Debate #1 ... And the winner is ... Romney?? :(

[Peace Voyager]

This too is well said Hotspring.

Waccos, which option is more achievable?


A) Having the majority of like-minded 3rd parties unite, giving those who've left all parties something they can get behind. (I think this may equal 1/3 of the public).

B) Having a strategy for the Green Party, Peace & Justice; Libertarians, etc. & decline to state voters infiltrate the Democratic Party, become delegates and key committee members to get the party on track to serve the people, not the 1%.

Got other solutions? Can we find better ways to use our resources than calling out what isn't working?

Only if it happens nationwide would it actually affect the electoral vote.
I think you actually (or at least you should actually) know that third parties in this electoral campaign for president 2012 does not have a snowball's chance in hell of getting any electoral votes in the first place.


Excuse me, but it is also everybody else's “constitutional right” to vote for “WHOMEVER” we choose to, “and for whatever reasons”, I might add. Of course, I know that you already know that.
I think that you are mischaracterizing the fundamental reasons why some of us are voting third-party as being “infantile”, “chronic obsession”; + your implication that anybody who votes for a third-party or; write-in candidate for that matter, of being a “disgruntled,” fanatic is a bit much, and kind of insulting to those who have a different opinions that you have the appearance of labeling onto us something which, in at least in my case, is not what the label says and most likely others too who are going to either write in somebody or vote for a third-party candidate.

Unfortunately, I think that if we start playing the label game, there is all kind of so-called (would be) "fanatics" here on this website, including ones that could be characterized as Democratic fanatics.
Do we really want to go there?... ...I think not, I sure don't.


If Obama had earned my vote, I would vote for him in this election. Obama did not lose my vote because I did not vote for him (or the Republican) in the last election. To put it simply: Obama did not earn my vote.


I will not speak for anybody else here, but I agree that there are some, maybe many, "good" things that Obama deserves credit and acknowledgment; for example, some of the things you have mentioned above, and there are probably others, however there are also some changes that could have been made for the better, but instead some of the changes that did occur went for the worse. Of course, as far as the health care situation is concerned, I blame that more on the Democrats as a whole, not just Obama. The Democrats did not even use single-payer as a lever! I know it would not have passed, but they didn't even use it as a lever. I think that was ignorant and gave the other side, who wants to get rid of pretty much all the safety net and privatize it way too much leverage.

I and many others on this board; some of whom I don't agree with very often about a whole variety of things, do for the most part agree on some things that we believe are fundamentally wrong that Obama did and in some cases did not do that he could have done.

Some of those disagreeable things that the Obama administration didn't do include punishing instead of praising whistle-blowers and even the press in some instances.
Then there is the Wall Street and big-bank bailouts, however I think maybe his hands were tied on that one because of the political positions that members in the house had and something clearly had to be done very quickly at the time.... but still...
...He should have fought harder for Main Street and not have bent-over backwards so far siding with Wall Street and the big banks as he apparently did.

Also, Obama, by not initiating something that would prevent the economic havoc that, BTW, we have not gotten out of yet; for example, reinstating the Glass-Steagall act or even so much as coming anywhere near proposing anything like it. Because of what I believe is Obama's lack of initiative in regards to that we are in the same entrapped economic situation we were in around the year 2007, with just about no protections whatsoever against another too big to fail economic breakdown, so the same reasons still exist today that existed when George W. Bush was president that can at any time cause another extreme recession or a depression.

Maybe Obama could not have made the changes that I mentioned, but he didn't even try! So he gets a thumbs-down for not even trying to do that or so much as discussing the matter in deeper detail or at least putting something on the table to bring the discussion up in the first place. Even if the house, which is (now) mostly Republican, refused to bring it up in session, does not mean Obama couldn't have come up with something that would get the ball rolling in that direction at some point in time.

As far as I'm concerned, the Democrats have their earplugs stuck really deep in on that one. And I think the reason those earplugs are in so deep is because Obama did not initiate.
Leadership is about initiating. Where's the leadership on this particular issue? Unfortunately, I do not sense that strong leadership in regards to that specific topic from Obama. To me that's not just disappointing; it is unacceptable.
The only thing more unacceptable would be Romney for president. But lucky me I live in California so I can vote for whoever I want to, because California is not a swing state. If I lived in a swing state I would plug my nose and vote for Obama because the possibility of Romney winning the state in that case would be too high for me to vote for a third-party.

