Citizens United case is Libertarians lawsuit against TV moguls protecting BILLARY 2008 by censorship of the Libertarian expose of Billary crimes..... US Sup Ct expanded the applicability of the case to allow any group spend unlimited money for any issue thus Sheldon Adelson or other billionaires can blanket Iowa AIRWAVES against peace in Palestine or lies against hydrogen cars to pretend polluting cars are not making more people die in bad air

Quite the argument for disengaging from participation in democracy. I hate to break it to you, but the two party system, which I don't like any better than you do, is baked in to the Constitutional electoral process. Our founding fathers may not have realized what they were creating, but the voting process guaranteed the rapid formation of a two party system. Voters have no way to change that. Certainly voting in 2016 for Jill Stein, for example, did nothing to change the system. The best disgruntled voters can hope for is to build new parties to replace the old, but it will still be a two party system. That is because our unfortunate system does not allow for multiple party power sharing blocks. It is winner take all. Your present comment seems to be arguing for non-voting, which is highly irresponsible and essentially amounts to turning one's back on the Constitutional call for citizens to participate by voting. You have offered no viable constructive alternative, and that is irresponsible.

More than anything, we need to push to get big money out of the game, not an easy challenge. But deciding not to vote out of a false idealistic sense of moral superiority does NOTHING to fix the problem. It is just turning the hen house over to the foxes.

@MikeInBatonRouge Believe and practice what you want. If parties want my vote, they can earn it. Until then, I will not encourage them in their game. Third party candidates can and have won elections around the country where they did not need big money to be competitive, so no, I will not cave into your arguement for voting the lesser evil. Irresponsibility is continuing to vote for the same shit or evil and expecting something different to magically happen. The Dems continue to move to the right and will continue to do so as long as most sheeple mindlessly waste their free right to vote on the two party system instead of voting for other parties who have actual honest, unbought people to choose from that are in touch with ordinary people and responsive to us, not the rich and corporations. Those mindless sheeple who don't question the system and demand better are the irresponsible ones, not me....

My hunch is that if the sheeple woke up and started voting third party for prez and congressional elections, the ruling class would suddenly lose control of the system and impose a military crackdown with martial law, ala Chile after Allende was elected. And if so, maybe that would be good for the US, as it's time we finally fought these pricks and their hired military in the streets once and for all....

@TomMcGiverin wow. You call me naive, but you have it backward. Your tactic of disengagement is precisely the wrong approach to ever get big money out of the driver's seat at the national level. You can't just click your heels together three times and wish what you want into being. You have to fight for it, and it takes a lot of persistance. You want to take your ball and go home, metaphorically speaking. How perfect. That does absolutely nothing to create pressure for change. You sound a bit like a Bernie-or-bust adherent, or Ralph Nader voter. Same difference. The primaries are about ideals. The general election is about pragmatism, and you don't get it.

@MikeInBatonRouge And you're full of it. Enjoy being blocked.

You better be careful! Or they'll start calling you Bill. Long story short. I worked endlessly from late 2015 throughout that primary to advocate for Sanders spending every free moment I had on facehack to get his policies and message out. As debate 2 came to an end I was already beginning to see a vision of a let down. I denied the Hedges interview of Nader and kept marching on. But they called the election cycle almost down to a tee. I still say outside of all the bullshit that went down during those months, Sanders won. The DNC found a way to cover it up. Without the bullshit, Sanders would have easily. If Sanders took Jill Stein up of running the Green Party ticket, Sanders just might be our president today! I witnessed/talked to/and chatted with scores of republicans and independents looking for information to change party affiliation to vote for Sanders. He let the country down and then also climbed of the false Russiagate narrative as a slap to all our faces.

We can take the Green Party or the SEP to the top the same way we did for Sanders!

@William_Mary I'm very lame at getting snark, so maybe you need to explain for me. What do you mean by the Bill reference? I agree that if Bernie had taken up Jill Stein's offer of running with her as a Green, he might have won because he was already very well known and the Greens were already on the ballot for prez in every state. But he caved and endorsed Killary which was letting us all down. Some say he did it because the Dems threatened him and his family, others say he did it to keep his working relationship with the Dems in the Senate. Either way, I'm sure he knows it wasn't right and he probably regrets it, but did it to fight another day. I don't think I can agree with you about the Greens or SEP becoming winners in big time elections, not as long as most of the sheeple still think like MikeIN BatonRouge. What is SEP, in case I am guessing wrong?

