds!!

Don't listen to this idiot's double-speak nonsense! He's wants the 1% to dominate us, by you not Voting!

Listen to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren: Register and Vote and get everybody to do the same. 1%-Cons, ALEC, Koch Bros and the MSM they own are all wrong: Voting is a good thing, it's what we have too little of!

Register and Vote, get everyone to do the same!!

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

Since no one ever mentioned anything about people voting on daily legislation, the only scam is the fucking ridiculous attempt to get people to rely upon the corporate backed representatives you advocate rather than uniting in overcoming them through ballot initiatives and affidavits. The falsity of your un-researched fantasies about founding fathers are exposed by their own words.


"There are two views in which the word Inequality, as relating to the Citizens of a State, may be considered. Inequality, of Fortune, or of Rights, Privileges and Dignities. In the Case of Riches, the Inequality arises in the natural Course of Things; Nor is there an Instance of a State of any Consequence, subsisting without it. There were indeed several sharp Contests in the Roman Republic, with Respect to an equal distribution of Lands; but they were never of any Service, to the People, and were always attended, with the most unhappy Consequences. The Question appears therefore to be, in other Words, whether a pure democracy be the most favourable Government to the Liberties of a People."

"It is a very general political maxim, that Men can never possess a great degree of Power without abusing it. Hence, so few Instances of despotic Monarchs, who have not been the scourges of their People. In an aristocratic government, the Power being in a number of hands, this tyrannical disposition becomes more dangerous, and extends wider its baneful Influence. But of all Tyrannies, the most dreadful, is that of an whole People; and in a Government, where all men are equal, the People will infallibly become Tyrants. What Protection can any Laws afford a Citizen in a State where every individual, thinks he has a right of altering and annulling them at his Pleasure, and where nothing is wanting, but the capricious whim of a vile Rabble, to overturn all Laws and Government? If a Prince is oppressive, at least he has been taught in some measure, the Art of governing an Empire, and has commonly been educated, for it. The same may be said of an Aristocracy, they will at least endeavour to support the Dignity of a State, and will take proper Measures for the safety of the majority, of the People, though they may be unjust to individuals. But when the Passions of a People, conscious of their Liberty and strength are raised, they hurry them into the greatest extremities: an enraged multitude, will consult nothing, but their fury; and their Ignorance serves only to increase their Obstinacy, and their Inconsistency."

John Quincy Adams Friday September 1st. 1786.


"All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and well born, the other the mass of the people. The voice of the people has been said to be the voice of God; and however generally this maxim has been quoted and believed, it is not true in fact. The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in the government. They will check the unsteadiness of the second, and as they cannot receive any advantage by a change, they therefore will ever maintain good government. Can a democratic assembly, who annually revolve in the mass of the people, be supposed steadily to pursue the public good? Nothing but a permanent body can check the imprudence of democracy. Their turbulent and uncontrouling disposition requires checks."

Alexander Hamilton at the Constitutional Convention 18 June 1787.


"Those who contend for a simple democracy, or a pure republic, actuated by the sense of the majority, and operating within narrow limits, assume or suppose a case which is altogether fictitious. They found their reasoning on the idea, that the people composing the Society, enjoy not only an equality of political rights; but that they have all precisely the same interests, and the same feelings in every respect. Were this in reality the case, their reasoning would be conclusive. The interest of the majority would be that of the minority also; the decisions could only turn on mere opinion concerning the good of the whole, of which the major voice would be the safest criterion; and within a small sphere, this voice could be most easily collected, and the public affairs most accurately managed."

"We know however that no Society ever did or can consist of so homogeneous a mass of Citizens. In the savage State indeed, an approach is made towards it; but in that State little or no Government is necessary. In all civilized Societies, distinctions are various and unavoidable. A distinction of property results from that very protection which a free Government gives to unequal faculties of acquiring it. There will be rich and poor; creditors and debtors; a landed interest, a monied interest, a mercantile interest, a manufacturing interest. These classes may again be subdivided according to the different productions of different situations & soils, & according to different branches of commerce, and of manufactures. In addition to these natural distinctions, artificial ones will be founded, on accidental differences in political, religious or other opinions, or an attachment to the persons of leading individuals. However erroneous or ridiculous these grounds of dissention and faction, may appear to the enlightened Statesman, or the benevolent philosopher, the bulk of mankind who are neither Statesmen nor Philosophers, will continue to view them in a different light."

"Divide et impera, the reprobated axiom of tyranny, is under certain qualifications, the only policy, by which a republic can be administered on just principles."

A few selected thoughts of James Madison from a letter written to Thomas Jefferson dated October 24, 1787

[-] 4 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

"From this view of the subject, it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society, consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert results from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party, or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is, that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives, as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed, that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized, and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions."

"A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure, and the efficacy which it must derive from the union."

"The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic, are first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended."

"The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice, will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good, than if pronounced by the people themselves convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests of the people. The question resulting is, whether small or extensive republics are most favourable to the election of proper guardians of the public weal; and it is clearly decided in favour of the latter by two obvious considerations."

James Madison The Federalist Number 10, 22 November 1787


"The error which limits republican government to a narrow district, has been unfolded and refuted in preceding papers. I remark here only, that it seems to owe its rise and prevalence chiefly to the confounding of a republic with a democracy: And applying to the former reasonings drawn from the nature of the latter. The true distinction between these forms was also adverted to on a former occasion. It is, that in a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic they assemble and administer it by their representatives and agents. A democracy consequently must be confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a large region."

James Madison The Federalist Number 14, 30 November 1787


"In a democracy, where a multitude of people exercise in person the legislative functions, and are continually exposed by their incapacity for regular deliberation and concerted measures, to the ambitious intrigues of their executive magistrates, tyranny may well be apprehended on some favourable emergency, to start up in the same quarter. But in a representative republic, where the executive magistracy is carefully limited both in the extent and the duration of its power; and where the legislative power is exercised by an assembly, which is inspired by a supposed influence over the people with an intrepid confidence in its own strength; which is sufficiently numerous to feel all the passions which actuate a multitude; yet not so numerous as to be incapable of pursuing the objects of its passions, by means which reason prescribes; it is against the enterprising ambition of this department, that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions."

James Madison The Federalist Number 48, 1 February 1788


WSmith,

You KNOW that voting for unaccountable corporate backed candidates doesn't serve the interests of the People.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/#comment-947155

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

You KNOW what a democracy is.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-democracy/

You KNOW the duopoly problem is nothing new and that the pursuit of democracy has been the only solution for over a hundred years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_direct_democracy_in_the_United_States#Progressive_Era

https://archive.org/stream/initiativerefere00nati#page/n0/mode/2up

So you KNOW that claiming to pursue democracy by advocating voting for corporate backed unaccountable candidates is a LIE.

Democracy is the Rule of the People, not the Rule of the Unaccountable Corporate Representatives. Your lying about pursuing democracy is so obvious that it's obvious that there's no real intention to deceive in telling such lies. Your only intention on the forum of a movement that advocates direct action including direct democracy and does not advocate duopoly support is obviously as a disruption. A means of attack from a political party that seeks no challenge or exposure from individuals throughout the country who can't be fooled or subdued into accepting the traditional party line.

And here's the PROOF.

