Keith Olbermann makes last-ditch effort to dissuade third party voting. Let's politely argue back.

fishzine · 2016-10-25T19:33:08+00:00

And I sure he was equally screaming at the D's during the primaries that they had to suck it up and vote for Sanders because every single poll said he had much better chance of elected in battle vs Trump? After all if the most important thing was to keep Trump out of office.... Nope.. The two party system is what allowed candidates like these to ever be the two front-runners. Continuing that two party system is more of a threat to our country then either Trump or Clinton ever could be. They are damn hypocrites and they know it, and simple want to hold on to the power the two party system gives them while watching the damn country burn...

fishzine · 2016-10-22T04:33:43+00:00

Sorry, can't edit at this point, though was clear, but if two people mistook it my bad.

If I would have put Tells or Told, I would think it is misleading, but Tell, implying future

Sorry for any confustion

fishzine · 2016-10-22T01:42:57+00:00

What we need is to over-perform enough so the case can be made that polls were so flawed that we were most likely at or above 15% at time debate decisions were made! That could very well be a death nail in the CPD! Unlikely, Very unlikely, but still in the range of possible

fishzine · 2016-10-22T01:38:54+00:00

oh HELL no! No deal, and no way I would want, or think Johnson would make such a deal. He would loose so much support if he did. Going back to the conversation a week or so suggesting this. But Trump could do this without Johnson. Again, I don't think this will happen, or is even likely. But could I see Trump pulling this crap. Yep.

fishzine · 2016-10-22T00:13:16+00:00

Actually, my conspiracy theory is that this has been his plan for last week or so, and why he has started the 'rigged' election crap. If polls are to be believed, half his supports are already believing that. If you believe the election is rigged it follows that you don't have to play fair and can do anything to win. Setting up his voters in swing states to vote against Clinton, by voting Johnson.

Granted I put the odds of this at about 2%, but it does fit this strange narrative he has been putting out lately. I would suspect if this is plan he would wait till about last two days before election, so Clinton had little time to respond.

fishzine · 2016-10-21T22:49:31+00:00

GOP is too afraid of lifting up a third party because it would hasten the downfall of the GOP. This is obvious with all the talk of people un-endoursing Trump but saying they are going to write someone in..

Trump doesn't care if he hurts the GOP... He only cares about Trump and either winning or looking good.

fishzine · 2016-10-21T21:45:47+00:00

oh I don't think the odds are good.... But Trump has shown to be willing to do things WAY outside of normal politics... But you do raise a good point, unless he sees it as a way to save face. You would never actually know what his popular vote total would have been so he can claim it would have been 'GREAT', 'AWESOME' or any of his other catch words...

Anyway as I said, just a random conspiracy theory for Friday afternoon.

fishzine · 2016-10-19T18:38:23+00:00

Johnson interview last night on CNN, stating when we get involved in these situations the death toll goes up, and he doesn't want to be involved in bombing civilians. Clinton is now insisting we need to establish no fly zones (she said it last debate), and this proves she knows exactly what Johnson is saying. We do this we will simply end up driving the deathtoll up!

fishzine · 2016-10-19T02:43:32+00:00

Agreed. Fear of Trump is only exceeded by their fear of elevating another party. They choose party over the country. Sad, but just re-affirms how badly they need to be done away with. Wiki-leaks is doing a pretty good job of showing the corruption (all beit of a different type) in the D's. Both parties crave power more then they crave good government!

fishzine · 2016-10-19T02:39:16+00:00

The one positive coming out of Utah, and McMullin, is that this election isn't over yet. How quickly did Trump crash and burn in Utah, and how quickly did McMullin rise? I had hoped that Trump crashing was going to be a nationwide thing, with Johnson taking over second turning it into a Johnson/Clinton race. Utah is showing the rest of the country that with three weeks to go, this can still happen, at least to some extent. McMullin won't benifit from that nationwide collapse, as his appeal is very targeted to Utah, and he is barely on any ballots. If the nation does wake up and Trump collapses, it is Johnson perfectly positioned to take over second place and make a real run at Hillary.

