Home | About | Donate

Why Vote? Bernie Sanders Offers Simple Last-Minute Reminder: The GOP Agenda Is Horrific


Of course vote for a good D if you have one to vote for. A green will tend to vote green in competition with either of the other major parties. If there is no green available and no compelling reason to vote for the positions advocated by either D or R; then write in None of the Above.

This course does two things over time. It deprives undesirable wall street D or R oligarchs of an automatic vote, and, at the same time, builds a solid third party. None of the Above also informs Ds and Rs if they are out of sink with modern information-age politics and enables them to adjust. None of the Above delivers as a positive feed back mechanism no matter how you look at it.


I checked my agreement with you, PonyBoy. We are united in our goal.


Yes, we are Garrett.


Nice thought but what makes you think that writing in “none of the above” will get any further than the vote counter or voting machine? It is naive to ignore that the system is rigged. Bernie knows this and that is why he had to register D. Perhaps he should have registered R. at least there was some sort of hope for change. Goddess bless Bernie but perhaps he is in denial that the kleptocracy is run by the MIC.


None of the Above is an aspect of information-age, democracy and physics. Although our brief ritualistic emersion in voting is over for the next two years, evolution accelerating at an accelerating rate continues.

Representative democracy is a tool of capitalism used to manage civilian morale during wealth harvesting in nature and society by capitalists. Almost half the people are aware of this and boycott. None of the Above is not actually necessary to be counted. The goal is to ally with those sensitive souls who boycott voting and see if they will become enthusiastic enough to register and vote in 2020.

Assume tens of millions register as nonpartisan independent green socialists in the next two years. Polling places will be closed in an attempt to keep the people from voting. There will be long lines and people will have time to communicate. Humanity will know what it has done. Information will have been shared. Citizens will realize that talking with each other and voting None of the Above is a monkey wrench in the collapsing capitalist system. What comes out the other side will either be increased totalitarianism or a new seven branch government working for peace and justice with nature. Voting for None of the Above becomes a majority when the people decide on peace.


Yes! Sorry, I misread your post.


Can add and subtract. Guilty of rounding. Yes, 80 years closer to right.


I don’t find much in your response to disagree with.

The Democrats are a poor, often anemic opposition party.

As for how we got here, people like me we got here because America’s history aligns more naturally with republican values and policies. Democratic values are, in some real, every-man sense, less “American”.

In the 1770’s, America forcefully rebelled against the British and its taxes. It was money and private property and taxes from the start. The US didn’t say pretty please to Britain like Canada or Australia. They fought. With guns. To claim and build America, white settlers exterminated the native population and imported slaves to boost profit. With guns. From the 13 colonies, America’s boundaries pushed to the Pacific, as parcel after parcel was seized. With guns. And a few good/bad lawyers.

The civil war was bloody and brutal and fractured north from south, an injury that remains to this day. It also involved a lot of guns. The great depression revealed America’s every-man-for-himself, libertarian heart. FDR got a New Deal but a lot of conservatives have hated every letter of that legislation ever since.

Then, early in the 1900s, a protestant Christian movement founded by Scofield and others in the late 1800s, and energized by millions of white KKK members, became a major political force. They morphed into the moral majority that elected Reagan in 79, the twice born POTUS who convinced a generation or two of Americans that government was the problem.

No other country has these deep roots in evangelical Christianity and libertarian economics. The nexus of the two can be found in preachers like Joel Osteen and Kreflow Dollar (great name) who interpret the Bible as a self-help manual for would-be, wealth-seeking capitalists. (Christians believe in God. Libertarians believe in money. Libertarian Christians believe God is money.)

I often argue with a colleague who thinks Americans reject Dems because they are bad politicians or have bad ads. To be sure, many are and do. But I think Americans reject Dems because most Americans don’t believe in secular, liberal values, personal or economic. Only in America is Ayn Rand an esteemed philosopher and writer. Most Americans still think government is always bad and markets are always better. Americans don’t believe in sharing. Obamacare proves as much. They don’t believe in public goods, infrastructure, education, or health care. They just do not believe in liberal/progressive values.

That is also why Dems like Bill Clinton and Barak Obama tend to be conservative. Because American values are more conservative than progressive. America is not Britain or Canada. It’s very different. America is the most extreme democracy in the world with respect to the balance it prefers between the public and private sectors.

How to get out of it? Your blunt point about me is right: I have no magic formula.

That’s because the real challenge for the Dems is to change the longtime American mind on government and community.

As a partial answer, I would say that liberals and progressives of all stripes need to unite under one party. That one party is the Dem party. United they could transform the Dem party into something much less corporate, much less Clintonesque. Greens like Nader and Stein need to work within the party, again, in Nader’s case. Ocasio Cortez proves that far-left (hate that term) liberals can win. Sanders proves it. Warren proves it. Heck, California proves it too.

It is a generational challenge. But as American demographics change in the next 20 years, and as corporate capitalism provides fewer answers to income inequality and the effects of AI and robotics and offshoring on every western economy, something has to give. Ideas like universal basic income and lifetime employment (Japanese idea) will continue to surface. New forms of socialism will emerge, no matter how much Jordan Peterson dislikes it. And of course the continued degradation of the environment will push everyone to rethink government, economics, and civilization.

In the meantime, before big and better answers emerge, liberals should not stand down in the face of Trump and his legion, who are trying to make America into one giant, corrupt family business. Liberals must resist. And for now, the only effective way to do that is to vote Dem. Sorry, hate its flaws too, but there is no other option.

The election results last night were a good start. Something to build on. So, so much better for the Dems to be in charge of congress.

In the end, individuals like you and I can only try to do what we can in our own small spheres of influence. Perhaps we get involved in local politics. Perhaps we write on web sites to encourage one another. I have kids. I soldier on. I hope. And to the extent that I can, I vote and do.


As I have said many times, no fan of Hillary Clinton, much preferred Gore and Obama and Sanders, for all of the obvious reasons.

But if I have to make a choice between Hillary and Trump, it’s Hillary.


Suppose the Green party becomes a national third party on every ballot in every state.

It would be a left party. The Dems would be a left party, center left to be sure, but left. The Greens and Dems would end up splitting the non-conservative vote. That would enable Republicans to establish a permanent majority so long as the split persisted.

The right had a Tea Party. Guess what they did? They became insurgents WITHIN the Republican party. They changed it, radically. I don’t like how they changed it but they were very effective.

That is how you win. The Green Party should follow the same path as the Tea Party. Go inside the main left wing party and transform it.

Establishing a third party is a losing strategy. See Canada for evidence. It has liberals, NDPs, and Greens, all left. And in that very left country, a conservative, Stephen Harper, managed to hold power for two terms with about 30% popularity because the left split their vote.

Are you trying to actually govern and change the country?