Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I'm saying is that I disagree with the view that the emergence of a new party with a proven ruinous ideology represents a positive development, as you and AppalachianAmerican seem to think.
That doesn't matter what you think, we live in a free country where people are allowed to vote for whomever they choose to vote for. You do not have the control to dictate who people do and don't vote for.
That doesn't matter what you think, we live in a free country where people are allowed to vote for whomever they choose to vote for. You do not have the control to dictate who people do and don't vote for.
Read my posts again. I didn't say I had the 'control to dictate' peoples' votes. What I said that I disagree that electoral success of a ruinous ideology should be viewed a positive development.
Read my posts again. I didn't say I had the 'control to dictate' peoples' votes. What I said that I disagree that electoral success of a ruinous ideology should be viewed a positive development.
I did read your post and I am aware you did not say that, I am simply saying you cannot control who people vote for, so you can disagree all you want, but she was elected in a free election by the people to represent the people.
If someone in the area was smart what they would do is show up early for a council meeting and simply take her seat. When she complains tell her that you are simply taking her advice and claiming what others own is now yours and if she wants it back, show up earlier next time.
Sure why not? You seriously would find value in participation by a 'Sharia Law party' in US elections? I would not, nor do I see value in the Socialist Alternative party. Either ideology has left poverty and misery in its wake, wherever it has gained power.
I have to disagree with your apparent view of 'the more the merrier' when it comes to political parties. Thanks but no thanks to socialism, Sharia law, KKK, Nazi, Communism, etc.
I would never vote for Socialist Alternative, but it's a good thing that there's an alternative to the two party system. In this case it's good that there's an alternative to Seattle's ONE party system.
A stronger Socialist Alternative could have positive effects on the Democratic Party in King County - it could get the far left out of the Dems and make the party more centrist and sane. It could also concievably take seats in the Washington State Legislature away from the Dems, narrowing their majority.
I would never vote for Socialist Alternative, but it's a good thing that there's an alternative to the two party system. In this case it's good that there's an alternative to Seattle's ONE party system.
A stronger Socialist Alternative could have positive effects on the Democratic Party in King County - it could get the far left out of the Dems and make the party more centrist and sane. It could also concievably take seats in the Washington State Legislature away from the Dems, narrowing their majority.
Clearly the effect of the win by Ksmama Sawant will be to move the Seattle-area Democrats further to the left, since they will be afraid of suffering the same fate as her opponent, a moderate liberal pro-business Democrat.
I do see a possible upside from Kshama as she is a true believer and therefore honest and forthright. It could be that when confronted with the true nature of socialism, even Seattle voters will say, nah we don't want that. But I see a huge potential downside if they don't. Make Detroit look like a picnic.....
Clearly the effect of the win by Ksmama Sawant will be to move the Seattle-area Democrats further to the left, since they will be afraid of suffering the same fate as her opponent, a moderate liberal pro-business Democrat.
I do see a possible upside from Kshama as she is a true believer and therefore honest and forthright. It could be that when confronted with the true nature of socialism, even Seattle voters will say, nah we don't want that. But I see a huge potential downside if they don't. Make Detroit look like a picnic.....
Is it possible that some of Seattle's loony left Dems might switch parties to Socialist Alternative?
There is a possibility that SA could run a candidate for governor or US Senate who would siphon enough votes from the Dems to allow for a Republican victory.
Is it possible that some of Seattle's loony left Dems might switch parties to Socialist Alternative?
There is a possibility that SA could run a candidate for governor or US Senate who would siphon enough votes from the Dems to allow for a Republican victory.
Good point--it is possible that the SA will result in R victories just as the Libertarian party has tended to result in Dem victories in Washington state.
I doubt it will work out that way though, because the Socialist Alternitive Party will be confined to the Seattle area, and the main effect will be to pull Seattle Democrats leftward. Already mayor-elect Ed Murray (D) had hopped on board the $15 minimum wage proposal advocated by socialist Kshama Sawant.
Clearly the effect of the win by Ksmama Sawant will be to move the Seattle-area Democrats further to the left, since they will be afraid of suffering the same fate as her opponent, a moderate liberal pro-business Democrat.
I do see a possible upside from Kshama as she is a true believer and therefore honest and forthright. It could be that when confronted with the true nature of socialism, even Seattle voters will say, nah we don't want that. But I see a huge potential downside if they don't. Make Detroit look like a picnic.....
I doubt it, this one person isn't going to turn Seattle into some communist city that you seem to think will happen because one person who identifies as a socialist gets elected to city council.
Also, Seattle will not look worse than Detroit, unless you are saying you have no idea what you are talking about, which that I would believe.
I agree with her. Boeing threatened to move the company elsewhere the workers should do whatever they can to make sure they stay there. People before profits!
and if boeing were to put people above profits, and start losing money, then what? does the company wait until it has to shut down to fire people?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
