It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bernie Sanders: Americans rejected two-party system in midterms

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Did the current two party system fail to deliver a candidate that was worthy of your vote?


Washington (CNN) -- Independent senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont argued Monday that the low voter turnout in the midterm elections reflected widespread negative opinions about both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.



"What I think really happened is about 64 percent of the American people rejected the two-party system," Sanders said on Comedy Central's "Colbert Report."

"They rejected Washington as it now functioned. They rejected a political system and a Congress which spends more time representing the wealthy and the powerful than ordinary Americans."


source




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: AlaskanDad

I guess that is one way of looking at it, Bernie.

One would think if it was truly a rejection of the two parties, we would have seen more third party candidates win.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   


"What I think really happened is about 64 percent of the American people rejected the two-party system," Sanders said on Comedy Central's "Colbert Report."



Except for the tens of millions of votes for both Democrats and Republicans that is.

But I think some Libertarian and Green candidates may have got more votes than usual.




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   


"They rejected Washington as it now functioned. They rejected a political system and a Congress which spends more time representing the wealthy and the powerful than ordinary Americans."



Except for the fact that the majority of partisan candidates running got re-elected.




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: AlaskanDad

I guess that is one way of looking at it, Bernie.

One would think if it was truly a rejection of the two parties, we would have seen more third party candidates win.


Possibly, but then again there were two parties that had records amounts of money to spend on the election and yet 64% populace was not inspired enough to vote at all.




edit on 18-11-2014 by AlaskanDad because: fixed typo



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   


Independent senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont argued Monday that the low voter turnout in the midterm elections reflected widespread negative opinions about both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.



More so with Democrats.

Probably that's why they got slaughtered this time.




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


Congress had roughly a 14 percent approval rate, and the incumbent re-election rate may be as low as 95 percent



Voters hold Congress in low regard, yet they re-elect almost everyone.


source

Better the devil we know?



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen


"What I think really happened is about 64 percent of the American people rejected the two-party system," Sanders said on Comedy Central's "Colbert Report."



Except for the tens of millions of votes for both Democrats and Republicans that is.

But I think some Libertarian and Green candidates may have got more votes than usual.



82 million people voted, representing 36% of all available voters.

www.electproject.org...

This is precisely why I don't like voter disenfranchisement. How the hell is a system going to get anymore functional if people opt out of voting entirely? It's completely irrational and I don't get it.

Somebody explain to me how not using democracy fixes democracy. Please.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I think Bernie is close to the mark. I think people are having the feeling that it doesn't matter how they vote the politician's are going to do what they want anyways, I mean whats the point of showing up at your local PCO meeting?? If theres more money in the system that greater out weighs your grassroot efforts.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

More so with Democrats.

Probably that's why they got slaughtered this time.



The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

There are way more Democrats than Republicans. Low voter turnout always favors Republicans. That's a big reason Democrats want to make voting as easy and barrier free as possible (ID!!! Why that's unconscionable!!!) and Republicans pray for inclement weather on election day.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: WhiteAlice

so we opt in to the current corrupt political system and go along voting in it and say to the political leaders that we don't care how corrupt you are we will vote for you anyways because that's the way it has to be? we should do that??



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   
hmmm....so Bernie, they vote MORE republicans in??.....c'mon Bernie, those voters that elected all of those republicans, love what is done nationally when they are in power...all we need is another war, lower taxes on the wealthy, less of those pesky financial regulations, more "fracked-up" drinking water, millions of poor people off of the ACA healthcare coverage, no abortion, no contraception, no unions, no workers rights, jim crow voting laws re-instated, etc.....back to the good ole' days of flag-waving prosperity!!!!
edit on 18-11-2014 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: jimmyx

Don't forget those are the conditions needed to move more of the population into slavery private prisons, which profits who?


During the past four decades, the U.S. prison population has quadrupled even as the crime rate has dropped. We have some 2.4 million people behind bars, far more than any other country, costing about $80 billion a year to maintain. Worse yet, as result of racial disparities in sentencing, more than half of U.S. prisoners are minorities. These staggering statistics stem from the failure of the “war on drugs,” the true impact of which can only be measured in destroyed lives and devastated communities, especially among the most marginalized segments of society.


source




edit on 18-11-2014 by AlaskanDad because: added quote and link to back up my opinion



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I have kind of been mulling this over for a while and I think what is needed is we have to create an environment in our communites where were doing things for ourselves. I know that sound's like a republican thing just make sure your okay and all that but I don't mean it like that. I mean where were able to care for our communities without a political public servant. I mean for a while now it has been like were kids asking the politician can you get us this can you do this for us?

If we create the atmosphere where there not needed or needed less and our communites are effective in giving out the needs to our communities, they are going to be begging to get in on the conversation. what can I do to help? whats going on here?

I kind of think that can be part of the solution



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: WhiteAlice

With all the voter i.d. hype, I wonder if some people actually thought they needed a "special" i.d. card?

Not beyond possible.




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: American-philosopher

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I think you're right. Personally, I think government fills a much needed role, I just think that for too long it's been pushed to the federal level where it's not only significantly more expensive, it's significantly less efficient. Department of Education? Whatever.

It's a control thing and a money thing and they go hand-in-hand.

The states send uncountable billions to DC, then have to go hat in hand, begging for some of it back. And it all comes with strings.

It's the classic frog in a pot situation, and we have and are letting it happen. I have no illusions about getting it fixed because what it would require is a well informed and active electorate. There's a social-psychological term called diffusion of responsibility that I think explains a good deal of it. Combine that with rampant ignorance and apathy, and there you go.

If the whole debate over net neutrality here on this site doesn't show that even an above average intelligent and aware audience is more interested in picking sides than solving problems, well then, you'll never see it.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

How can third party candidates win if they aren't allowed to run or when elections for parties other than the established party in the area aren't taken seriously? The only Libertarian I could have voted for in Maryland (and where I live) was the governor (he didn't win). So what should I have done for my Congressional voting?



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: WhiteAlice

With all the voter i.d. hype, I wonder if some people actually thought they needed a "special" i.d. card?

Not beyond possible.



Not beyond plausible at all to be honest. "Voter ID" does sound like a special card, doesn't it?



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
So we need a few people that are very well known, famous even, even current politicians or celebrities of some sort, then we need some millionaires, billionaires to put up some money, and then we need some media types to promote it.

It really is that simple and we'll have some viable third party candidates. The tea party should split off from the Republican Party and Bernie and a few other guys should form a fourth party to the left and we'll have 4 solid parties.

I'd do it, but I don't have any money, media friends and i'm not famous. it wouldn't quite work out very well.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I won't argue that point. The big two do their best to strangle out any opposition.
There is always the write-in option.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join