Identify the candidates you advocate voting for who adhere to the affirmations presented in FreeDA http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/

Either you can and there are candidates throughout the country worth voting for who won't submit to representing corporate interests or you can't and you're obviously just another supporter of the corporate run status quo.

[-] -3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 4 months ago

People, ignore the fatalist, Unicorn diatribe, JUST VOTE!!!

[-] -1 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

So, you see organizing democracy as being "fatalist, Unicorn diatribe". Not surprising as your call to ignore facts and just comply with the status quo goes hand in hand with advocating the election of corporaticians. How very...republican of you, in both the modern partisan and the Madisonian senses of the word.


WSmith,

You KNOW that voting for unaccountable corporate backed candidates doesn't serve the interests of the People.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/#comment-947155

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

You KNOW what a democracy is.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-democracy/

You KNOW the duopoly problem is nothing new and that the pursuit of democracy has been the only solution for over a hundred years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_direct_democracy_in_the_United_States#Progressive_Era

https://archive.org/stream/initiativerefere00nati#page/n0/mode/2up

So you KNOW that claiming to pursue democracy by advocating voting for corporate backed unaccountable candidates is a LIE.

Democracy is the Rule of the People, not the Rule of the Unaccountable Corporate Representatives. Your lying about pursuing democracy is so obvious that it's obvious that there's no real intention to deceive in telling such lies. Your only intention on the forum of a movement that advocates direct action including direct democracy and does not advocate duopoly support is obviously as a disruption. A means of attack from a political party that seeks no challenge or exposure from individuals throughout the country who can't be fooled or subdued into accepting the traditional party line.

And here's the PROOF.

Identify the candidates you advocate voting for who adhere to the affirmations presented in FreeDA http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/

Either you can and there are candidates throughout the country worth voting for who won't submit to representing corporate interests or you can't and you're obviously just another supporter of the corporate run status quo.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

People power/our pressure has pushed back on desperate, dishonest repub voter suppression.

http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/06/ohios-gop-sparked-a-grassroots-movement-to-pass-a-voter-bill-of-rights/372774/

encouraging

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 3 months ago

Direct democracy has already been working throughout the country for over a hundred years. Direct democracy working is why Washington and Colorado have legalized marijuana. All that is needed is for the People to be nationally organized to vote on the same important issues at the same time at the municipal level to create unofficial national laws that can then be federally supported by non-corporate candidates elected from among the People who voted for such laws.

Denying people the right to vote by seeking to make voting mandatory and therefore an act of compelled speech violates the 1st Amendment's protection of the freedom of speech since the freedom to speak necessarily includes the freedom not to speak.

It is simply an ongoing FACT proven by the reality of compulsory voting in Australia that 100% or near 100% voter turnout doesn't affect anything. Two major parties dominate the politics of Australia;

the social democratic Australian Labor Party which received 33.8% of the votes in 2013 resulting in 55 seats in the House of Representatives and 25 seats in the Senate

and the center-right Coalition Parties which received 45% of the votes resulting in 90 seats in the House of Representatives and 33 seats in the Senate.

Thus the ongoing observable FACT is that the left/right dichotomy under mandatory voting in Australia is no different than the left/right dichotomy in the United States with its low voter turnout and 1st Amendment protection of freedom of speech. Increasing the volume of voters doesn't change the ever present reality of roughly balanced opposing perspectives and the partisan voting results.

Removing all obstacles from voting rather than seeking to remove the very aspect of freedom itself from voting is what is conducive for liberty.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

Referendums are a great start to achieve real direct democracy, not really there yet.

Years of hard work ahead.

One example of mandatory voting (Aus) isn't enough evidence to discard the necessary goal of increasing voter turnout.

I know we MUST increase voter turnout to have an energetic true representative govt.

"denying people the right to vote by seeking to make voting mandatory....."???

That's a silly stretch. "remove the very aspect of freedom itself from voting...."?

Freedom... from voting??? WHAAAAT?! LMFAO!!! You can't be serious.

We disagree that's all. I support mandatory voting. You interpret that as a violation of free speech and do not support it.

most people do not support mandatory voting. I haven't seen a good reason yet.

LOL

What a joke

[-] 3 points by LeoYo (5909) 3 months ago

"Referendums are a great start to achieve real direct democracy, not really there yet."

"Years of hard work ahead."


Simply organizing municipal initiatives nationwide and supporting the non-corporate candidates who will champion the initiatives at the state and federal levels will bring about national direct democracy. There is no 'work' aside from that as there is nothing else that is legally within the power of the People to accomplish.



"One example of mandatory voting (Aus) isn't enough evidence to discard the necessary goal of increasing voter turnout."

"I know we MUST increase voter turnout to have an energetic true representative govt."


You know no such thing. You can't provide a single valid reason or example for what you claim so one actual example to your no examples is more than enough. Even so, added to that are

Brazil, Ecuador, Luxembourg, Peru, Singapore, Uruguay

which all have enforced compulsory voting and a left/right political dichotomy. The only countries with enforced compulsory voting where such a dichotomy is either hard to discern or doesn't exist are

Argentina, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nauru, North Korea

all countries that either suffer from ongoing political instability or are socially oppressive.

That is now a 100% representation of all the countries to employ enforced compulsory voting showing the ongoing observable FACT that mandatory voting does not produce any significant political results from the voter turnout. In fact, people resistant to compulsory voting have been known to simply select the first candidate at the top of a list of candidates for which they have no interest thereby contributing greater support for a candidate than what is actual.



"denying people the right to vote by seeking to make voting mandatory....."???

That's a silly stretch. "remove the very aspect of freedom itself from voting...."?

Freedom... from voting??? WHAAAAT?! LMFAO!!! You can't be serious.


Are you serious? Are you truly ignorant of what a right is or are you simply being dishonest? Are you truly ignorant of the distinctions of what is freedom of choice and what is mandatory or are you simply being dishonest? Do you seriously think seeking to establish a law for mandatory abortions would be the same as having a right to choose an abortion?

A right is a legally enforced socially recognized entitlement of personal freedom. The act of voting is one of those rights. Nothing that anyone is legally compelled to do can be a personal freedom. Nothing mandatory can be a right. That's not an interpretation, that's a FACT. Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one's opinions and ideas. Voting is the political right to communicate one's opinion in the ballot booth or even by mail. Voting IS a political freedom and your serious opposition to it remaining so is the only joke anyone can see.

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

Nothing simple about creating real direct democracy. When we can eliminate elected officials we will have real direct democracy.

We disagree on the difficulty & timeframe for gettin there.

"left/right dichotomy, political results"? I never said that. Using strawman arg cause you can't refute my actual statement?

I said mandatory voting would facilitate "energetic true representative govt."

your args, or numbers/examples do not refute that contention.

try again.

As to your "FACT" regarding the definition of voting as a right.

I contend voting is a right, and a civic duty, responsibility, obligation & rightly should be a constitutional amendment codifying that responsibility.

We gotta serve jury duty, put out garbage, and many other duties as citizens.

Ain't too much to ask. No violation of rights. You don't wanna vote. Don't. Wanna write in micky mouse, go ahead!

I don't care. But don't tell me it's too much or violates you.

Democracy dies when people stay home.

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 3 months ago

"Nothing simple about creating real direct democracy. When we can eliminate elected officials we will have real direct democracy."


The existence of elected officials has nothing to do with the existence of direct democracy. They can and do exist side by side at the municipal and state levels and even at the national level in Switzerland.



