Presidential Debate Commission Adopts Mute Button

[HorusRa2 5,005]

Just now, FATCAT said:

I understand your frustrations, but a 3rd party vote given our current system is, and always has been, a waste. It's been a waste for more than a century. We have to change how we vote (ranked choice) or get rid of the electoral college before we can ever consider third parties. People aren't telling you that to discourage you or manipulate you, it's just the reality we face, and if enough people vote third party while our only viable ticket is up against a facist, you aren't going to get brownie points from anyone. There are people dying right now, there are families being separated at the border, we don't have time to get this wrong.

There were people dying in the Obama administration from very similar economic circumstances and the Obama administration made that pain worse. But to your point about third parties, you are wrong. Pure and simple. The reality is that for as long as people like you are unwilling to vote for what you would rather see than for the two major political parties, you will never see anything get better. This is why even though we have known about climate change for decades we are at the brink of disaster and we have done nothing to prevent the chaos that will inevitably come. 

And that's on people like you who tell people the only choice they have that is worth anything is to vote for a republican who will do everything but to acknowledge the problem and the democrat who will acknowledge the problem but will say there's nothing they can do about it except write sternly worded letters. 

[REALITY 80,177]

1 minute ago, HorusRa2 said:

Since the connection is indirectly helping both, it cannot be indirectly helping either. 

The fact is that Joe Biden is far and away more ahead than any challenger to an incumbent since the late 1930s. There is no way that Joe loses the election at this point and based off of the available information we have. And in fact, Joe doesn't need florida to win; he would only need Florida to prevent Trump from having any paths to victory considering the interrelated polling in the midwest. 

I know that we agree with one another on how the democrats are governing and why it is a bad thing for progressivism; that's why I don't want to be vicious with you about this. The fact is that I could not bring myself to vote for one rapist and racist over the other. They both have credible rape allegations. Both are responsible for racist policies that have resulted in mass incarceration and misery from people of all colors, disproportionately african american. So, I voted for the political party that is in alignment with my values. 

If you dig deep into the democratic party, there are really very few of their values and policy actions that a progressive would agree with. The only reason you would vote for a democrat is to prevent a republican from getting into office. The problem with that is that for as long as you're willing to vote dem to prevent the republican, there will be no third party alternative. People have to choose to vote third party in order for a third party to seize power. I am choosing to vote third party for that goal because in the long-term, a third political party is much more healthy for our democracy than Joe Biden getting 27 more electoral votes than he was going to get anyway (and still win). 

Well, but if Biden needs Florida to only prevent Trump from having any more paths to victory, isn't that reason enough to vote for him? From the data that we have, Biden looks like he's going to win this election. And I actually do value polling data, and I'm not just like, "BuT tHeY wErE wRoNg iN 2016!", even though many people say that. 

Look, Biden's obviously not the perfect candidate. He was like my 5th choice at best during the Democratic Primary. And I totally respect that he doesn't share your views. Even though I did vote for him (here in Texas), I didn't vote for him because I'm enthusiastic about Biden necessarily, but because I just despise Trump so much that voting for Biden was the only viable thing I could do.

Third parties, overall, would probably be beneficial for our democracy. It gets more voices heard and it gets the nuances that I think both the Democratic and Republican parties lack. However, I just don't like this notion of almost viewing third parties as our "saving grace." I'm not saying that's what you're doing, but I've noticed that a lot of the times people who act with such disdain for the two major parties almost believe that the third parties would act entirely differently if suddenly they were the major party in the US.

Politics is corrupt, I'd argue inherently so. When people have that much power and authority, who knows what'll happen. For all we know, we could eventually grow the third parties in the US to a sizeable amount, only to have them be just as corrupt as the current parties now. 

If they align with your views, and if you want to vote for them, that's 100% your prerogative. But politics in general is a corrupt institution. A rise in third parties will not necessarily change that. 

[HorusRa2 5,005]

6 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

Well, but if Biden needs Florida to only prevent Trump from having any more paths to victory, isn't that reason enough to vote for him? From the data that we have, Biden looks like he's going to win this election. And I actually do value polling data, and I'm not just like, "BuT tHeY wErE wRoNg iN 2016!", even though many people say that. 

Look, Biden's obviously not the perfect candidate. He was like my 5th choice at best during the Democratic Primary. And I totally respect that he doesn't share your views. Even though I did vote for him (here in Texas), I didn't vote for him because I'm enthusiastic about Biden necessarily, but because I just despise Trump so much that voting for Biden was the only viable thing I could do.

Third parties, overall, would probably be beneficial for our democracy. It gets more voices heard and it gets the nuances that I think both the Democratic and Republican parties lack. However, I just don't like this notion of almost viewing third parties as our "saving grace." I'm not saying that's what you're doing, but I've noticed that a lot of the times people who act with such disdain for the two major parties almost believe that the third parties would act entirely differently if suddenly they were the major party in the US.

Politics is corrupt, I'd argue inherently so. When people have that much power and authority, who knows what'll happen. For all we know, we could eventually grow the third parties in the US to a sizeable amount, only to have them be just as corrupt as the current parties now. 

If they align with your views, and if you want to vote for them, that's 100% your prerogative. But politics in general is a corrupt institution. A rise in third parties will not necessarily change that. 