Now, as mentioned before, one of the main reasons some of us on this board would (will or have in the past) vote/ed for third-party candidates is that we want to see a third-party candidate in the debates!

I know some hard-core Democrats don't like that. But that's just tough!


Honestly, I do not think anybody on this board is that “psychologically arrested" or “delusional” to the extent you describe above.
Also, I have not heard or read anything anybody said here that in any way wanted to start or were even so much as suggesting to start, join, or otherwise participate in an actual "armed revolution” or anything like that. I don't know if you're just exaggerating about things posted on this board or if I missed something when I have not been reading the board that you picked up on, or if you are generalizing and projecting that onto some of us or someone in particular.

Of course there are some anti-gun fanatics that would say (about) somebody that wants to have protected their second amendment constitutional rights; (some anti-gun "fanatics") who seem to suggest that anyone that want's to maintain the intent of the Second Amendment are somehow revolutionary fanatics because they want to keep their guns and ammo. Whereas I think that Obama does at this point in time, deserve some praise for understanding or at least not messing with what the second amendment right is and not giving too much license to the anti-gun fanatics within the Democratic party.


I don't think of it quite that way, but I understand what you're saying.
I'm thinking that if and when ever a third-party or write-in candidate gets elected that it would be more of a bellwether for the improved chance for the profound changes progressives want and it most certainly is not or would not be the change by itself alone.


Contradictory?... ... It could very well be contradictory.... ... Hypocritical?... ...Possibly. I'm not justifying it, but hypocrisy seems to be the norm in politics; unfortunately.
So maybe it's time for progressives to “occupy” the Democratic Party by joining it... ...Yes that's it; maybe independent, green, peace and freedom, declined to state, etc. progressives should join the Democratic Party and work to move it where it needs to go to enable it so that it can make those changes it’s unable to make now.

I am not so sure, but I think that (registered non-Democrat progressives should join the Democratic Party) may be what you have been implying or suggesting some of us non-Democrat progressives do (?).


That’s a good question, and I have one good answer, but I'm sure it's not the only good answer. The answer is because: some that assert the American political system is essentially flawed do not want to have an “armed revolution” to change it.


I understand exactly what you're saying, a lot of people that I knew who voted for Obama felt that way about him in 2008. I tried to explain to them that it wouldn't be that way, but they were so enthusiastic it was like they were under the influence of some kind of a happy drug. When they asked me what I thought about him I told them that he is a politician and that they should not be so overly optimistic about what he would actually do.


I agree.


I don't think we are going to hear that in any of the debates between Obama and Romney. That is precisely why I am going to vote for a 3rd party candidate in 2012.


That is a very accurate assessment, and I agree with the gist of it.

[Peace Voyager]

My wish is that California was more than just a blue or red state; but a leader in requring more from candiates in order to earn our votes.

If Kucinich and Ron Paul had teamed up; we would have been able to have a viable 3rd option with something for each of the Democrats and Republicans who feel betrayed by their parties. This line-up could have been a contender.

Rather than a write in; I'm considering Green Party candidate Jill Stein, or the newly formed Justice Party candidate Rocky Anderson.

When Jill spoke at SSU recently, I asked her about how she would specifically end the policy and funding of unconstitutional war. Her answer was less than adequate, just "bring the troops home". So I'm looking more closely at Rocky.

I'd like to know what ya'll think about these 2; and any others who have solutions for ending the grip of war profiteers on politicians unwilling to uphold their oath to support and defend the Constitution.

Can the Justice Party be what we need to restore the peace and well being we are starving for?

www.jillstein.org

www.voterocky.org/

From his website:

Think warmongering is a bipartisan issue? Think again. A vote for a Republican is a vote for war. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for war. Congress has not declared war since WWII.

A vote for Rocky Anderson is a vote for peace.

