They'll be sending in some Secret Service brain worms dressed in tiny black suits and itty bitty sunglasses to protect the OG. Rest assured, it will be safe.
It makes sense to me. Biden and Trump have Secret Service detail already. RFK does not. Biden wants to make sure that it at least looks like all 3 candidates are being protected from more violence.
You are trying to get us to vote for the duopoly, but I am most likely voting for a third party.
Green Party for the long-term goal of breaking the two-party system.
Do not forget my mantra:
We should focus our actions, time, and resources on Direct Action, Mutual Aid, and Community Outreach. If you do engage in Electoral Politics do not support the Duopoly (Red or Blue Team). No War but Class War!
You said it yourself: it’s a duopoly. By your vote you have the power to nudge the outcome toward one of two possibilities.
More options would be fantastic, but that’s not the system we live in. The current options are fascism or not-fascism. You support 3rd parties? Then vote for whichever party has the best shot at not-fascism… cuz if fascism wins, 3rds are fucked right along with everyone else.
In your case, voting Trump, voting 3rd, or not voting at all are all just throwing in the towel. Fascism won! No point in fighting it; just bend over and take whatever comes next.
Biden may not be your cup of tea, but a vote for him is a vote to keep the fascists out of power - for you that’s a vote for more time. Right now our system won’t allow a 3rd to win due to the power accumulated by the big two; but it’s still malleable. Ranked Choice is getting onto more and more people’s radar, gaining popularity, and making its way into more and more states. RCV is your golden ticket to getting a 3rd in office - people need to be comfortable with voting for a 3rd without risking the ‘other guy’ taking power. And our system IS moving that direction.
Fascist victory and we can kiss RCV goodbye, along with most of our rights and any possibility for 3rd party to come out on top for a very, VERY long time.
Could it be better? Yes. Should it be better? Abso-fucking-lutely. But the best result possible in our shitty reality for 3rds and everyone who isn’t a Nazi is for the fascists to lose, and for that to happen, you need to vote blue.
To bring attention to RFK Jr to help remove votes from Trump
RFK Jr is much more known to right wingers, who are also more violent. They don’t even really know of Cornell West or Jill Stein enough to care. RFK Jr is running opposite of Trump on the Right wingers side, whereas the other two will only strip votes from leftwing/Biden side
Kennedy Curse, they shouldn’t have lobotomized Rosemary Kennedy. So anything could happen to ol brain worms
While I don’t endorse the guy, I think you forgot (L) Chase Oliver. I bring this up only because the Libertarian candidates usually get more votes than the leftist candidates and I’m pretty sure they’re listed on more state’s ballots.
-Personally speaking, I’ll be one of the “three people” voting for one of the other two candidates mentioned
But imagine the consequences of not doing it, and him getting assassinated! Not worth the risk. Also, i assume this is the future standard Trump is looking into. Competition being legal targets for the sitting president
Good on RFK Jr. 50 years ago just the thought of him being able to escape the political shadow of the previous generation of Kennedys would have been laughable.
But when I saw this headline I legitimately forgot about his dad and uncle both being assassinated. My brain went straight to the brain worms.
It’s honestly kind of crazy he’s not just a Jeb! type guy whose only notable feature is his last name.
Hahahaha. No one takes this guy seriously. This is only done because it looks good. There’s no threat to the guy who can’t possibly win because there’s no point in taking him out.
But also, there go my tax dollars when I’d like them to pay for roads, teachers, etc. Fuck you for running Bobby, you lying sack of shit (see takedown by Maintenance Phase podcast; the dude’s a lying liar).
Not at all, taxes come after the government spends money and is used to take money out of circulation (destroyed), they are absolutely in no way receiving that money and then using it for anything, it is received and removed from circulation. If the government needs money they make money, they do not depend on anyone to create money, they depend on taxes to appropriately remove money from circulation to control the value of the dollar and inflation.
It’s not political in any way, why would the federal government need anyone’s taxes? They create the currency, they don’t depend on anyone’s taxes to do anything. If they need money they create it and it happens constantly. I’m not speaking to local taxes obviously, which are mostly responsible for the roads the original poster complained about anyway which are completely different.
Their is a reason controlling the currency and removing money from circulation is importantly, I never discounted that but the federal government does not wait around to receive tax money before they decide if they have money to spend. They create new money to fund things and destroy the tax funds as they come in.
It’s how the federal budget functions. Congress passes a budget, the central bank generates the money, and the money received via taxes gets destroyed. You can make whatever of it you want but that is actually how US currency, and likely any FIAT currency for that matter, functions.
They can’t just print money when they need money. That’s not how it works at all. Sure, they replace money that has been destroyed. The government absolutely needs tax money for education, infrastructure, health care etc.
They can and do create money in support of the budget. They can’t create unlimited money without consequence but they do create money for the budget and money returned to the government via taxes is destroyed. The gov takes out loans by issuing bonds and the National debt is simply a running total of those issued bonds over time. The federal government doesn’t need anyone’s money to have money, they create the money, they tax it back to get rid of it. It’s a spend first tax after system.
I never intended to imply taxes aren’t required, I was simply trying to state that they are not taking away from infrastructure spending because they issued increase funding to the secret service. I feel like a lot of folks naturally evaluate the federal government budget like a state, local, or personal budget and it’s backwards. Rather than taking money in and then spending it, they generate the money and then remove it with taxes. That was the only point I was attempting to convey.
Ok that’s fair. Apologies if I was being too stern. It sounded like you literally thought they just print as much money as they want and that taxes are a scam.
I really appreciate that you took the time to tease out the point I was attempting to make, at times during my initial comments it didn’t feel great but I mostly chalk it up to not being the most socially intelligent or articulate by any stretch of the imagination. Hope you have a good day.