"left/right dichotomy, political results"? I never said that. Using strawman arg cause you can't refute my actual statement?

I said mandatory voting would facilitate "energetic true representative govt."


You're the only person who resorts to strawman arguments whenever you can't refute the facts. As can be clearly seen, I had already stated that

"Thus the ongoing observable FACT is that the left/right dichotomy under mandatory voting in Australia is no different than the left/right dichotomy in the United States with its low voter turnout and 1st Amendment protection of freedom of speech. Increasing the volume of voters doesn't change the ever present reality of roughly balanced opposing perspectives and the partisan voting results."

Yet, in responding to that, you didn't seek to claim that it had been a strawman argument then. Seeking to do so now only clearly shows the constant attempts at distraction you resort to whenever you can't refute the facts. You said

"I know we MUST increase voter turnout to have an energetic true representative govt."

And the fact as I pointed out before is that you don't know any such thing as you can't provide a single valid reason or example in support of such a notion.



I contend voting is a right, and a civic duty, responsibility, obligation & rightly should be a constitutional amendment codifying that responsibility.

We gotta serve jury duty, put out garbage, and many other duties as citizens.

Ain't too much to ask. No violation of rights. You don't wanna vote. Don't. Wanna write in micky mouse, go ahead!

I don't care. But don't tell me it's too much or violates you.


It doesn't matter what you contend when what you contend doesn't reflect reality. Entitlements to freedoms are not civic duties, responsibilities, or obligations. Wanting them to be so will never make them so and you certainly don't determine what's acceptable or too much to ask of others. If you don't like my reminding you of what's too much to impose upon others or what violates peoples' rights, guess what...YOU DON'T HAVE TO REPLY TO ME! You are under no obligation or mandate to reply to anything I say. That's what FREEDOM is about. Especially since you're ALWAYS the one to initiate these dialogs. So as long as you choose to continue making unsolicited replies to me, I will choose to exercise my freedom to respond to you however I damn well please.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

As well you should. Wasn't really tryin to upset you.

My opinion that more voters is good for democracy & should be a civic duty as well as civil right

Is just that. My opinion, I say 'I know' because I'm confident, but it is still just my opinion/contention.

Your opinion that more voters are not good for democracy, and voting should not be required?

We disagree that's all.

Evidence for my contention? I gotta prove to you that more voters facilitates energetic true representative govt.& therefore good for democracy?

Do you think less voters are good for a representative govt.?

I suppose for me the best corraberative evidence that more voters are good for democracy (& progressive agenda) is the massive effort to suppress voters of a certain political persuasion.

This thread includes many articles on this destructive effort.

Larger voter turnout (which Mandatory voting would accomplish) is clearly what our enemies (corp oligarchs) fear the most.

That's enough evidence for me.

Peace

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 3 months ago

I suppose for me the best corraberative evidence that more voters are good for democracy (& progressive agenda) is the massive effort to suppress voters of a certain political persuasion.

This thread includes many articles on this destructive effort.

Larger voter turnout (which Mandatory voting would accomplish) is clearly what our enemies (corp oligarchs) fear the most.

That's enough evidence for me.


Larger voter turnout is by no means what 'corp oligarchs' fear most. It's always irrelevant to them. They already control the choices thus it doesn't matter to them what the voter turnout is or which choice is chosen. They already win either way. Voter suppression is only a partisan tactic for defeating an opposition party. Since it is always selectively applied, it has absolutely nothing to do with evidence for high voter turnout resulting in true representative government. True representative government depends upon enough choices being allowed to represent the public's interests. In a duopoly, the public is always limited to just two choices no matter what the voter turnout is. This system is designed to limit any additional choices thereby prohibiting any chance of a true representative government. http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/24877-why-elections-still-matter-except-when-they-dont Furthermore, as mentioned before,

"In fact, people resistant to compulsory voting have been known to simply select the first candidate at the top of a list of candidates for which they have no interest thereby contributing greater support for a candidate than what is actual."

Compulsory voting results in various forms of resistance to it that misrepresents the public's choice. Far better to only have the results of the people who actually want to express their choice rather than compelling the people who don't to have opportunity to subvert the actual choice of the public in disgruntled acts of resistance.

Barring the violation of voting rights, the volume of voters has nothing to do with achieving a true representative government.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

From your Excellent article:

"Completely eschewing campaigns and elections makes no sense."

Agree with the summation entirely! no one should refrain from voting. Of course I say more voters = truer representation, & therefore voting should be compulsory.

I agree with most if not all of the articles points on the state of our problems, elections and otherwise.

In fact all of the articles points are the reason we must fight, protest, march, boycott, divest, vote, & more

In so far as how people resistant to compulsory voting vote,?

More voters are necessary! How they vote is less important.

Direct democracy, representative democracy both require enough voters (can you say quorum?) to be effective.

What's the word for too many voters?

Peace.

No one should believe, hope, that only voting is required for real change.

Voting is one infrequent (biannual) & thusfar weak tool, but is very useful to get people involved with the real work between elections.

Activism, protest, boycotts, petitions, marches, divestment, coalition building, growing movements.

Still we need increased turnout to give voting more effectiveness, Mandatory voting would do that.

I say this because the topic is the vote suppression currently going on. Mandatory voting would end this criminal phenomenon perpetrated by the 1% oligarchs political puppets.

[-] 0 points by LeoYo (5909) 3 months ago

In so far as how people resistant to compulsory voting vote,?

More voters are necessary! How they vote is less important.


That's simply not true. The whole purpose of voting is to establish the public choice. Subverting that choice with legally coerced disinterested participants who would willingly sabotage the outcome in acts of resistance defeats the whole purpose of voting. It is most certainly more important to all committed voters that their choices not be invalidated by the input of more participants who don't care and would otherwise never be involved.



Direct democracy, representative democracy both require enough voters (can you say quorum?) to be effective.


Both direct democracy and representative government only require the freedom of those entitled to vote to participate. If enough voters choose not to participate, it's because the choices being presented to them either aren't important enough to them or are unacceptable to them. That problem can never be solved by coerced participation.



Voting is one infrequent (biannual) & thusfar weak tool, but is very useful to get people involved with the real work between elections.


Organizing ballot initiatives is what gets people politically involved at any time throughout the elective cycles and actually brings about the changes they feel to be important.



Still we need increased turnout to give voting more effectiveness, Mandatory voting would do that.

I say this because the topic is the vote suppression currently going on. Mandatory voting would end this criminal phenomenon perpetrated by the 1% oligarchs political puppets.


Only ending private influences upon public officials can give voting more effectiveness and only establishing a federal right to vote with nationally uniform rules would end legal partisan state level attempts at vote suppression. Mandatory voting would only legally legitimize the rule of the oligarchs who already control the limited choices that the voters can make.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

"Mandatory voting would only legally legitimize the rule of the oligarchs "

So you state that mandatory voting is GOOD for oligarchs?

Then why are they (oligarchs, & their extremist pols) engaged in the massive vote suppression effort?

http://thecentristword.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/alec-koch-brothers-and-voter-suppression/

http://newsone.com/3034071/voter-suppression-nc/

Some earlier bits,

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html

Fl

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rishi-manchanda/floridas-voter-suppressio_b_858893.html

Fl upd:

http://rolandmartinreports.com/blog/tag/voter-suppression/

Nate is a great analysis.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/measuring-the-effects-of-voter-identification-laws/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Oligarchs are more vulnerable when voter turnout, of the victims of economic predation is large.

