are you registered to vote yet?

I think moderates are better for both sides. Believe it or not, Obamacare or even Romneycare are quite radical. And so would repealing the welfare programs started by Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Johnson. But I don’t know if moderates can survive today. For the Democrats, their newer supporters are left-wing extremists, so it would be hard for a moderate to get into the Democratic Party. For the Republicans, it’s either they support Trump or not be in the party at all. This is why Corker and Flake are leaving. Time will settle this one out, and eventually, we’ll both be together again. But in order for that to happen, all the extreme issues (such as socialism, bathroom bills, political correctness, and the zero-tolerance policy) need to be thrown out the window.

Moderates/centrists definitely benefit both parties, but it seems like that in the recent decades, they've fit in more with the Democratic Party, particularly as Bill Clinton moderated the party with his run for the presidency in 1992. However, since you did bring up universal health care, particularly not just the Affordable Care Act that was passed through Congress in 2009 and 2010, but Romneycare as well, which was passed when Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts in 2006 and was part of the reason Romney was such a weak candidate against Barack Obama when Obama was running for re-election in 2012-the Republicans' message since the passage of the ACA in March 2010 had been "repeal and replace" (which was their rallying cry for that year's midterms). However, as seen with the campaign Bernie Sanders ran for the 2016 election and, despite the fact that Hillary Clinton won the Democratic primary (which her win was definitely questionable considering we're all well aware that Debbie Wasserman Schultz, as chair of the Democratic National Committee, tried to affect the results of the primary to favor Hillary Clinton), she then lost the election to Donald Trump, which has practically shown that the influence of Third Way has dissipated, at least in the United States. For example, the Sanders campaign caused Hillary Clinton to move to the left, while her husband actually moved even more to the center after being elected in 1992-as the Democrats faced heavy losses in the 1994 midterms to the Republicans following unpopular moves by Bill Clinton's administration where taxes were raised, and on the same subject as Romneycare and Obamacare, the unpopular "Hillarycare" plan of 1993, Bill Clinton's political positions were more towards the center when he ran for re-election in 1996 than they had been when he was first elected in the previous election.
However, that does lead me to another point-ever since Harry Truman was president, the Democrats have wanted universal healthcare. Many of Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society programs were supposed to pave way for this, but Johnson couldn't pass this before he left office because of the massive Republican gains in the 1966 midterms due to the unpopularity of the Vietnam War (and the Great Society was starting to have its own popularity issues in the mid-late '60s). Hillary Clinton's efforts when she was First Lady in 1993 and 1994 clearly failed, which meant Obamacare's passage in 2010 made it the first time ever that the Democrats achieved their goal of universal health care. Of course, the Trump administration has attempted to repeal it, but the efforts tried last year failed. Point of the story is, I wouldn't call universal health care that radical, especially considering a substantial amount of Democrats today would prefer to have a single payer system anyways. But yes, as seen not just from the campaign Bernie Sanders ran, but also the primary wins of politicians such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York, centrists have clearly lost their influence in the Democratic Party. The Republicans had already started moving further and further to the right with its reaction against the Obama administration in the midterm elections of 2010 and 2014 and that environment is how Trump gained so much ground in the 2016 primary and that support maintained itself into the election against Hillary Clinton. For lack of a better term, whenever the United States experiences a change in party in power of the presidency, the candidate that won is the reaction against the previous president, and Trump is clearly the reaction against Barack Obama. Likewise, Obama was the reaction against George W. Bush, Bush was the reaction against Bill Clinton, and Bill Clinton was the reaction against George H.W. Bush. George H.W. Bush was of course elected to the presidency when a popular Republican president was in office, but Ronald Reagan was the reaction against Jimmy Carter, just like how Carter was the reaction against Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon was the reaction against Lyndon B. Johnson. These midterms are also crucial in seeing if any reaction against Trump could affect the 2020 presidential election.
 
Sure some rich people do exploit people, but not all do. There are many great people who are rich for doing what is right as well.
Name one lol
I hate this romanticism of being rich. If people are really rich they can't have been doing what's right because they should have given back more money to the community. No one needs millions of dollars.
Also most rich people were born rich. It's not like they did some great feat to get money.

I am glad we are able to have the freedom to discuss our differences Lamda and I definitely encourage you to research like I do on matters because knowing all sides of a matter is a very good thing (knowing the why factor of logic & reason). :)

Way to be condescending.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I can totally relate with the hate on socialism /s
My country is really falling apart because of it! Oh no, free healthcare! Free education! Not being thousands of dollars in debt because of going to university! It's all so terrible, please come save me!!
 
@nintendofan85:

That last part reminds me of something. I was told that radicalism is like a pendulum. It may go in favor for you, but once it swings away, you will be hit hard by the other side’s radicalism. But what’re your saying sounds like the pendulum is building even more energy as it keeps swinging.

While the right wing keeps moving rightward because of Obama and the left wing keeps moving leftward because of Trump, I suggest that everyone, including the senators that acted like high school teenagers during the whole Kavanaugh process, read this blog entry I written five months ago. Keep in mind that you can’t read it when you’re logged off or not a member. I closed it because I don’t want to redirect those into politics or other subjects to an Animal Crossing fansite.

EDIT: I just realized that the senators can’t read my entry. They are non-members. But then again, there’s always copying and pasting.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I've been registered to vote for quite some time. And I always vote. I will state it bluntly, it means absolutely nothing in my pure red state. Every single county voted red even for the disgusting Trump. That's how far gone my state is, but I still vote, so don't come lecturing to me. I just live in a really, really crappy place, and it feels very hopeless.
 
Yes, I've been registered to vote for quite some time. And I always vote. I will state it bluntly, it means absolutely nothing in my pure red state. Every single county voted red even for the disgusting Trump. That's how far gone my state is, but I still vote, so don't come lecturing to me. I just live in a really, really crappy place, and it feels very hopeless.

