MLB All Star Salary Cap Draft: CHAT

[femurov]

UK has been texted

Yeah... where did he go? He had to know Shane was online and he would be on the clock again soon.

 

[Ritzarmy]

Yeah... where did he go? He had to know Shane was online and he would be on the clock again soon.

 

[Nosferatu]

the real question about this upcoming election is what percentage of potential voters actually vote... I guarantee that it is the lowest it ever has been...

I don't know about that, people dont only go to vote for canidates they like people go vote against canidates they hate too. There has not been an election in my lifetime that has been filled with more hate than this one.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I don't know about that, people dont only go to vote for canidates they like people go vote against canidates they hate too. There has not been an election in my lifetime that has been filled with more hate than this one.

True...

 

[Mebert]

What you are not understanding is 100 times out 100 voting for a third party canidate is a wasted vote, no third party canidate is ever going to receive 270 electoral votes, you are simply taking votes away from the canidate whos views are closer to that of the third party canidate, do you realize the two main party canidates are backed by billion dollar corporations, do you think these corporations are just going to throw money away on backing a Republican or a Democrat just to watch a third party canidate win? NOT A CHANCE IN HE11! Also if a third party canidate ever did miraculously get 270 electoral votes do you really think the electors would vote for them? Ummm no, there is way to much money involved in this. The only way a third party canidate will ever have a chance is if all third party canidates get together to create a third party that is united, it would take some time for them to start winning seats in the house and senate like 10-20 years or more but eventually it could happen...

The view that it is a wasted vote is a short term view. Lets take the libertarian party as the example. Lets be honest in 1971 had 0 support, however the idea that the government is a bunch of fuck ups so we should limit them where possible has it's appeal.

Move forward 30 years and it was still small, but they started getting candidates that have appeal, and started to grow(although I think Johnson sucks). After that it has grown every year and has gone from a fringe nothing, to a party that is at least in the conversation. If Gary Johnson does get 15% he is now part of national debates and he gets a TON of exposure for the party, who know where it could grow from there. I might even become a true 3rd party, which most of America seems to agree is needed.

Lets say it is 12 years from now, and the party finally has a candidate that can speak in a nonscripted format without making an ass of himself and the party takes some seats. The entire discussion in this country has changed at that point.

So while technically true a vote now or back in the 70's and 80's had no chance of taking anything, in 50 years you have built something that does matter. If the over all goal is to improve the state of the country it is not an immediate proposition.

A vote for a third party this year has no upfront value, but massive value in changing the narrative.

 

[femurov]

@tlance

 

[UK Cowboy]

The view that it is a wasted vote is a short term view. Lets take the libertarian party as the example. Lets be honest in 1971 had 0 support, however the idea that the government is a bunch of fuck ups so we should limit them where possible has it's appeal.

Move forward 30 years and it was still small, but they started getting candidates that have appeal, and started to grow(although I think Johnson sucks). After that it has grown every year and has gone from a fringe nothing, to a party that is at least in the conversation. If Gary Johnson does get 15% he is now part of national debates and he gets a TON of exposure for the party, who know where it could grow from there. I might even become a true 3rd party, which most of America seems to agree is needed.

Lets say it is 12 years from now, and the party finally has a candidate that can speak in a nonscripted format without making an ass of himself and the party takes some seats. The entire discussion in this country has changed at that point.

So while technically true a vote now or back in the 70's and 80's had no chance of taking anything, in 50 years you have built something that does matter. If the over all goal is to improve the state of the country it is not an immediate proposition.

A vote for a third party this year has no upfront value, but massive value in changing the narrative.

12 more years like the last 8 will be to much. Economy will be completely wrecked, military will have been caught by China and Russia, US citizens will be afraid to travel, because now that the going rate is $400 million, kidnappings will go through the roof, US citizens will also be afraid to walk their own streets, as cops will say go get fucked when you call 911, but hey, the good news is, the morning talk shows will be booming, having had our first Black President, and our first Woman President, there will be no Senators, Governors, or General's running, as the only qualification you will need would be the chance to be the first openly Gay President

 

[Mebert]

12 more years like the last 8 will be to much. Economy will be completely wrecked, military will have been caught by China and Russia, US citizens will be afraid to travel, because now that the going rate is $400 million, kidnappings will go through the roof, US citizens will also be afraid to walk their own streets, as cops will say go get fucked when you call 911, but hey, the good news is, the morning talk shows will be booming, having had our first Black President, and our first Woman President, there will be no Senators, Governors, or General's running, as the only qualification you will need would be the chance to be the first openly Gay President

The logic is flawed. Hillary = bad president does not mean Trump = good president. Either option leaves us fucked, might as well start the ground work for fixing it now. All this depends on if you believe the libertarian party has the right of it.