Mandatory voting (& other related national voting laws) would increase turnout & eliminate the oligarchs massive vote suppression efforts.

Oligarchs know they are most threatened when growing voter turnout is coupled with growing progressive populism/activism/outrage.

That's what we are doing. Fighting oligarchs vote suppression efforts & building progressive populist momentum.

Certainly not twisting the truth of oligarchs complicity in voter suppression so as to argue that less voter turnout is good,& Mandatory voting is good (legitimizes) for oligarchs.

That's nonsensical , & counter productive.

Protest! Vote! Repeat.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

True that.

Who suggests/supports that?

Just another strawman distraction/deflection?

[+] -5 points by 99nproud (2697) 2 weeks ago

I don't 'need' anyone to represent me. I acknowledge that power resides with our elected officials who are bought off by corps.

I therefore recognize we must identify all vote suppressing pols, retire them, pressure remaining to represent us (instead of corps) while we work towards direct democracy & the elimination of this oligarch owned gov.

So... not appeased.

Wanna discuss the issue or would you rather continue the useless distraction of personally attack on me?

[-] 7 points by turbocharger (1478) 2 weeks ago

" pressure remaining to represent us (instead of corps) while we work towards direct democracy &"

The former only further defeats the ability to transfer to the later.

Working to save a relationship when the ultimate goal is to scrap is all together probably isnt the brightest plan in the world.

[-] 1 points by MattHolck0 (1733) 2 weeks ago

recognition of the current government structure

is not the same as trying to work within i t

[+] -5 points by 99nproud (2697) 2 weeks ago

Repubs attacking voting rights are the problem.

http://www.southernstudies.org/2014/10/americans-for-prosperitys-trail-of-voter-misinform.html

"North Carolina election officials are investigating a mailer that Americans for Prosperity sent to thousands of would-be voters in the state that contained bad information. The group has previously come under criticism for mailing misinformation to potential voters in at least three other states: Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin."

They can't win w/o cheating.

[-] 6 points by turbocharger (1478) 2 weeks ago

The entire thing is a cheat.

[+] -6 points by 99nproud (2697) 2 weeks ago

We must force the change to eliminate the 'big cheat'

Time to hit the streets!

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/10/sam_brownbacks_last_ditch_hail_mary_a_deplorable_voter_suppression_plan/

Deplorable repub cheat

[-] 4 points by turbocharger (1478) 2 weeks ago

Wow, you really like the low laying fruit dont ya?

Personally I think the entire system is a cheat, first and foremost convincing people that they need others to lead for them.

[-] 0 points by LeoYo (5909) 3 months ago

"Mandatory voting would only legally legitimize the rule of the oligarchs "

So you state that mandatory voting is GOOD for oligarchs?

Then why are they (oligarchs, & their extremist pols) engaged in the massive vote suppression effort?


You read what I wrote. I clearly stated

"Mandatory voting would only legally legitimize the rule of the oligarchs who already control the limited choices that the voters can make."

yet you deliberately decided to only quote the first half of my statement, excluding the part you can't refute in order to dishonestly engage in a strawman argument.

You also know that oligarchs are not involved in any voter suppression apart from partisan affiliation so asking about it as if oligarchs in general are involved in general vote suppression is also just as dishonest. Especially since you've already read my earlier reply to that issue:

"Larger voter turnout is by no means what 'corp oligarchs' fear most. It's always irrelevant to them. They already control the choices thus it doesn't matter to them what the voter turnout is or which choice is chosen. They already win either way. Voter suppression is only a partisan tactic for defeating an opposition party."



Oligarchs are more vulnerable when voter turnout, of the victims of economic predation is large.

Mandatory voting (& other related national voting laws) would increase turnout & eliminate the oligarchs massive vote suppression efforts.

Oligarchs know they are most threatened when growing voter turnout is coupled with growing progressive populism/activism/outrage.

That's what we are doing. Fighting oligarchs vote suppression efforts & building progressive populist momentum.

Certainly not twisting the truth of oligarchs complicity in voter suppression so as to argue that less voter turnout is good,& Mandatory voting is good (legitimizes) for oligarchs.

That's nonsensical , & counter productive.

Protest! Vote! Repeat.


Of course, nothing you've said above is true. In order for your statements to be true, you either have to show that

A.

Oligarchs don't control BOTH of the political parties from which the vast majority of voters choose their representatives and therefore the oligarchs don't "already control the limited choices that the voters can make."

or

B.

Oligarchs ONLY control the Tea/Republican Party that engages in vote suppression to prevent certain voters from supporting Democrats.

If neither of those statements can be shown to be true, nothing you've said above is true and is therefore quite plainly "nonsensical , & counter productive" not to mention plainly dishonest.

Trying to eliminate vote suppression with compulsory voting would be like trying to eliminate anti-abortion with mandatory abortions. Absurd to say the least. People don't need to be robbed of their free choice to vote by having the vote imposed upon them. People need to have their right to choose protected at the national level to end vote suppression once and for all and people need to have their democratically determined choices protected from the sabotage of those who would protest any subjection to a coerced participation.

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

Oligarchic control of the peoples govt is not adequate reason to surrender the ballot/elected official process.

We can get leaders elected who will represent people not corps. And over time (years of hard work) tip the balance away from oligarchs and back towards people.

Not without robust, growing, grassroots movement to challenge the corporatist anti worker agenda on the street and beyond.

This IS happening now slowly.

This WILL accelerate as we sneak in one, two, and more leaders who answer to people not corps. Each successful election (Sawant, Deblasio, Sanders, Warren) builds on the last, creates momentum, & adds to the chorus of our street protests.

This is best achieved through educating more people & growing our demonstrations, & ballot action.

I submit more educated voters are better for our cause, & mandatory voting would facilitate increased turnout, while we educate the masses.

In any event, suppressing the vote is clearly wrong & certainly perpetrated by the current powers that be. That would be oligarchs who control the peoples govt that we are fighting.

With protest, Vote, & repeat.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 3 months ago

Oligarchic control of the peoples govt is not adequate reason to surrender the ballot/elected official process.


Another dishonest attempt at a straw man argument as you very well know that no one has in any way proposed that "the ballot/elected official process" be surrendered for any reason.



We can get leaders elected who will represent people not corps. And over time (years of hard work) tip the balance away from oligarchs and back towards people.

Not without robust, growing, grassroots movement to challenge the corporatist anti worker agenda on the street and beyond.

This IS happening now slowly.

This WILL accelerate as we sneak in one, two, and more leaders who answer to people not corps. Each successful election (Sawant, Deblasio, Sanders, Warren) builds on the last, creates momentum, & adds to the chorus of our street protests.

This is best achieved through educating more people & growing our demonstrations, & ballot action.


Now you're just preaching to the choir as you already know about http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/ and http://occupywallst.org/forum/omni-organizing-municipal-national-initiatives/



In any event, suppressing the vote is clearly wrong & certainly perpetrated by the current powers that be. That would be oligarchs who control the peoples govt that we are fighting.