• Rocky opposed the Vietnam War, participating in protests and teach-ins as a college student.
• Rocky did more than speak out. His resistance to US orchestration and financing of the contra war in Nicaragua included organizing and taking two trips for dozens of people to Nicaragua during the contra war to see for themselves the truth, which varied dramatically from the accounts by the Reagan administration and the mainstream media.
• Rocky debated the contra Commander-in-Chief Adolfo Calero and spoke at universities and elsewhere about disastrous US policy in Central America.
• Rocky's opposition to the invasion and occupation of Iraq included his calls for impeachment of Bush for lying to the nation during the lead-up to that catastrophic war.
• Rocky would end our military involvement in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia immediately. He would undertake to repair relations with those nations and re-affirm their sovereignty, while committing not to engage in acts of war without congressional authorization, as required by the War Power Clause of the Constitution. Rocky would seek to be remembered as the “peace president,” not a “war president.”

https://www.voterocky.org/vice_presidential_candidate_luis_rodriguez

Luis Rodriguez Joins Rocky Anderson's 2012 Campaign As Vice Presidential Running Mate

Posted by Campaign Staff -2pc on July 17, 2012 · Flag



Click here for Spanish translation.
Luis Rodriguez, a leading Chicano writer, speaker, gang expert and interventionist, and activist for justice in urban peace, the arts, labor, and human rights, has joined Rocky Anderson's 2012 presidential campaign as Anderson’s vice presidential running mate. "The search for a highly competent, dignified, principled running mate has been arduous," Rocky stated. "Luis exceeds any expectations I had. He will inform, uplift, and motivate in this campaign, just as he does every day in his inspirational work."
He is a co-founder of the Network for Revolutionary Change, trying to fill the gap of strategic and unified leadership among the poor, the pushed-out, the dismissed, and forgotten. He's also co-founder of the nonprofit Tia Chucha's Centro Cultural & Bookstore and its publishing wing, Tia Chucha Press, in the San Fernando Valley section of Los Angeles. He has fifteen published books in poetry, fiction, non-fiction, and children's literature, including the bestselling 1993 memoir Always Running, La Vida Loca, Gang Days in L.A. and its 2011 sequel, It Calls You Back: An Odyssey Through Love, Addiction, Revolutions, and Healing. His writings have appeared in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicano Tribune, The Progressive, Philadelphia Inquirer magazine, The Nation, L.A. Weekly, U.S. News & World Report, Fox News Latino, and the Huffington Post, among others. He has lived and worked in Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, San Bernardino, and fifteen years in Chicago. He's now a resident of San Fernando, CA.

From Wikipedia

Rocky Anderson
Anderson in 2009
33rd Mayor of Salt Lake City
In office 2000–2008
Political party	Justice Party (since 2011) Democratic Party (before 2011)

Ross Carl "Rocky" Anderson (born September 9, 1951) served two terms as the 33rd mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, between 2000 and 2008.^[2] He is the Executive Director of High Road for Human Rights.^[3] Prior to serving as Mayor, he practiced law for 21 years in Salt Lake City, during which time he was listed in Best Lawyers in America, was rated A-V (highest rating) by Martindale-Hubbell, served as Chair of the Utah State Bar Litigation Section^[4] and was Editor-in-Chief of, and a contributor to, Voir Dire legal journal.^[5]

As mayor, Anderson rose to nationwide prominence as a champion of several national and international causes, including climate protection, immigration reform, restorative criminal justice, LGBT rights, and an end to the "war on drugs". Before and after the invasion by the U.S. of Iraq in 2003, Anderson was a leading opponent of the invasion and occupation of Iraq and related human rights abuses. Anderson was the only mayor of a major U.S. city who advocated for the impeachment of President George W. Bush, which he did in many venues throughout the United States.

Anderson's work and advocacy led to local, national, and international recognition in numerous spheres, including being named by Business Week as one of the top twenty activists in the world on climate change,^[6] serving on the Newsweek Global Environmental Leadership Advisory Board,^[7] and being recognised by the Human Rights Campaign as one of the top ten straight advocates in the United States for LGBT equality.^[8] He has also received numerous awards for his work, including the EPA Climate Protection Award,^[9] the Sierra Club Distinguished Service Award,^[10] the Respect the Earth Planet Defender Award, the National Association of Hispanic Publications Presidential Award,^[11] The Drug Policy Alliance Richard J. Dennis Drugpeace Award,^[12] the Progressive Democrats of America Spine Award,^[13] the League of United Latin American Citizens Profile in Courage Award,^[14] the Bill of Rights Defense Committee Patriot Award,^[15] the Code Pink (Salt Lake City) Pink Star honor, the Morehouse University Gandhi, King, Ikeda Award, and the World Leadership Award for environmental programs.^[16]

Formerly a member of the Democratic Party, Anderson expressed his disappointment with that Party in 2011,^[17] stating, “The Constitution has been eviscerated while Democrats have stood by with nary a whimper. It is a gutless, unprincipled party, bought and paid for by the same interests that buy and pay for the Republican Party."^[18] Anderson announced his intention to run for President in 2012 as a candidate for the newly-formed Justice Party.^[19]

I agree that Obama's record has been disappointing to say the least, and I agree that the economy is in ailing condition, but my question is what president will honor the fundamentals to our existence? I want a president who will 1. work to preserve and restore the health of our planet and that means push organic gardening and regulating industry to start. 2. put people first, i.e. QUALITY education and health care. 3.restore the rights and liberty of the individual over corporations. Dennis Kuchinich and Ralf Nader are the only two people who I now would qualify for this position. that is who I am writng in.