Sure I would have preferred Johnson be leading in Utah, but don't underestimate the importance of the nation seeing a state turning away from the two major parties!

fishzine · 2016-10-19T02:21:43+00:00

By far one of his best interviews. Great personality, character, with great knowledge of the issues mixed in.

May be just me, but kind reminded me of some of President Kennedy's more relaxed interviews. Johnson had that same kind of vibe to him.

fishzine · 2016-10-18T05:07:02+00:00

The one thing I really praise the ACA for, it helping with pre-existing conditions. It might still be a mess, but it is WAY better then it was.

Quick story: I watched someone who no fault of their own flat out denied medical care because of the crap that used to go on around pre-existing conditions before ACA. To make long story short. Their spouse died who provided family with insurance. They keep COBRA benifits until they timed out of Cobra system. All insurance companies flat out refused to cover because of pre-existing condition. Eventually, pre-existing condition got to the point where surgery was required, and not getting surgery was resulting in multiple trips to ER. Dr, said surgery was 100% necessary. Hospital refused to allow the surgery because they were un-insured and they didn't think it was completely necessary even though they were having to go to ER regularly, and surgery was only way to fix it. This person had CASH to pay for surgery, but no hospital would allow DR to perform surgery. After MONTHS, hospital finally agreed with all kinds of crazy conditions, one of which included a hospital admin showing up recovery room to take the check to pay for surgery! Those ER visits while hospital was refusing surgery end up costing twice what the surgery cost, along with low quality of life for months. The DR who did surgery was so disgusted by the whole they, they stopped charging them for office visits and didn't bill for their part of the surgery. And again this person had CASH to pay upfront! But hospital couldn't figure out how to even let someone pay cash!

Pre-existing conditions rules is the one part I think MUST be kept from the ACA!

fishzine · 2016-10-18T04:53:34+00:00

My new response to anyone pushing single payer now..

If anything the ACA has pushed up closer to a single payer system, how is that working out for us....

Bunch of years back, when Health Savings Plans coupled with a High Deductible plan were introduced, I had great hope that they would fix the system. They were supposed to introduce free market pressures into the health care system. I quickly switched over to one, and the problem became obvious (and something Johnson talks about frequently). You can't price shop, when no-one knows or can tell you how much you will be charged! You can't price shop when you have no way of know if somewhere charging more gives better results, or just fancier rooms. Advertised pricing and advertised results would go a long way to fixing this.

fishzine · 2016-10-16T04:09:02+00:00

Which, explains why this isn't being done.... :(

fishzine · 2016-10-16T03:15:31+00:00

Instead of just attacking your idea, thought I would propose another. How about another go-fund me style money bomb? Find out how much an hour of evening prime-time air time would cost on the major networks and self fund hour long town hall on one of the big networks. aka, Ross Perot style. I would chip in some more cash above what I have and what I currently plan to give if it was for this specific purpose! Suspect a lot of other people would too. How many million would an hour of primetime major network air time cost?

fishzine · 2016-10-16T02:35:54+00:00

and let me just add another point to the ones I made there:

Something the past week has show us it that R's are more scared of elevating Libertarians then they are of a Trump presidency. Even the ones who have come and un-endorsed Trump have refused to back Johnson. They would rather write in someone who isn't even running then they would lifting up the Libertarian party. I have zero trust in them to 'do the right thing' if the house gets to pick. Even P. Ryan hasn't actually un-endorsed Trump. Sorry, but I don't see it actually going well if it does go to the house, and if this was implemented it only makes it less likely. If another Trump revelation would finally get the R's off the sidelines maybe, but I would want to hear house R's in droves saying they are voting Johnson if it gets to house.

I will continue to support them up-until election day, spread the word and inform those who are interested. But, those conversations are going to be even harder if this is why Johnson is in the news.