A lie repeated does not become the truth. Since you cannot show validity for the previously proposed statement that "Oligarchs don't control BOTH of the political parties" or that "Oligarchs ONLY control the Tea/Republican Party that engages in vote suppression" you cannot with any honesty claim that "suppressing the vote is...certainly perpetrated by...oligarchs who control the peoples govt..." You already know that the corporate oligarchy controls BOTH of the major political parties which includes the party that engages in vote suppression as well as the party that doesn't engage in vote suppression. Thus, you already know that vote suppression is a partisan, not an oligarchic driven act. Deliberately misrepresenting the nature of the act only serves to distract from the true source of the act where attention must be focused to combat it.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

Fight against vote suppression!

But have a laugh.

http://www.camelcitydispatch.com/the-voter-suppression-follies-an-editorial-cartoon-portfolio-7843/

Protest, vote, repeat

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Voting matters! Otherwise, otherwise the libertarian corporatist oligarchs wouldn't be desperate to suppress the vote, and intimidate voters!

http://news.yahoo.com/conservatives-poll-watchers-police-voter-integrity-mississippis-black-181406727.html

So many pols are unaccountable because corporate interests have rigged the system, by buying the peoples representatives, AND the PEOPLE have neglected the accountability power we have.

WE must vote 'em out if they do not serve us. WE have to put pressure on all pols to take back control.

Voting doesn't mean we submit & support the corruption. We can't resolve this by decreasing voter turnout.

The only way to win is:

Protest, Vote, Repeat.

Minimizing the massive efforts of voter suppression/intimidation serves those perpetrating such crimes against the people.

Encouraging people to give up their voting rights (that so many have died for!!) is immoral, ill informed and once again serves the oligarchs who are perpetrating the massive voter suppression/intimidation.

They want/need a low turnout.

Do you want what they want but for a different reason?

So the fuck what?

[-] 3 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

Democracy matters! Otherwise the duopoly corporatist oligarchs wouldn't be desperate to suppress the actual voting of the People through ballot initiatives, and discourage voters!

From New York

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/24309-the-fight-for-fifteen-in-nyc-just-got-a-lot-more-promising-and-a-lot-more-complicated

to Providence

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/24287-will-the-first-housekeeper-on-a-city-council-shame-rhode-island-democrats-into-allowing-a-just-wage

to Seattle

http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/16638/kshama_sawant_seattles_15_minimum_wage_not_a_done_deal

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/05/05/1297116/-Seattle-City-Councilwoman-Kshama-Sawant-responds-to-mayor-s-15-minimum-wage-proposal

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/05/seattle-minimum-wage-socialist-councillor-class-warfare

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/seattle-approves-countrys-highest-minimum-wage-15-n120511

the People who elected representatives to promote their interests are instead faced with politicians who represent corporate interests and are therefore forced to resort to democracy to overcome the corporate favoring republicanism of the duopoly.

WE must vote upon the issues OURSELVES and cease sole reliance upon the protesting and elections that can never change the corporate loyalties of those elected.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/#comment-947155

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

Democracy doesn't mean that the republicanism that defines this country's government will be done away with. Democracy means that such republicanism will not be able to suppress the will of the People for corporate interests.

Once people regularly engage in voting upon the issues that are important to them, non-duopoly candidates in support of those issues will arise to support them at the federal level.

Encouraging people to ignore their nationwide democratic power for sole reliance upon republicanism is immoral, ill informed and once again serves the oligarchs who are seeking to continue acting independent of the public good.

They want/need people to ignore their democratic power for sole reliance upon the republicanism that has always betrayed them.

Do you want what they want but for a different reason?

So the fuck what?

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

And what is this non sense.? You list many systemic problems and then claim protesting is NOT the answer? WRONG!!!

http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/#comment-947155

Are you joking?

You are arguing in this comment that apathy isn't a problem?

You specified, "debt left to our grandchildren????"

Gee where have I heard those dishonest political talking points?

WE AIN'T BROKE!!!!! End austerity! Invest in the people!!

You reach back to founding fathers setting up this oppressive govt, but you neglect to note that they used THE VOTE to maintain control/oppression.

The same Vote that we have been slowly (centuries!!!) expanding, non landowners, non whites, non male, all gained this powerful tool only after...... wait for it.......

Protest, VOTE!! Repeat!!

We can support direct democracy while improving this corrupt system, In fact the best path to direct democracy is continuing the natural, evolutionary process of expanding voting rights, educating voters, growing this progressive movement, & reforming campaigns/elections & how issues are voted on.

Discouraging voting, & ignoring vote suppression/intimidation efforts does NOT serve you supposed goal.

Serves the oligarchs.

Who cares about the weak reasons you put forth to justify these destructive efforts.?

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Voting on the issues (we could encourage more referendum, and other direct democracy strategies) is the inevitable evolution of all democratic approaches.

Encouraging people NOT to vote minimizes the possibility of our getting to that desired evolutionary form of government.

Why the min wage links?

Reposting/editing my comments (Inaccurately! Never said "sole reliance"? Who said that?) without answering or honestly addressing the points is just childish.

Why present that 'straw man' "sole reliance" lie? You might be smart enough to realize that once you take part in such dishonest distractoid strategy, it reflects the weakness of your position. It illustrates that your position can't stand up to honest debate.

I clearly stated, & do again: PROTEST!! VOTE!! REPEAT!!

I support direct democracy, voting on issues, referendums, even eventually eliminating representatives.

But we MUST have mandatory/compulsory voting for any democracy to work. And we must identify and defeat all voter suppression/intimidation efforts.

Discouraging voting participation, and minimizing voting suppression efforts doesn't help the "democratic power", or "voting the issues" you pretend to support.

Claiming you support a 'better voting approach' is a poor excuse to push the oligarch line.

Only adult responses are welcome.

PEACE!!

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

Voting on the issues is what has been going on for over a hundred years at both the municipal and state levels. It is neither inevitable nor an evolution. It is something that can be organized nationwide to have a national impact.

Encouraging people NOT to reject corporate loyal politicians goes against seeking a democratic solution. A candidate who doesn't accept corporate funding requires the support of the People. The People aren't going to support a candidate who isn't participating in some major involvement of the People with which they can identify. What better involvement of the People for prospective candidates to participate in than the nationwide organization of democracy?

"Why the min wage links?"

Why pretend you didn't read what I wrote immediately after those links in answer to your question?

If you don't like your own words throne back at you perhaps you should consider a more responsible approach to making comments. Engaging in silly responses to comments is just childish. Where did I say you or anyone else had said "sole reliance"? Why suggest such a lie? In your own words 99nproud/Inclusionman/VQkag2

"You might be smart enough to realize that once you take part in such dishonest distractoid strategy, it reflects the weakness of your position. It illustrates that your position can't stand up to honest debate."

You say "PROTEST!! VOTE!! REPEAT!!" without EVER referring to the democratic process of the People voting upon the issues to affect them yet you wish to object to the observation of advocating sole reliance on such methods.

So long as the 1st Amendment exists with protection for freedom of speech, voting will ALWAYS remain a Freedom of Choice personal decision that will never be made into some mandatory/compulsory tyrannical fantasy.

Discouraging the organizing of nationwide voting participation on the issues while equating the rejection of corporate funded candidates as "Discouraging voting participation" doesn't help the 99% you pretend to support and is a poor excuse to push the oligarch line.