[Peace Voyager]

I so agree with you. Let's see how we can refine and manifest this!

I agree with Kat that, "Romney showed that the emperor has no clothes while 60 million watched, and Obama helped him... "

Unfortunately, the emperor will continue to be naked, if it's either of the Obamney twins.

I will still write in Ron Paul. Even if I'm in a vanishingly small minority, I will sleep with a clear conscience.

Even if you disagree with some of his stances on some of the smaller issues, I think his primary objective of Stopping the Mass Murder in Our Name is worthwhile. As a society, we need a spontaneous remission of the psychopathic belief that we have the right to murder anyone, anywhere if they disagree with us. This is primary. We CANNOT solve any of the other problems until we stop being willingly complicit murderers.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely.

Here's a fantasy to consider:

Those who self-identify as green, peace and freedom, independent, libertarian or simply "undecided", in total, outnumber both the republicans and the democrats.

There are many republicans who are unhappy with Romney.

There are many democrats who are unhappy with Obama.

There are many citizens who are unhappy with rigged electronic voting machines.

This total, if concentrated, holds the vast majority of citizens.

A write-in that outnumbered the "two party" parties would send a message they couldn't ignore.

A massive write-in would clearly reject the electronic counting as untrustworthy.

And the beauty of it would be a hard, undeniable demonstration of a self-organising system at work, working as it should, in spite of massive intervention and subterfuge by the State.

Given the Web, such a spontaneous remission could easily occur in the remaining 4 weeks.

Workers of the world, Fan Out! What have you got to lose?

Yeah, I know... just a fantasy.

["Mad" Miles]

`
Badura88,

Have you looked at Jill Stein's "Green New Deal For America"? She's on the ballot. Ralph and Dennis are not. Everything in your three part list is core to the Green Party Platform. Check us out!

https://www.jillstein.org/green_new_deal

https://www.gp.org/committees/platform/2010/index.php

I agree that Obama's record has been disappointing to say the least, and I agree that the economy is in ailing condition, but my question is what president will honor the fundamentals to our existence? I want a president who will 1. work to preserve and restore the health of our planet and that means push organic gardening and regulating industry to start. 2. put people first, i.e. QUALITY education and health care. 3.restore the rights and liberty of the individual over corporations. Dennis Kuchinich and Ralf Nader are the only two people who I now would qualify for this position. that is who I am writng in.

[podfish]

` Karen TK, Your projections are myriad, per usual.

I guess the assertions Kat's making (" he took companies that were going under and were going to put everybody out of work, restructured them, and made them profitable so that they could continue EMPLOYING PEOPLE", to pick one out of many) seem to her to be based on reality, since apparently only unreliable leftist sources make the case otherwise. It doesn't seem to get through that you've given a wide range of specific topics that are relevant, while hers essentially comes down to an assertion of the truth of her perspective and a dismissal of anyone who might offer information challenging that point of view.

[Hotspring 44]

Waccos, which option is more achievable?


A) Having the majority of like-minded 3rd parties unite, giving those who've left all parties something they can get behind. (I think this may equal 1/3 of the public).

B) Having a strategy for the Green Party, Peace & Justice; Libertarians, etc. & decline to state voters infiltrate the Democratic Party, become delegates and key committee members to get the party on track to serve the people, not the 1%.

Got other solutions? Can we find better ways to use our resources than calling out what isn't working?

Peace Voyager, that is a very interesting set of questions.

Here is one way I can think of at the moment to answer those questions:
Get the the vast majority of the "1/3 of the public" you mentioned in Q A), to "infiltrate the Democratic Party" as mentioned in Q B), then it's crucial for those who get into the positions where they can make actual, consequential change and also the ones that voted and worked to put them that far in, to commit and stick to the primary original objectives without allowing the movements of those changes to become fractured by the tedious details of governing that inevitably surface. I think that would be a good start.