@TomMcGiverin

William=Bill I tend to be a bit loud and passionate, seemingly angered, at times. Your reply simply sounded like something I would say almost to a tee. I often cuss at Lewis Black for making millions off my natural character! SO when someone starts sounding like me I say that to them. Be careful, they might start calling you Bill.

SEP=Socialist Equality Party

Part of Sanders job comes with threats. They all get threats. It doesn't matter who they come from, he has a duty to deal with them appropriately. He has the top law enforcement agencies at his disposal in DC. Anyone using that at an excuse for him is simply ludicrous.

@William_Mary If I were him, I would take threats seriously, as even the top law enforcement agencies may not always be able to protect you, or even want to protect you, if you piss off the wrong powerful people. For example Mel Carnahan of Missouri or Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, both US senators who died in small plane crashes after they pissed off Cheney by opposing the Iraq War. I think they were both assassinated, but, like the real story of what happened on 9-11, we'll never know. I've got a feeling that if Bernie were elected and he had, for example, someone like Liz Warren as his running mate, he might easily suffer a conveniently arranged heart attack with the help of one of our intelligence agencies so she could play LBJ to his JFK and give the corporate boys all the cooperation they asked for.

@TomMcGiverin I could see that happening. ✔

@William_Mary Disturbing, isn't it? That is why I think Bernie will think long and hard about not picking anyone who is corruptible as a running mate should he somehow get the nomination. It will not be Warren, as he has no reason to trust her after she refused to back him last time, instead she helped Hillary in spite of Warren knowing how corrupt and neo-liberal Hillary was. My guess is he would pick a woman who is less known but totally uncorruptible.

I will argue empty is the failure to consider what you read and look back on the history of where our country is at today. Recognizing both parties share the same agenda. Within this next article you can apply the narrative of net neutrality to all aspects of government and reach the same conclusion. Also written by the same writer.

Dems And GOP Work Together Like A Boxer’s 1–2 Punch To Knock You Out

[caitlinjohnstone.com]

Outside of main stream media you can find scores of journalist who became independent in their work because they couldn't get real factual information past their editors, or fired from MSM because they crossed the establishment narrative that the ruling class now suppresses from the public by releasing their work through other means.

We are indeed engaged in an information warfare. Refusal to understand that or educate yourself on this as a duty of media and citizens alike is simply compliance to further advancement towards fascism being brought to us by both parties. And your seemingly call of tribalism is part of the weapons they use against us.

@William_Mary I wish it were so. ! I am Canadian and really wonder if everyone south of the border is totally insane!, LOL. If it is as you described, great. Why do you all tend to express things in totally oppositional terms? Why not admit that the other side may have a small contribution to make?

@dance1 Why not admit that the other side may have a small contribution to make?

History: Tells us the same story of both parties. Lies and deceitful means to war. Democratically elected government interference's from CIA orchestrated chaos with help of terrorist. From Reagan through Trump. Pick a war, I'll tell you how it was lied about and a reason. Often due to resources, socialist nature, and or corporate desire to expand.

If you really think it's about just the US, you're really missing the big picture. What will you be leaving behind for your family? Your country is part of the problem in Venezuela. You're backing another illegal government take over for their gold. But you're ok with that I take it. People are dying in Venezuela over sanctions our countries are backing, again over lies for resources and a government with a socialist nature towards greater equality for its citizens which vastly improved from Chavez's revolution. But the ruling class and corporations, from there and around the world couldn't have that. Couldn't have the world seeing a Latin American like country improve its society by these means.

First Obama then Trump while a count of recent that 40,000 have died due to a lack of medicines and medical equipment and other issues for you and us because we want to pillage their country. And today the opposition party we've been supporting is now neck deep in a scandal from their fake emergency aid illusion with ties to another person milking their gas company with our help of millions.

Rather than through diplomacy, that's really not needed, the Brits have stolen 3 billion in gold, we have frozen their assets in billions of gas from the US, and your corporations are bidding for their gold through opposition to support death via those illegal sanctions.

Other side? I'm against both sides! You obviously miss the point of the article! In more ways than one.

Rank order voting is still Democracy. The only problem with it in America is (in my humble opinion) it is too complicated for Americans to understand well enough for them ever to support it, much less demand the change.

Biden has ties to about every problem and bad republicans in politics. He has a long history of supporting bad policies we still operate on today. I challenge you to join our group and debate that which has been posted about his past in post. or upcoming post. He just spent 8 years as the vice president in which Obama spent 8 years supporting and expanding the same bad policies and warring agenda of GW Bush. And giving the ruling class a pass on wrecking our economy while passing out trillions in bailouts! Leaving society to flip the bill and many on the streets. Many still today unable to get back on their feet or above water. Only one time did he speak negative of those policies, when he did he willingly apologized as he was forced to like a shrill would.