Those who claim to want adult responses should first make them rather than engaging in the childish behavior of claiming points aren't honestly addressed while themselves dismissing reasons as being weak without ever honestly addressing or even identifying those reasons.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/beware-1-cons-conducting-anti-voting-campaign/#comment-1036424

.

Can you address the findings of

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

"Economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism."

"When a majority – even a very large majority – of the public favors change, it is not likely to get what it wants. In our 1,779 policy cases, narrow pro-change majorities of the public got the policy changes they wanted only about 30% of the time. More strikingly, even overwhelmingly large pro-change majorities, with 80% of the public favoring a policy change, got that change only about 43% of the time."

"When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it."

.

Can you address the political reality presented by the author of http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/#comment-947155 rather than confusing him with me and never refuting anything he presented?

.

Can you identify any candidates you advocate voting for who are known to adhere to the affirmations presented in FreeDA http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/ or at least explain how electing corporate funded candidates in combination with protesting is somehow going to switch their loyalties from the corporations to the People?

Only adult responses are welcome.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

This guy had the right idea. You might benefit from reading this comment:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/stopping-people-from-voting-seriously-why-do-we-pu/

Solidarity?

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Protest voter suppression!

BTW:

"Encouraging people NOT to reject corporate loyal politicians". Who does that?

Not me!

How people vote is their business. (write in, 3rd party, blank even) I'm not telling anyone how to vote, & certainly never said they should "NOT to reject corporate loyal politicians"

So to suggest that is my position is dishonest and again illustrates that your position cannot stand up to the truth.

And that truth is:

Apathy (voter, activism) CREATED our problems by allowing the corporatist, oligarchs to take control of the peoples govt.

Increased activism, (protest & voting) is the only non violent approach that will work.

Protest, Vote! Repeat!

And some current thread related info:

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-voting-rights-hearing-20140624-story.html

Peace

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Until we reform campaign/election laws *through protest, voting, repeatedly) that have been created by corporatists to favor them over us, we MUST vote for the best candidate and pressure them to pass policies that benefit the 99%.

There is no other non violent way to achieve the necessary expansion of the democratic power that will usher in the evolutionary direct democracy goal we know best serves all people.

So therefore, previous progress (voting rights, workers rights, etc) has come through protest, & voting.

Any additional progress (direct democracy) will come through protest, & voting.

What else?

Clearly the oligarchs (through ALEC, Kochs etc) have initiated a massive voter suppression effort.

Only a willfully ignorant individual denies that reality, and only someone complicit with those oligarchs would attempt to discourage voting,& minimize voting suppression efforts.

Throwing away voting rights that so many have struggled & died for is NOT the answer.

Action in the form of protest,& voting is required. Encouraging the apathy, and non voting CREATED the vacuum that allowed rightwing oligarchs to seize control of the peoples govt.

Pick your own candidates. (I suppose not, cause you ain't voting right?)

Does that cover your points.? I hope you are less confused now.

I responded without your immature tactics of repeating my words.

Please do not respond with "nyah nyah nya nya nyaaa".

Peace

[-] 3 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

No, it clearly doesn't cover any of the points as you very well know. So let's go over them. I clearly asked

Can you address the findings of

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

"Economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism."

"When a majority – even a very large majority – of the public favors change, it is not likely to get what it wants. In our 1,779 policy cases, narrow pro-change majorities of the public got the policy changes they wanted only about 30% of the time. More strikingly, even overwhelmingly large pro-change majorities, with 80% of the public favoring a policy change, got that change only about 43% of the time."

"When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it."

FACT: You have clearly chosen not to respond to that question which reveals the TRUTH that you can't honestly respond to those points.

I clearly asked

Can you address the political reality presented by the author of http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/#comment-947155 rather than confusing him with me and never refuting anything he presented?

FACT: You have clearly chosen not to respond to that question revealing the TRUTH that you can't honestly respond to those points.

I clearly asked

Can you identify any candidates you advocate voting for who are known to adhere to the affirmations presented in FreeDA http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/ or at least explain how electing corporate funded candidates in combination with protesting is somehow going to switch their loyalties from the corporations to the People?

FACT: You have clearly chosen not to respond to that question revealing the TRUTH that you can't honestly respond to those points.

All you've done as usual is avoid addressing anything presented that doesn't agree with your expressed position while asserting your supposed opinion on the matter without any substantiation whatsoever. Then you went on to expose your dishonesty in saying

"Encouraging people NOT to reject corporate loyal politicians". Who does that?

Not me!

How people vote is their business. (write in, 3rd party, blank even) I'm not telling anyone how to vote, & certainly never said they should "NOT to reject corporate loyal politicians"

Yet you clearly and consistently respond to my comments about rejecting corporate funded candidates with

"Voting matters! Otherwise, otherwise the libertarian corporatist oligarchs wouldn't be desperate to suppress the vote, and intimidate voters!"

"Minimizing the massive efforts of voter suppression/intimidation serves those perpetrating such crimes against the people.

Encouraging people to give up their voting rights (that so many have died for!!) is immoral, ill informed and once again serves the oligarchs who are perpetrating the massive voter suppression/intimidation.

They want/need a low turnout.

Do you want what they want but for a different reason?"

"Discouraging voting, & ignoring vote suppression/intimidation efforts does NOT serve you supposed goal."

"Encouraging people NOT to vote minimizes the possibility of our getting to that desired evolutionary form of government."

"Discouraging voting participation, and minimizing voting suppression efforts doesn't help the "democratic power", or "voting the issues" you pretend to support.

Claiming you support a 'better voting approach' is a poor excuse to push the oligarch line."

Since you've NEVER seen me tell anyone not to vote and you've ONLY seen me advocating democracy and rejection of corporate funded candidates, your consistent responses of implying my "Discouraging voter participation" clearly reveal your equating of my advocating democracy and rejection of corporate funded candidates as "Encouraging people NOT to vote". Or else, you never would have been responding as you clearly have been.

Then there was your other lie.

"Apathy (voter, activism) CREATED our problems by allowing the corporatist, oligarchs to take control of the peoples govt."

Ignoring the facts of actual history to blame an entire nation of victims is truly reprehensible to say the least.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/democracy-is-the-solution/

It is clearly known and documented by even presidents that the wealthy elites have ALWAYS been in control of the government. From the very beginning, the richest man in the country had been the first commander in chief and president and he had to suppress the Whiskey Rebellion which arose due to the betrayal of elected representatives supporting taxation favoring eastern big business at expense to western citizens. All of their non-violent protests and objections didn't mean a thing to 'their' elected government.

So, if you want to continue blaming the victims for your non-historical claim that "Apathy (voter, activism) CREATED our problems by allowing the corporatist, oligarchs to take control of the peoples govt." refute the historical FACTS presented in the quotes at http://occupywallst.org/forum/democracy-is-the-solution/ .

I don't even need to ask again "Can you" because it's obvious from your previous responses that all you can do is ignore what you can't refute while reiterating your opinion without substantiation.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

What are you still confused about?

I support all non violent strategies to take back our govt from oligarchs, including voting of course.

I know that we can't succeed through only voting (or any one strategy) but rather only through many growing efforts.

I also submit that these strategies are the only way we can succeed (without violence, and/or unacceptable misery and depredation for the poorest among us)

What do we disagree on?

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/why-the-voting-rights-act-still-matters/373541/

http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2014/06/27/most-voting-discrimination-is-local/

If voting didn't matter there would not be so much voter discrimination right?