["Mad" Miles]

`
PodFish,

This is the claim that demonstrates a fundamental lack of education about the nature of Arbitrage, "...he took companies that were going under and were going to put everybody out of work...".

Any news junkie with heterogeneous views who reads heterogeneous sources knows, leveraged buyouts and acquisitions do not only affect companies who are struggling to survive. Certainly those that are, are more vulnerable. But it's reality avoidance to claim that is always the case. No surprise there, since rigid systems of conceptuality are all about avoiding reality!

Aka, "The Big Lie". One of many, obviously.

As always, thanks for weighing in! It gets lonely out here. In here?


`

[Karen the KAT]

Sorry Miles, but you lose again, talk about not letting reality in, gheesh..

Go look up Bain Capital under the Romney years 1984 to 1989, and you'll see exactly what I am saying, and it totally contradicts what you are saying. Go to Wikipedia, go check anywhere... Romney saved several companies from certain death.

Oh, and by the Way, Romney is up almost 5% by PEW and 2.7% by Rasmussan... lalalalala...haha...

Oh and Colorado State University, they same people who have been the most accurate of all when it comes to predicting every Presidential run since JFK (IE: They have picked every one right, and their numbers have been the closest), they have predicted a Romney blowout like Reagan -Carter.

Oh, and Las Vegas is now favoring Romney...

I'll be voting for Ron Paul and Dennis Kuchinich as write-ins, but I'll laugh my ass of if Obama loses, couldn't happen to a nicer guy !

Too bad people didn't get a clue and run Hillary, we wouldn't be in this mess...

[Karen the KAT]

I've gotta give you credit for one thing Miles; Nobody can talk shit in circles like you can. You start nowhere, and end nowhere, and you talk shit about everybody that doesn't agree with you.

You should change your name to "Miles the Hater", because it seems that's what you're good at. You insult everyone who doesn't live in your denial World...

I don't begrudge you your rights to spout off, hey I often call certain groups of people various names, but I don't get personal until I've been personally attacked a few times and you are WAY past that line with me.

Why, I don't know, but I know I'm not the only one that's tired of being constantly personally attacked by you. Look at the way you treat people, it's not very nice. You basically call everybody who doesn't agree with your warped little, in-factual World view an idiot. Which is a sure sign you've already lost...

[Peace Voyager]

This is not helpful. Let's stick to issues, not insults.

I've gotta give you credit for one thing Miles; Nobody can talk shit in circles like you can. You start nowhere, and end nowhere, and you talk shit about everybody that doesn't agree with you.

You should change your name to "Miles the Hater", because it seems that's what you're good at. You insult everyone who doesn't live in your denial World...

I don't begrudge you your rights to spout off, hey I often call certain groups of people various names, but I don't get personal until I've been personally attacked a few times and you are WAY past that line with me.

Why, I don't know, but I know I'm not the only one that's tired of being constantly personally attacked by you. Look at the way you treat people, it's not very nice. You basically call everybody who doesn't agree with your warped little, in-factual World view an idiot. Which is a sure sign you've already lost...

[Barry]

I've gotta give you credit for one thing Miles; Nobody can talk shit in circles like you can. You start nowhere, and end nowhere, and you talk shit about everybody that doesn't agree with you...

OK, that's quite enough. Karen and Miles, please be respectful.

[Peace Voyager]

I think we would be in the same mess with Hillary.

If the Democrats had supported the one guy who represents the party's core values best; it would have been Kucinich in 2008, and we'd be more than half way out of this ditch; by being out of all the strike first wars of choice, and not in the new ones Obama started. The bank bail out Bush began could have been thwarted; and all the "too big to fail" bad banks would not have had the chance to fleece us while trying to skirt the law.

Karen, SERIOUSLY, do you think if Romney had been in Obama's shoes during the bail out, he would have put the American people's interest first, and not caved to the pressure of the international uber1%?

Obama did not let me down, 'cause I saw right through the facade during his first campaign; but Romney is a train wreck. His ride to hell would be one hundred times faster than Obama's. Starting with Bombing Iran just to please his buddy in Israel; thereby releasing radiation into everyone's atmosphere. This is not a sign of intelligence; how can you support that?

Feels like you are just here to stir our pot.

Sorry Miles, but you lose again, talk about not letting reality in, gheesh..

