Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
Actually,
If 10% of people vote, or 80%, and the results are the same either way, under which scenario can the victor assume some sort of mandate? You always want your guy to win, of course, but you want a big turnout so there's not so much doubt about what "most" people support.
If this were manifest, it would have to be done by someone that does not exist in the duopoly. The real problem is who is on the ballot, how they got there and of those that are on the ballot why do only 2 of them really count, not who votes for whom.
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
My pet peeve: those who say they are going to refuse to vote to send a message. Who is going to receive that message?
I have been voting exclusively third, fourth, fifth, Independent, anything but Republican or Democrat as my message for over 10 years now. Many say that is like not voting at all and yet there I am voting virtually every election, exercising my right, pissing off all of the other voters. The answer to your question is in reality no is really receiving any messages, only giving.
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
Actually,
If 10% of people vote, or 80%, and the results are the same either way, under which scenario can the victor assume some sort of mandate? You always want your guy to win, of course, but you want a big turnout so there's not so much doubt about what "most" people support.
That's been Robert Reich's big push lately. Certainly he's anti-fascism and wants Trump out of office. But he's been saying that it needs to be more than a little-v victory. It needs to be a landslide, a message, a repudiation. So, yes, vote. Not for the win, but to set the tone of the nation, telling the minority that they're outnumbered by a significant amount.
See that is what I am talking about. Would he rather lots of people voted and the landslide be Trump? I think not. He is assuming the more people vote, the more will vote against Trump and this is the foundation of his thinking. If he was not confident of this, he would prefer they stay home if not voting against Trump. This is a classic example of my pet peeve, he does not want more people to vote to exercise our rights as some sign of virtue, he wants to be sure not only is Trump out, but to insure there is no dissent and it goes down smoothly.
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
Actually,
If 10% of people vote, or 80%, and the results are the same either way, under which scenario can the victor assume some sort of mandate? You always want your guy to win, of course, but you want a big turnout so there's not so much doubt about what "most" people support.
That's been Robert Reich's big push lately. Certainly he's anti-fascism and wants Trump out of office. But he's been saying that it needs to be more than a little-v victory. It needs to be a landslide, a message, a repudiation. So, yes, vote. Not for the win, but to set the tone of the nation, telling the minority that they're outnumbered by a significant amount.
That's a little different. Winning by a huge margin sends a different message: not only did you lose, your ideas are wildly unpopular. If the turnout is high, that makes it even worse. But with a massive turnout and a 55-45% victory, that's a solid win but the losing side can't really say "you only won because the weather favored your side" etc. They'll have to admit they lost. Like Al Gore and Hillary, they might not have become president but they never had to say they lost the election.
It needs to be a huge margin to get past the Republican voter suppression and the skewed results from the electoral college.
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
Actually,
If 10% of people vote, or 80%, and the results are the same either way, under which scenario can the victor assume some sort of mandate? You always want your guy to win, of course, but you want a big turnout so there's not so much doubt about what "most" people support.
That's been Robert Reich's big push lately. Certainly he's anti-fascism and wants Trump out of office. But he's been saying that it needs to be more than a little-v victory. It needs to be a landslide, a message, a repudiation. So, yes, vote. Not for the win, but to set the tone of the nation, telling the minority that they're outnumbered by a significant amount.
That's a little different. Winning by a huge margin sends a different message: not only did you lose, your ideas are wildly unpopular. If the turnout is high, that makes it even worse. But with a massive turnout and a 55-45% victory, that's a solid win but the losing side can't really say "you only won because the weather favored your side" etc. They'll have to admit they lost. Like Al Gore and Hillary, they might not have become president but they never had to say they lost the election.
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
Actually,
If 10% of people vote, or 80%, and the results are the same either way, under which scenario can the victor assume some sort of mandate? You always want your guy to win, of course, but you want a big turnout so there's not so much doubt about what "most" people support.
That's been Robert Reich's big push lately. Certainly he's anti-fascism and wants Trump out of office. But he's been saying that it needs to be more than a little-v victory. It needs to be a landslide, a message, a repudiation. So, yes, vote. Not for the win, but to set the tone of the nation, telling the minority that they're outnumbered by a significant amount.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 1:59pm
ScottFromWyoming wrote:
sirdroseph wrote:
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
Actually,
If 10% of people vote, or 80%, and the results are the same either way, under which scenario can the victor assume some sort of mandate? You always want your guy to win, of course, but you want a big turnout so there's not so much doubt about what "most" people support.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 1:49pm
sirdroseph wrote:
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
My pet peeve: those who say they are going to refuse to vote to send a message. Who is going to receive that message?
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
Actually,
If 10% of people vote, or 80%, and the results are the same either way, under which scenario can the victor assume some sort of mandate? You always want your guy to win, of course, but you want a big turnout so there's not so much doubt about what "most" people support.
Pet peeve. Those who emphatically urge us to vote. Be honest just say to vote for so and so or so and so. Those who are most emphatic about making sure others exercise their right to vote really just want you to vote for who they want. Just say what you mean. This goes both ways I know of those on both ends of political spectrum that do this bull....ish.
If I could speak conch I could hit people over the head and just be misunderstood rather than a worn out old sea shell with the sound of the sea trapped inside...
Itâs nice knowing someone whoâs willing to lend you a metal detector.
A big magnet on a stick can work. It's kind of scary how much metal is out there and a screw in a horse's hoof isn't a good thing
I took it out of the car, and was going to put it in the basement, so I turned it on and did a quick scan of a portion of the side yard, where I found the knob. It's too hot, and getting ready to storm, so I didn't feel like going all in. But, I had one hit ... clearly something buried. I'm not interested in excavating.
It really is good to keep that coffee can full of odd nuts and bolts and nails and screws. It's also good that I had decided to only mow the front and side yards this afternoon, as I realized when I had one more short pass to make in the side yard going "home" that the knob/screw holding the left handle together had come off! I found the knob, but not the threaded part.
But then I found a wingnut in the coffee can that isn't perfect, but close enough to hold the handle together for now.
It’s nice knowing someone who’s willing to lend you a metal detector.