I personally think the libertarian party has great bulliten board material with unrealistic policy to make it a reality.

 

[Ritzarmy]

Tlance?

 

[Nosferatu]

The view that it is a wasted vote is a short term view. Lets take the libertarian party as the example. Lets be honest in 1971 had 0 support, however the idea that the government is a bunch of fuck ups so we should limit them where possible has it's appeal.

Move forward 30 years and it was still small, but they started getting candidates that have appeal, and started to grow(although I think Johnson sucks). After that it has grown every year and has gone from a fringe nothing, to a party that is at least in the conversation. If Gary Johnson does get 15% he is now part of national debates and he gets a TON of exposure for the party, who know where it could grow from there. I might even become a true 3rd party, which most of America seems to agree is needed.

Lets say it is 12 years from now, and the party finally has a candidate that can speak in a nonscripted format without making an ass of himself and the party takes some seats. The entire discussion in this country has changed at that point.

So while technically true a vote now or back in the 70's and 80's had no chance of taking anything, in 50 years you have built something that does matter. If the over all goal is to improve the state of the country it is not an immediate proposition.

A vote for a third party this year has no upfront value, but massive value in changing the narrative.

I know you can't possibly believe Johnson will get 15%. Ross Perot probably had as much support as any third party candidate in my lifetime at least and he managed 8% so everything else you mentioned is wasted energy.

 

[Nosferatu]

Ok I just got home I have Tlance list...

 

[Ritzarmy]

Ok I just got home I have Tlance list...

Holy chit it's about time

 

[Ritzarmy]

Geez your job is getting in the way of priorities like drafting

 

[Nosferatu]

Holy chit it's about time

Sorry I didn't know we were in a hurry, next time i'll drive faster home from work...

 

[Ritzarmy]

Voting

 

[Nosferatu]

I did text Bolts...

 

[Mebert]

I know you can't possibly believe Johnson will get 15%. Ross Perot probably had as much support as any third party candidate in my lifetime at least and he managed 8% so everything else you mentioned is wasted energy.

I think Johnson getting 15 is the worst case scenario for the libertarians in this election. They need a better candidate before they reach that milestone.

My overall point was it takes time. 15% now? Not likely, but he consistently polls at 10-15 now. And they now are on the ballot in all 50 states. It has grown every year.

My point had nothing to do with results from this election, it was that change is gradual. The libertarian party has made slow but gradual gains for 40 years. All the claims that votes for them to that point are wasted is bullshit, they are effecting change.

And for the record I am not libertarian, I used them as the example as they are the best example of the gradual change I am talking about.

 

[Nosferatu]

I think Johnson getting 15 is the worst case scenario for the libertarians in this election. They need a better candidate before they reach that milestone.

My overall point was it takes time. 15% now? Not likely, but he consistently polls at 10-15 now. And they now are on the ballot in all 50 states. It has grown every year.

My point had nothing to do with results from this election, it was that change is gradual. The libertarian party has made slow but gradual gains for 40 years. All the claims that votes for them to that point are wasted is bullshit, they are effecting change.

And for the record I am not libertarian, I used them as the example as they are the best example of the gradual change I am talking about.

In 2000 Harry Browne got less than 1/2 of 1% of the popular vote. Where are these gains you're talking about? It's not just about the candidate or the party, without funding no third party has a chance.

 

[Mebert]

In 2000 Harry Browne got less than 1/2 of 1% of the popular vote. Where are these gains you're talking about? It's not just about the candidate or the party, without funding no third party has a chance.

Yes, in 16 years from .5% to 10-15% is significant. And they gain a TON of funding by getting 5%. which they get easy this election.

 

[Nosferatu]

Yes, in 16 years from .5% to 10-15% is significant. And they gain a TON of funding by getting 5%. which they get easy this election.

You said steady progress in 40 years, which is not the case. I doubt very highly Johnson gets 10%. Johnson is just another one in the long line of third party candidates who won't make a difference and won't change anything.