@William_Mary I am not defending Biden. There are several candidates running whom I would prefer to him. I said he's a nice guy (at least by public reputation). But he'a also out of touch with the current momentum of the Democratic party. But according to polls, apparently so are a whole lot of voters. My point is we should not become so alarmist about him as to forget how utterly horrendous Donal Trump is. There is no equivalency. If Bernie wins the nomination, I am absolutely voting for him. But same goes for if Biden wins. Neither of those two are in,my top three or four choices.

@greyeyed123 re. Rank order voting being too complicated for Americans, that argument was put forward in Ireland as well. But voters are now more invested. As things stand, Americans tune out because they easily think (with good reason) that their vote won't count. We are disenfranchised by the current system, which was planned intentionally to ptotect the privileged from the will of the masses and with deference toward sparsely populated slave states of the Old South. No wonder Americans feel like tuning out. They aren't genetically "dumber" than the Irish. Rank order voting guarantees it will count.

I think you are somewhat naive to be so doubtful of conspiracy that is, if not in activity, is clearly there in shared purpose among the players.

@TomMcGiverin well, that is the appeal of conspiracy theories. There are several research articles on the psychology of conspiracy theory appeal.

@MikeInBatonRouge It's not an argument against rank order voting. It's an observation as to why it hasn't gained any traction in the US, why virtually no one knows what it is or how it works, and why no politicians or political commentators are talking about it. I'm sure someone, somewhere in US politics has mentioned it, but I'm a political junkie and I can think of no one. Not one person (politician, author, columnist, or talking head).

@greyeyed123 I first heard about it on npr, not at all doing any deep research. It is actually already in operation in the U.S. Maybe this will help: one state has already put it into action, as have a handful of municipalities.
[en.m.wikipedia.org]

@MikeInBatonRouge I first heard about it from a fellow teacher 12+ years ago (she was a Social Studies teacher), but I immediately understood the jist of it before she even finished explaining. (I'm sure I've heard it mentioned occasionally since then, but as I said, it just isn't getting any traction.) The link you provide seems very mixed in the US, with multiple entries of places that implemented it, then repealed it (why did so many places repeal it?). Again, my only claim is that it is an idea too complicated for the vast majority of voters to get behind nationwide. All you would have to do is have Fox News suggest it is a Democratic plot to takeover the country, and it would be dead immediately with no hope of passing for generations (mostly because people don't really get it, so it is easily vilified).

@greyeyed123 you just expressed nicely how it is easy to take even straight-forward concepts and convince people they are scary and complicated. Yes, there certainly is pushback. Republicans can only win if democracy is subverted. ...by which I mean, their actual policy goals favor a tiny privileged minority. So along with obfuscation to confuse voters into voting against their own economic best interest, the GOP does NOT want straight-forward representational democracy. That would never favor them.

@MikeInBatonRouge There are several research articles on the psychology of conspiracy theory appeal.

There was also a CIA program started around 1980 in which they directed our main stream media to start calling anyone who spoke against the establishment narrative a conspiracy theorist. They took 2 simple words and turned them into a bad thing as combined. Then our intelligence agencies, then our X military persons, began infiltrating our news media over the years. And getting paid well to conform the talking points towards perpetual warring. Perception management started under the Reagan administration. You can go to Consortium News and put perception management in their Google search engine and find Robert Parry's work on that and other articles about perception management. Robert Parry left MSM media over this and started the first internet new source in 1995. I would also highly recommend to read the memorium to him on the right of any page on the site. It details his work and reasons he left MSM which is staunchly related to what we are dealing with today in politics.

@MikeInBatonRouge, @greyeyed123

If you haven't heard about rank voting it just might be the news you're watching. Maine was the first state to enact it. A number of states and cities are in the process of looking at it and enacting it.

I will argue it isn't that difficult. You vote your first choice then down line. It's being argued as difficult because the establishment doesn't want it! Let that sink in for a moment, if you need a moment.

What Is Ranked-Choice Voting? An Exercise in Representative Democracy, Reformists Say

[fortune.com]

@William_Mary To be clear, I wasn't arguing against it. I was saying that a nationwide system is unlikely as too many on the right will recognize the advantage it gives to the left, and reject it as a plot to take over the country by Deep State, Obama-loving, yada yada yada lefties...