I don't think it's enough reason to vote for Biden in particular. He has a long list of transgressions that are directly opposed to what I value. I understand the lesser of two evils vote but I'm just not going to participate in that. 

Re: third parties - you are correct that there's nothing to say a third political party would not at some point be corrupted. That said, from a policy standpoint today, if you compare the current democratic and republican parties, I think it's hard to argue that there isn't a need for more diversity in terms of perspective and governing technique. 

Re: third parties in presidential debates (trying to pivot back to topic), if nothing else, voting for the green party and ensuring they could get into the presidential debate at some point in the future would at least add diversity with regard to climate. Right now we have a democratic party that says, "We love fracking," and a republican party that is saying, "we loved fracking first." It is important that there be a diversity of ideas thrown out there for the american people to select from. And while this mute function prevents Trump and Biden from having a screaming match instead of a debate, what it doesn't do is ensure that Americans have a true sense of all the different political approaches to governing. 

[Whispering 18,865]

Back to the topic: 

This is only for four minutes of each of the 15 minute segments. Trump still has 11 minutes to spew his nonsense without restrictions. 

[TimisaMonster 31,073]

Trump Supporters: "YoU aRe TaKiNg AwAy AlL mY rIgHt To FrEeDoM oF sPeEcH!!!" 

Kamala Harris: Excuse me! I'm talking! *mutes mic*

Trump: 

Joe: 

The way we won...they should have done this a long time ago...but due to Trumps childlike behavior of constantly needing to he the center of attention otherwise he throws a tantrum if he isn't being heard every 5 seconds....we now have a mute mic 

[FATCAT 60,896]

1 hour ago, HorusRa2 said:

There were people dying in the Obama administration from very similar economic circumstances and the Obama administration made that pain worse. But to your point about third parties, you are wrong. Pure and simple. The reality is that for as long as people like you are unwilling to vote for what you would rather see than for the two major political parties, you will never see anything get better. This is why even though we have known about climate change for decades we are at the brink of disaster and we have done nothing to prevent the chaos that will inevitably come. 

And that's on people like you who tell people the only choice they have that is worth anything is to vote for a republican who will do everything but to acknowledge the problem and the democrat who will acknowledge the problem but will say there's nothing they can do about it except write sternly worded letters. 

the electoral college requires 270 votes to win outright. Any more than 2 candidates would make it near impossible to reach that number. I'm sorry, but the facts don't fit your feelings & you need to own up to reality before you fall off your high horse & into fascism.

[HorusRa2 5,005]

18 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

the electoral college requires 270 votes to win outright. Any more than 2 candidates would make it near impossible to reach that number. I'm sorry, but the facts don't fit your feelings & you need to own up to reality before you fall off your high horse & into fascism.

There's no real evidence to support what you just stated. It's just what you think might happen if there were three main political parties. There is no way of knowing how the vote totals would be split up between the three if all three parties (Republican, Dem & Green) if they were all elevated to the conversation at equal levels. 

You should own up to the fact that we live in an Oligarchy and has already descended to facism long before Trump got into office. 

[FATCAT 60,896]

38 minutes ago, HorusRa2 said:

There is no way of knowing how the vote totals would be split up between the three if all three parties (Republican, Dem & Green) if they were all elevated to the conversation at equal levels. 

You really have no idea, Green would only split the left. Republicans would immediately demonize the Green party and turn Fox and other conservative outlets on them in a heartbeat.

Listen, I think more parties is a good idea, but it isn't possible without changing our elections. Until then, vote blue like your life depends on it, because for many, it does.

 

[HorusRa2 5,005]

37 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

You really have no idea, Green would only split the left. Republicans would immediately demonize the Green party and turn Fox and other conservative outlets on them in a heartbeat.

Listen, I think more parties is a good idea, but it isn't possible without changing our elections. Until then, vote blue like your life depends on it, because for many, it does.

 

It's almost as if the republicans already do that with the democrats and the democrats scramble to prove that they are more republican than progressive in order to pick off a few votes on the most extreme of margins. That's really working out really well when both political parties in the US won't ban fracking. Oh, and then the democrats have the gall to say that they believe in science and yet they continue to do the opposite of what the science says. 

Yeah, voting blue like your life depends on it is going to get us all killed. Great job. 

[Queen Bitch 10,513]

The fact that this is even necessary is sad really. 

On 10/20/2020 at 4:29 PM, Cookie Tookie said:

How about actually letting 3rd party candidates on the debate stage? That should be their main concern. Because we’re disgusted with the same corrupt duopoly we’ve been experiencing for a while now.

I agree with this.
I know that realistically only Biden and Trump will have a chance of winning. But the media doesn't even give attention to the other candidates; well Kanye gets attention, but only because he's already a big celebrity.
Take Jo Jorgensen (whom I'm personally rooting for) as an example. With so much focus on women's rights, sexism & MeeToo, I find it very strange that the media is basically completely ignoring one of the only female candidates (still) in the race. 

[Chromatican 4,046]

This is such a must. I know this might be used against Bernie-types at the Democratic debates in the future, but its a must in a Trump debate. A lot of us have already made up our minds, but there is a segment of America that (unfortunately) is unsure of who to vote for, and may not follow politics as closely as we do. Hopefully this allows for some more info being disseminated to the public.