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

Wrong again. Voter discrimination has nothing to do with the value of voting. Voter discrimination is what a party engages in to win over another party. Voter discrimination doesn't mean a thing pertaining to the issue of both parties already serving the same corporate agendas no matter which party wins. Everything has a context and the practice that some engage in in stating things outside of their intended context is the engagement of a strawman argument. If people want voting to matter beyond the issue of partisan contest winners, they're going to have to do a lot more than just protest, vote & hope. They're going to have to engage in real actions that will have a real impact on all of partisan politics such as presented here http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/#comment-1031137 and here http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Your post & the article you are referring to are excellent.

From said article (read it 2 months ago!):

"Citizens must learn to attack politicians, corporations and wealthy individuals in response to legislation they oppose. Nonviolent economic sanctions can be applied to these groups by boycotting their companies and products, disrupting shareholder meetings, waging effective campaigns via social media to effect price drops in their stocks, pushing divestment campaigns and impacting the operational costs of their businesses"

Great!! Your article makes my case that action (as protest ) is required.

You said : " Voter discrimination doesn't mean a thing pertaining to the issue of both parties already serving the same corporate agendas "

If voting (or related discrimination) didn't matter to the corporatists, then why are the corporatist oligarchs perpetrating such a massive effort to suppress our vote?

I guess you added "...hope" to my refrain Vote, protest. Repeat as an example of the 'strawman' concept you described.? 'Cause I never said "hope".

I will say that action against our extreme conservative oligarch enemies is obviously part of protest. I mean actions described in your posted articles ain't in 'support. of rightwing corporatist policies.

So again, it seems we agree, and you are pretending not to understand that action is part of protest.

I guess you just wanna argue.?

Peace!

Vote, Protest (including action!!!!). Repeat.

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

"Great!! Your article makes my case that action (as protest ) is required."


As stated in the article,

"If citizens wish to see their will manifested in this system of government, they will need to move beyond symbolic actions such as petitions and protests, and engage in effective economic, political and social sanctioning actions against politicians, corporations and wealthy elites."

The author, like many people, clearly distinguishes action as being beyond mere protest.



"You said : " Voter discrimination doesn't mean a thing pertaining to the issue of both parties already serving the same corporate agendas " "

"If voting (or related discrimination) didn't matter to the corporatists, then why are the corporatist oligarchs perpetrating such a massive effort to suppress our vote?"


The corporatist oligarchs aren't perpetrating a massive effort to suppress the vote. Suppression of votes is a partisan act engaged in by one of the parties serving the corporatist oligarchs.



I guess you added "...hope" to my refrain Vote, protest. Repeat as an example of the 'strawman' concept you described.? 'Cause I never said "hope".


No, my mention of 'just protest, vote & hope' was apart of my own statement, not an imitation of your words.



"So again, it seems we agree, and you are pretending not to understand that action is part of protest."

"I guess you just wanna argue.?"


No, as shown above from both the cited article and now from your own reply

"Vote, Protest (including action!!!!). Repeat."

the general use of the word protest is not generally understood to mainly include serious action, a fact you are pretending wasn't understood.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 months ago

No pretense on the definition of 'protest'. My use of the term DOES include ALL non violent forms of activism.

And as I review your comments it is clear that we only disagree on 'what I meant' when using the term 'protest'.

Forgive me if I do not subscribe to your limited definition of 'protest'.

Vote, Protest (in all non violent forms)!!! Repeat!!

We agree whether you admit it or not.

And in compliment with this thread topic:

http://www.camelcitydispatch.com/moral-movement-coming-to-winston-salem-monday-for-voter-suppression-hearing-7632/

More & more progressive people/orgs are joining the chorus of protest to battle the threat to our voting rights.

http://www.camelcitydispatch.com/moral-movement-coming-to-winston-salem-monday-for-voter-suppression-hearing-7632/

https://www.aclu.org/blog/voting-rights/four-bad-voter-suppression-measures-we-have-kill-four-months

Make no mistake, securing our voting rights is necessary if we are to evolve our current corrupt political system into the superior direct voting system we need.

Peace,& Solidarity.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

In response:

You asked about this study:

"When a majority – even a very large majority – of the public favors change, it is not likely to get what it wants. In our 1,779 policy cases, narrow pro-change majorities of the public got the policy changes they wanted only about 30% of the time. More strikingly, even overwhelmingly large pro-change majorities, with 80% of the public favoring a policy change, got that change only about 43% of the time."

These numbers are slightly off, but still I believe it clearly indicates that the past indicates we have close to 50% chance to create change.

Kinda makes my point.

Are you committed to inaction until the "numbers/chances look better"?

And please don't let some study dictate your actions. Make your actions dictate future studies!

Remember our current min wage fight began with one protest in one burger king in Times sq.

I'll get to the rest of your babble later.

Peace,

Maybe you missed this:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/stopping-people-from-voting-seriously-why-do-we-pu/

Solidarity?

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

Again, you've merely reiterated your opinion without substantiation.

How are the numbers "slightly off"?

How does what you merely choose to "believe" make any "point" at all in the real world?

As for what I'm committed to, I'm committed to http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/ and http://occupywallst.org/forum/omni-organizing-municipal-national-initiatives/ . Or have you not been paying attention?

Did you catch the FACT I mentioned before or are you simply ignoring it in order to continue on in your babble? Here it is again in case you missed it.

Since you've NEVER seen me tell anyone not to vote and you've ONLY seen me advocating democracy and rejection of corporate funded candidates, your consistent responses of implying my "Discouraging voter participation" clearly reveal your equating of my advocating democracy and rejection of corporate funded candidates as "Encouraging people NOT to vote". Or else, you never would have been responding as you clearly have been.

So that pretty much makes citing this http://occupywallst.org/forum/stopping-people-from-voting-seriously-why-do-we-pu/ just another example of what I just restated above.

[-] 2 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Voter suppression news!

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/06/18/3450206/nevada-voter-suppression-initiative-crashes-and-burns/

That's good news. Right?

And a strategy to fight voter suppression here:

http://www.districtchronicles.com/news/view.php/762663/Massive-voter-registration-key-to-blunti

(That's a study!!)

Regardless of studies though, (none are perfect, all can be slanted and manipulated) the fight MUST continue:

http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?id=15056

Those who support Pat Roberts position on voter suppression are dead wrong and represent/push the oligarch effort to keep voter turnout low.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/sen-pat-roberts-claims-limiting-campaign-donations-voter-suppression-audio

Using your (or any) study to discourage protest, voting, or any activism isn't easier than finding hope in the numbers.

We see/present what we want.

Peace!!!!! Protest, Vote!!! Repeat!!

[-] 0 points by LeoYo (5909) 4 months ago

"Using your (or any) study to discourage protest, voting, or any activism isn't easier than finding hope in the numbers."

There you go again with your false implications.

You should check this out. This guy had the right idea. You might benefit from reading this comment: http://occupywallst.org/forum/goodbye-occupy-wall-street/#comment-872156

Fits right in with what I've been advocating http://occupywallst.org/forum/omni-organizing-municipal-national-initiatives/

You should also check out http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/#comment-1031475 for ending voter suppression.

[-] 2 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Agreed. (Again).

I see no contradictions in the posts you reference and my position.

If you do, let me know.

Peace!!

We must focus on remaking the system, from the ground up, horizontally, w/ direct democracy. Do you know how that is progressing?