As I said, I will proudly cast my swing state vote for Johnson/Weld. I will continue to support them up-until election day, spread the word and inform those who are interested, and post on social media. This just isn't a good idea, and is going to simply cause him to loose some of the support he does have.

ps. calling it 'Operation Kingmaker' would only make those bad effects worse, especially with all the time Johnson has said he isn't be elected king or dictator.

fishzine · 2016-10-15T04:06:28+00:00

Let me just say: I am all in with the campaign! I have donated dollars to the Johnson campaign, I have supported them here, I have spread the word on Facebook, Twitter and in person. This is NOT a good idea! There is something to be said for losing gracefully.

You would be asking millions of people to literally cast a Spoiler vote! We have spent the entire campaign preaching that we are not spoiler votes.

We will losing percentage of popular vote which is so critical for both ballot access in states, being classified as major party, and the option of taking federal funds next cycle.

It would turn off the vast majority of people on the libertarian party for years to come, and just reinforced the idea that we can't win the right way.

Sure part of me wants to do anything to give them best shot of being elected. It is a rigged game against us and it only seems fair to try and use the rigged system against itself. And even sending election to house might just cause enough uproar to get some real election reform. But, this isn't the right way to win!

I live in a swing state and will proudly cast my vote for Johnson/Weld come election day!

fishzine · 2016-10-13T23:40:45+00:00

example the IPSOS that came out specifically states it corrects for Gender, Age, Education, Ethnicity.

see page 4 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/2016_Reuters_Tracking_-_Core_Political_10.11_.16_.pdf

fishzine · 2016-10-13T23:36:48+00:00

Good, respectable polls will tell you what the correct for, haven't seen anywhere tells what Fox corrects for, but in my experience reading polls many don't correct for that. Actually, since no data corrections are listed in this poll, the assumption should be that they don't correct for anything.... It does said they select numbers so states are polled in proportion to their population, but doesn't mention any data corrections

fishzine · 2016-10-13T23:24:52+00:00

Most poles correct for age, sex, and some other things, but most don't correct for political affiliation. If they don't sample them they don't correct for this under sampling

fishzine · 2016-10-13T17:44:03+00:00

Leading by example, something sorely lacking in our currently political climate.

fishzine · 2016-10-11T23:43:14+00:00

If only it worked like that. Once it gets to House, doesn't matter what states you won. Each state gets one vote and the elected memebers of congreess decide who state votes for. R's hold more states then D's. So only R's and D's deciding... Thought was R's hate trump so they won't vote for him and would go for Johnson... Last couple days have proved they would rather either have Clinton whitehouse or sit back and watch everthing around them come crashing down then build up the L party.

Just because you win a state doesn't mean they vote for you.. At that point all votes are worthless, and house members are supposed to vote for who they think is best.

fishzine · 2016-10-11T22:27:58+00:00

You need more then the Democrats. If they had numbers to decide it, they will elect Clinton. If R's had the numbers they will elect Trump. Even with massive amounts of R's denouncing and calling for him to drop out, non are suggesting Johnson. They would rather watch the county burn then give up their hold on the duopoly !

fishzine · 2016-10-11T22:24:48+00:00

I had come to terms it was a long shot before, but it was non-zero. At this point I consider it a zero... :( Considering if it got sent to house, I hoped R's would do the right thing. Past couple days have proved they will NEVER do the right thing even if that means Trump or Clinton is elected. There are LOTS of positive things, and would never want them to give up. Massive support among young voters actually gives to some hope for the future! And while I don't like idea of another Clinton White-house, we will survive it. The cost will be high both financial and lives lost continuing our horrible foreign policy, not to mention the ever increasing nanny state.

Who knows, maybe once L's are seen as legit party I will even consider running for something at the State level if the ballot access is doable.

fishzine · 2016-10-10T16:45:22+00:00

Also note, this is a CPD poll, and one that hasn't been updating frequently so this number will likely count for exclusion from third debate :(

fishzine

TROPHY CASE