Election models can’t draw conclusions over Cruz and Beto, so it’s possible for Beto to win (which I don’t want anyway). But I can safely say that Greg Abbott will win Texas while the Texas House and Texas Senate will remain Republican dominant. Even if the state becomes blue on the federal level, the state level still remains red.
 
@nintendofan85:

That last part reminds me of something. I was told that radicalism is like a pendulum. It may go in favor for you, but once it swings away, you will be hit hard by the other side’s radicalism. But what’re your saying sounds like the pendulum is building even more energy as it keeps swinging.

While the right wing keeps moving rightward because of Obama and the left wing keeps moving leftward because of Trump, I suggest that everyone, including the senators that acted like high school teenagers during the whole Kavanaugh process, read this blog entry I written five months ago. Keep in mind that you can’t read it when you’re logged off or not a member. I closed it because I don’t want to redirect those into politics or other subjects to an Animal Crossing fansite.

EDIT: I just realized that the senators can’t read my entry. They are non-members. But then again, there’s always copying and pasting.

Trust me, we're the most divided we have been since the 1960s.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Election models can’t draw conclusions over Cruz and Beto, so it’s possible for Beto to win (which I don’t want anyway). But I can safely say that Greg Abbott will win Texas while the Texas House and Texas Senate will remain Republican dominant. Even if the state becomes blue on the federal level, the state level still remains red.

This also reminds me of how Southern states were in the 1980s-they would vote Republican for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, but still elected Democrats to statewide offices. It's basically the opposite of what you said, but still similar.
 
Election models can’t draw conclusions over Cruz and Beto, so it’s possible for Beto to win (which I don’t want anyway). But I can safely say that Greg Abbott will win Texas while the Texas House and Texas Senate will remain Republican dominant. Even if the state becomes blue on the federal level, the state level still remains red.

I'm not even talking about Texas. At least Texas has some counties that vote Democrat. My crappy state doesn't even have that.
 
I'm not even talking about Texas. At least Texas has some counties that vote Democrat. My crappy state doesn't even have that.

I thought you were from Texas. I wonder if you moved or if you never lived there to begin with them, but that doesn’t matter.

I wonder what everyone’s top issues are for the election. Mine is obviously civility, but a backup top issue for me is healthcare.
 
Name one lol
I hate this romanticism of being rich. If people are really rich they can't have been doing what's right because they should have given back more money to the community. No one needs millions of dollars.
Also most rich people were born rich. It's not like they did some great feat to get money.



Way to be condescending.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I can totally relate with the hate on socialism /s
My country is really falling apart because of it! Oh no, free healthcare! Free education! Not being thousands of dollars in debt because of going to university! It's all so terrible, please come save me!!

For your first point, I definitely can say there are many people who have gotten rich for doing what is right. :) Off the top of my head, I know Warren Buffet (a very famous stock market trader who lives a very humble life regardless of wealth), Satoru Iwata (Nintendo's former President before sadly passing too young :( ), and Bill Gates are very well known people that earned their wealth the right way. Plus, all 3 have given back to the community in some way or another (or sacrificed their own income to protect those under them from losing their jobs like Satoru Iwata did when the Wii U sold bad) and 2 of them plan on giving all of their wealth to charity after they pass (Warren Buffet and Bill Gates). Another thing to note about these 3 is that all of them started from humble beginnings and they did not forget where they came from in the past. :)

Secondly, I do not see what is condescending about that, it is true that we have the freedom to express each other's view in a civil forum and there is nothing wrong about encouraging someone to become more informed about politics so they know who to vote and not vote.

Lastly, I assume you are being sarcastic there, but if you are being serious, a lot of the things you said are happening in the USA as well (since your profile says you are from Germany). I think to a degree certain facets of society need to be Socialistic like the public school system (before college-level work) which allows kids to learn vital knowledge and skills that can help them in all avenues of life. It is when you make Socialism so dominant that the incentive to work hard and be successful is when there is a problem (a nation has to be balanced at multiple facets to stay sustainable in the long run). I know some people want college to be free in the USA, but I feel like it would only worsen the situation that is happening here where the higher education degrees are becoming increasingly devalued due to a flood of degrees on the market and not enough positions to take all of them. Certain majors are not badly affected yet, but it is only a matter of time. Also, I do not think it would go over well with all the millions of college graduates that are up to their eyeballs in debt because of getting a higher education degree. With the way things are going regardless of an improving economy here, you are far better off getting a 2-year degree in some skilled labor where the demand is out of the roof due to the lack of qualified workers (if I had known what I was getting myself into by going for a Bachelors, I definitely would have taken this route).
 
Last edited:
I thought you were from Texas. I wonder if you moved or if you never lived there to begin with them, but that doesn’t matter.

I wonder what everyone’s top issues are for the election. Mine is obviously civility, but a backup top issue for me is healthcare.

Honestly, it's same-sex marriage. I'm just worried that if Donald Trump appoints more justices to the Supreme Court, particularly if one of them has to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Stephen Breyer, then Obergefell v. Hodges could be overturned.
 
Honestly, it's same-sex marriage. I'm just worried that if Donald Trump appoints more justices to the Supreme Court, particularly if one of them has to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Stephen Breyer, then Obergefell v. Hodges could be overturned.

I know it could happen, but I think I read somewhere that Trump has no intentions of overturning Obergefell. However, he did intend overturning Roe v Wade. And people were more concerned about Roe than Obergefell when Kavanaugh was picked.

I still wish for Obamacare’s repeal, but I don’t think it’s going to be possible anymore with the House likely going to the Democrats. I may never know. The government should have no control of healthcare in any form.
 
Back
Top