Most people want a 3rd party POTUS

@kevcvs57 said
Well that would be the likes of Chuck Schumer or, on a bad day Kevin McCarthy. It’s literally not a foolproof system, it’s how we ended up with Boris Johnson but Boris could theoretically be pushed out of office tomorrow, it’s the party that gets elected or rather the individual constituency candidate who belongs to any given party and collectively they choose the prime mini ...[text shortened]... lly don’t like the direction it’s heading in or resign and cause a by election in that constituency.

A wonderfully stable system like in Italy.

I personally prefer elections at set intervals and removal for misconduct in between.

@kevcvs57 said
Well that would be the likes of Chuck Schumer or, on a bad day Kevin McCarthy.

No, you're not reading what I write.

The point is that "that" would not be either of those. Only one of the functions might be either of those. The other function could be someone else altogether. Right now, if either of those functions would be Marjorie Whatsherface, your system demands that so is the other one. In a sane system - which will never happen in the USA - if one office is held by a Marjorie, the other one can not be held by her, and might even be held by a Bernie.

Don't you see that that is the problem? Right now, you have no checks on the power of the POTUS. Whoever holds that office, holds it all. In a saner country, a madman in one of the offices could be - and in fact, often is - balanced by a madwoman in the other. In the USA, every office is infinitely and unbalancedly mad.

@no1marauder said
I admit I've never understood such arguments.

That doesn't surprise me.

@shallow-blue said
That doesn't surprise me.

In case you missed it, there's a rest of the post saying why.

But answering those points would be for a serious debater, not you.

@shallow-blue said
No, you're not reading what I write.

The point is that "that" would not be either of those. Only one of the functions might be either of those. The other function could be someone else altogether. Right now, if either of those functions would be Marjorie Whatsherface, your system demands that so is the other one. In a sane system - which will never happen in th ...[text shortened]... - balanced by a madwoman in the other. In the USA, every office is infinitely and unbalancedly mad.

You don't seem to understand the US system at all. There are plenty of checks on the power of the POTUS, as many have found out including Trump and Biden.

@no1marauder said
You don't seem to understand the US system at all. There are plenty of checks on the power of the POTUS, as many have found out including Trump and Biden.

Most usually a third party candidate is a spoiler,
drawing votes from one candidate or another.
It is well understood that RALPH NADER cost
AL GORE THE 2000 election by taking votes
away from GORE in FLORIDA.

@jimm619 said
Most usually a third party candidate is a spoiler,
drawing votes from one candidate or another.
It is well understood that RALPH NADER cost
AL GORE THE 2000 election by taking votes
away from GORE in FLORIDA.

People don't owe votes to a candidate that they do not believe represents their views.

@no1marauder said
You don't seem to understand the US system at all.

Cute. You evidently understand anything else.

@suzianne said
The 'angle' is reality, not tabloid conspiracy theory.

Which of those on my list are conspiracy theory?

@averagejoe1 said
Were the other actions of Hillary insignificant, like destroying govt property and paying for the fake dossier? No1, why do you libs cherry pick incidents which fit your narratives? Why did you highlight just her emails? Why don't you admit Hunter is absolutely horrible? Why don't you find Hillary horrible? What's your angle?

This is the list. No one has to go search for it,

@no1marauder said
IF Democrats had preferred Sanders to Biden, they would have voted for the former. But they didn't.

Sanders didn't try to win. This is obvious to anybody who followed politics during the election cycle. So nice of him to say Biden can beat Trump, but like he said, they are very good friends.

When DWS was caught conspiring to suppress Sanders so HRC would win did Sanders make waves about it like anybody who wanted to win would? That is why I call him "Silent Sanders". I know you have conformist tendencies, but even you cannot be this stupid.

Is it because this is not Russia? You believe conspiracy theories regarding Russia. If any of this happened in Russia you would believe it. Right?

@no1marauder said
All these arguments really boil down to is:

"People are stupid/brainwashed/etc. etc. etc. because they don't vote like enlightened thinkers like myself think they should. Therefore, the system/election etc. etc. etc. is "rigged"."

It is rigged against 3rd parties. That is not a theory, it is a fact and you know it. This boils down to you denying facts, even when you know these facts.

What is wrong with you? You are exuding double think. How do you rationalize that cognitive dissonance?

@jimmac said
I believe that people vote for the one they dislike the least. To suggest that Trump or Biden is the best you have got is ridiculous. Both are pathetic. Not just a bit, a lot. And people do not necessarily support either party per-say, they just do not feel as though they really have a choice.
The reality that we have to live with is that one of the 2 "will" win, so what one are we most prepared to live with. That in no way infers support.

You are right and no1 knows it. He just doesn't want to admit it because he is a loyal democrat in debate mode.

@metal-brain said
You are right and no1 knows it. He just doesn't want to admit it because he is a loyal democrat in debate mode.

I haven't voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate since 1992.

Some "loyal Democrat". You really are a sub moron.

The facts are the facts. Even with all the difficulties the country is in, 82% of Democrats approve of Biden.

@metal-brain said
Sanders didn't try to win. This is obvious to anybody who followed politics during the election cycle. So nice of him to say Biden can beat Trump, but like he said, they are very good friends.

When DWS was caught conspiring to suppress Sanders so HRC would win did Sanders make waves about it like anybody who wanted to win would? That is why I call him "Silent Sanders". ...[text shortened]... conspiracy theories regarding Russia. If any of this happened in Russia you would believe it. Right?

You know perfectly well, unless you are so much of an idiot that you forgot things we have discussed on this Forum at least a dozen times, that Sanders did "make waves" about DWS and, in fact, forced her to resign from her Democratic Party chairmanship.

Sanders ran an aggressive campaign, spent about $165 million in campaign expenditures (https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race/bernie-sanders/expenditures?id=N00000528) and got more than 9.5 million votes before suspending his campaign when and only when it was clear he could not win (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries). Your moronic assertion that he "didn't try to win" in 2020 is utterly and mind-numbingly stupid.