Go look up Bain Capital under the Romney years 1984 to 1989, and you'll see exactly what I am saying, and it totally contradicts what you are saying. Go to Wikipedia, go check anywhere... Romney saved several companies from certain death.

Oh, and by the Way, Romney is up almost 5% by PEW and 2.7% by Rasmussan... lalalalala...haha...

Oh and Colorado State University, they same people who have been the most accurate of all when it comes to predicting every Presidential run since JFK (IE: They have picked every one right, and their numbers have been the closest), they have predicted a Romney blowout like Reagan -Carter.

Oh, and Las Vegas is now favoring Romney...

I'll be voting for Ron Paul and Dennis Kuchinich as write-ins, but I'll laugh my ass of if Obama loses, couldn't happen to a nicer guy !

Too bad people didn't get a clue and run Hillary, we wouldn't be in this mess...

[Peace Voyager]

Why is it that compelling our government to serve the tax payers with their taxes; instead of the multinational corps with all thier offshoring of jobs and profits; is often categorized as Socialism?

I'll admit, government could do a lot to run more effectively with the resources it has; but we would not find its duties run any better by for profit businesses. Independent audits and performance evaluations, along with cost vs benefit reviews are a start.

Based on some recent headlines; a review of how our local and federal law enforcement budgets are spent needs to be a priority too.

Every city needs a citizens review board.

[Peace Voyager]

Did Obama earn your vote when he signed the National defense Authorization Act; killing due process for Americans; when acts such as posting this can be twisted to fit the "terrorist" profile; and I, and many others here, could be detained and held indefinitely?

The Daily Show covers the Senate vote on indefinite detention of US citizens in the Defense spending bill. Spoiler alert: only 7 voted against it!

It's like a bad movie when guys like Rand Paul are the only ones standing up for our Constitutional Rights.

https://www.thedailyshow.com/full-ep...ctober-5-2012-

[Peace Voyager]

This too is well said Hotspring.

Waccos, which option is more achievable?


A) Having the majority of like-minded 3rd parties unite, giving those who've left all parties something they can get behind. (I think this may equal 1/3 of the public).

B) Having a strategy for the Green Party, Peace & Justice; Libertarians, etc. & decline to state voters infiltrate the Democratic Party, become delegates and key committee members to get the party on track to serve the people, not the 1%.

Got other solutions? Can we find better ways to use our resources than calling out what isn't working?

Let's call it the Omni-Partisan Party. We combine the best all parties have to offer, and leave behind what doesn't work for the majority; we leave off the table, those things we really can't agree on such as: abortion and gay rights.

Here's what that sounds like - the Occupy Party perhaps?

At least "Occupy Each District" can have their majority define a deal breaker list; a set of key issues which define your community's and candidate's demographics, such as how CVS/Chase is for Sebastopol.

[handy]

I could be wrong, but I think any attempt at infiltrating the Democrat party will be just as ineffective as Ron Paul's attempt to infiltrate the Republican party, and will be stonewalled, undercut, overruled and stopped cold in just the same way.

It would be interesting to see write-ins outnumber party-picks, even if the write-ins were distributed amongst several candidates. The fact that the number of "Unsatisfied With Either Party" voters outnumber both the hardcore Reps and hardcore Dems would certainly make a statement.

Given that the unhappiness, the economic crises, and the tremendous death toll over the last 150 or so years is PRECISELY the directed output of exclusively Democrat/Republican voting, one does hope people can wake up. (I keep trying to justify my optimism...)

It is because people continue to vote for Democrats and Republicans that the mass murder in our name continues. If YOU vote for a Democrat or a Republican, YOU are a Willing, Complicit Accomplice. You are as guilty as the war criminals you vote into office. Does it feel good to know that you are a Murderer? Can you not find that place in your heart that tells you to STOP?

Voting for a Commander-in-Chief who would begin ordering the troops home as the first order of business would be taking the country in a direction that is neither Left nor Right. We the People need to take that decision individually AND together.

Peace Voyager, that is a very interesting set of questions.

Here is one way I can think of at the moment to answer those questions:
Get the the vast majority of the "1/3 of the public" you mentioned in Q A), to "infiltrate the Democratic Party" as mentioned in Q B), then it's crucial for those who get into the positions where they can make actual, consequential change and also the ones that voted and worked to put them that far in, to commit and stick to the primary original objectives without allowing the movements of those changes to become fractured by the tedious details of governing that inevitably surface. I think that would be a good start.