We must fight for the change that will help 3rd parties succeed. (movetoamend, nationalpopularvote, opendebates, & others)

And we must agitate all pols for change the benefits the 99%.

And of course fight for everyones voting rights.

[-] 1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 5 months ago

Voting legitimises them. DONT VOTE!!!!

[-] 2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

NO, not "Voting legitimises them," Voting Empowers the People and our democracy! If you don't Vote, you don't count!

Democracy is not a spectator sport, Participate People! Don't listen to the anti-democracy saboteurs!

Unite, Vote and Win!

That's why Koch Bros & Suckers spend CU billion$ to keep you from doing it!

[-] 1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 5 months ago

Just because I'm against democracy doesn't mean I'm a saboteur of any kind. I'm open about my objections to majoritarian rule.

Who do suggest I vote for?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

is this the campaign that supports choosing a party instead of voting ?

[-] 1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 5 months ago

Power should arbitrarily be based on whether you have a vagina or a penis. It should based on the thinking organ, not the sex organ.

Men and women have equal capability for stupidity.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Stinkles and twinkles? I'll bet if you added up [all] of them, I'd be in the top ten.

I assure YOU if we ALL VOTED we'd get every fucking thing we wanted!!!

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago
[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

voter id (suppression) law overturned in Wisconsin

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/4/30/alec_in_the_news_oklahoma_punishes

Needed a bump

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

This was surprising

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/03/19/3416499/wisconsin-senator-voter-suppression/

Keep fightin the good fight. "Don't let the bastards drag you down"

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

You too!

Get everybody registered!!!

Get everybody Voting!!!

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Ex-cellent!. I like this thread up top as often as possible.

A little current events on Voter Suppression

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pat-lamarche/voter-suppression-because_b_5343894.html

bumped

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Yes.

Give us a headline and lead. Links are blach...

[-] -1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Somethin' to bring 'em in huh? Yeah. Hopefully, generate a response that can facilitate additional detail.

I think I understand. Great advise.

Thx again

[-] -1 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Why Propaganda About Generational Warfare Is Dangerous and Wrong Understanding what makes generations tick reveals a great deal about the world. (etc)

http://www.alternet.org/activism/why-propaganda-about-generational-warfare-dangerous-and-wrong

[-] -2 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Court rejects NC voter suppression: This criminal effort by the corp oligarchs using ONE party, is happening everywhere, and we must expose it, & fight it for the sake of our democracy.

https://www.aclu.org/voting-rights/court-rejects-nc-lawmakers-attempt-withhold-email-related-passage-sweeping-voter

NC will be critical this Nov. East coast (earlier poll closing/results) races could effect turn out.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

voting should be public record

each citizen should stand by his/her vote

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 months ago

No district-ing - at ALL - just one vote one candidate - majority ( real numbers ) wins. Would be so much more friendly for real challengers/challenges to the status quo. No more Gambling House favored rigged elections.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

everyone must speak for themselves

a like the system of proxy representation

where one person would give another permission to carry their vote

with the freedom to with drawl if the proxy voter no longer represents

the views of the citizen that granted them the vote

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 months ago

NOPE - no transferal of votes by candidate or party - a person drops out - as the best alternative - those individuals ( voting citizens ) should be allowed to recast their vote for "their" next best choice.

In other words = an "individual votes" or does not - no proxy's. Total numbers of votes counts = ONLY - no electoral college BS.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 months ago

districts would need to observed for local issues

everyone may vote in congress or grant that vote to a representative the internet can track and run congressional interaction and result

anybody paying attention may vote others may decide to gave their vote to someone who is paying attention

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (25038) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 months ago

NO Districts = NONE = ONE INDIVIDUAL = ONE VOTE = MAJORITY WINS. No proxy voting - you vote or you don't.


Fuck You And Your Bloody Caps Lock Fetish - The Caps Lock Is NOT On.

[-] 1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 5 months ago

Like Australia? They have demeny voting too.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 5 months ago

Mandatory voting like Australia

[-] 1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 4 months ago

Doesn't sound very free. What if I don't like any of the candidates? Could I at least write in Dr. Zoidberg?

[-] 3 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

You are to free to vote, write in, leave blank, none of the above. Whatever!

But every eligible voter MUST vote!!!

It's what the corp oligarchs fear the most. That'll learn 'em.

[-] 1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 4 months ago

Leaving it blank will teach them? Can I vote republican?

[-] 2 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

I don't tell people how to vote. Vote the issues, please!!!

And remember, I support PROTEST, voting, & protest again.!!!

[-] 2 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 4 months ago

Can I protest against voting? Can I vote not to vote? Can I vote for myself?

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

You can do whatever you want.

I ask that we all vote between massive constant growing protests

[-] 1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 4 months ago

Alright. I'm going to go on not voting. Is that okay?

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

I ask that we all vote AND protest constantly.

If you can't do any or some, or all, that is your business. I'm no ones judge.

Good luck

[-] -1 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 4 months ago

Okay, I just want be clear. You used the word "we"; am I included in this? I don't really want you speaking for me. I have a mouth too.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

I agree, that is why I did NOT use "we" to speak for you. Rather I ask that 'we' (as in my request is directed at everyone) all vote as a civil duty.

It's ok to request something from everyone right?

Do you understand now?

[-] 2 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 4 months ago

Don't expect positive results. I can request that everyone jump up and down on one foot in unison, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna get what I want. Voting is a mass delusion. People are willingly ceding away their personal sovereignty to someone they may or may not even agree with. That is all fine and dandy and I support peoples right to vote if they choose to do so, but will forever refuse to take part in the madness that is representative democracy.

[-] 2 points by HCabret2014 (-11) 4 months ago

This is towards 99npround. The reply button disappeared on me.

Or Thoreau style common law republic. In addition to involuntary representation, I am also against majoritarian rule and prefer consensus decision making to 50%+.

[-] 0 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Good luck to you.

Direct Democracy Now!

[-] -2 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

Voter suppression update

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/politics/2014/06/17/tuesday-deadline-nevada-voter-petitions/10698053/

Vote out vote suppressing politicians!!

[-] -3 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 1 week ago

Let it Rain, People!!!

Rain Baby Rain!!

Drown the 1% with Democracy!!!

[-] -2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 1 week ago

Get out the VOTE!

[-] -2 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 1 week ago

The 1% spends all that Koch and Citizens United money to SUPPRESS Your Vote!!

Let it RAIN!

Drown the 1% with DEMOCRACY!!!

[Removed]

[+] -4 points by WSmith (1849) from Cornelius, OR 5 months ago

Cons. RepubliCONS!

[Removed]

[Removed]

[+] -5 points by hatpin (-6) 4 months ago

Yes...we try an make it impossible to find a voting booth in your home town. Normally we put up fake signs, directing simpleton progressives and blacks to vacant lots and they are so effing stupid, they are never able to find a voting both. Works every year

[-] -2 points by 99nproud (2697) 4 months ago

All these dishonest efforts have limited short term success, and profound long term failure for those who take part in it.

http://www.enewspf.com/opinion/analysis/53702-50-years-after-freedom-summer-report-shows-that-communities-of-color-can-shift-the-balance-of-power-in-black-belt-states.html

In the end they cannot stop the overwhelming force of freedom and righteousness!!.

"here it comes,...."