American Solidarity Party

[dUSt]

I found a party worthy of my vote: https://solidarity-party.org/

In 2016 I justified supporting Trump because I weighed the importance of pro-life issues against all the negative that came with Trump. For the most part, I was optimistic and erred towards giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. Two Supreme Court nominees later, multiplied by divisive, racist rhetoric, and absolute no humility, I can’t justify it again. 
 

Of course, Joe Biden and his less-obvious-but-still-racist and pro-abortion party isn’t any better. 

The American Solidarity Party, on the surface, seems like the dream party for any Catholic simply trying to vote their conscience. 

[Hna.Caridad]

Hmmmm...that's not a bad option.   A vote for a candidate isn't a vote against another candidate--a vote for a candidate is indeed a vote FOR that candidate.  I ended up voting for a different "third" party candidate in the last election because I couldn't justify voting for either of the two major party candidates--for exactly the reasons you gave above, plus some.  I'm thinking that the American Solidarity Party candidate might not have been on the ballot in my state or else I would've considered voting for him/her.  I'll definitely watch for them this year, though--thanks for putting them on my radar! 

[little2add]

8 hours ago, dUSt said:

Two Supreme Court nominees later,

What’s wrong with them?

[chrysostom]

https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/st-compromise/

In a national presidential election (not counting local elections): since my own vote counts, practically speaking, as less than a rounding error, the only reason I, personally, have to vote is to signal some kind of formal support of both the candidate as well as legitimise the system which presents the nation with only two unpalatable alternatives on a consistent basis.

In that kind of formal sense I think it's less silly to vote for the ASP.

But if the vote is all about a principle vote, get your principles correct right out of the gate. If you want to do an idealist vote, get it right. The ASP avoids mortally sinful active policy positions, which is good. My concern is with positions they haven't taken but are implicit in the fact that they haven't mentioned them - so yeah, it would be fine for Catholics to vote for them but I will probably continue to abstain. The issue is usury. I know the ASP would probably support limiting usurious contracts, but that doesn't go far enough. Any party which, when in power, would continue the State's continued enforcement of usurious (non-recourse - so credit cards, car loans, personal loans, etc.) contracts, would be guilty of cooperating in mortal sin in my view. In a similar way that I deplore the continued funding and support of abortions by the current government in various ways.

Crazy, I know. How unrealistic! That would never get you elected! Well, sounds like something people would already say to the ASP. I want all the good policy positions.

[dUSt]

6 hours ago, little2add said:

What’s wrong with them?

https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2020/06/catholics-respond-to-landmark-supreme-court-ruling/

[Anomaly]

3 hours ago, dUSt said:

https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2020/06/catholics-respond-to-landmark-supreme-court-ruling/

Read the link.    It’s a mixed bag as far as the recent ruling.   The Jesuit priest’s comments at the end were significant.  What Catholic wants to see LBGTQ discrimination in jobs, housing, etc.   Catholic hierarchy aren’t in full agreement on it  

As far as voting, it’s a moral decision to choose the least likely harm AND to minimize the likely harm.  In the classic runaway trolley where switch A runs into two people, switch B runs into six, yo of course choose A, but don’t stop there.  Still try to warn people on A!  What if you hit switch B immediately after and derailed the trolley? Try praying for a miracle or telekinesis or the hand of God to intervene.  

It looks like Biden or Trump will be President.   A vote for either is necessary to minimize the harm.  But by all means, start now supporting a third party or political committee, even the USCCB.    Catholic votes are so splintered now they are almost a meaningless demographic.

IF I vote for Trump or Biden, it will be my choice for the least harm, greater good. But I personally won’t defend bad behavior or cronyism or discrimination which is why I pay attention to local politicians where local laws are made, and support peaceful protests.   Other opinions and perspectives matter and may be more accurate than mine.  Maybe someone else will save the people on track A, and I saved the people on track B.  At least actively try instead of choosing to do nothing. 

[little2add]

14 hours ago, dUSt said:

https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2020/06/catholics-respond-to-landmark-supreme-court-ruling/

And if the democratic candidate had won the last election a far more liberal, pro-abortion, communist would have been seated on the supreme  court.   

BTW: a 3rd party vote would be worthless, i fear

[Luigi]

4 hours ago, little2add said:

BTW: a 3rd party vote would be worthless, i fear

A third party vote is usually a wasted vote, but in this year's election, any vote is probably a wasted vote. Therefore, this year's election is probably the best opportunity to cast a protest vote for a third party. It would be unreasonable to expect the third party to win the presidency, but the more people vote third party, the louder the message of dissatisfaction to the major parties. 

The only caveat to that - and we don't have enough information yet - is who Biden picks as his running mate. He's currently 77 years old; if he wins, he'll be 78 when he gets sworn in. Rumors are flying that he's losing his mental sharpness. I don't know if that's true, but I have to take it into consideration. I have to figure that his vice-president may very well finish out Biden's term, if elected. Trump isn't in a much better situation - currently 74, and some people say he's losing his marbles, too. But if Biden picks a numbskull - by which I mean someone with whom I disagree vehemently - then I wouldn't vote third party. I'd have to vote for Trump to avoid the possibility of the numbskull finishing out Biden's term. 

Edited June 26, 2020 by Luigi

[little2add]

The Democrats openly promote and Advocate:  abortion with no limits, infanticide and have become the ANTI-GOD party.

The 2012 DNC voted to removed God's name from the party platform.

There hypocrisy is stunning 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Anomaly]

14 hours ago, Luigi said:

A third party vote is usually a wasted vote, but in this year's election, any vote is probably a wasted vote. Therefore, this year's election is probably the best opportunity to cast a protest vote for a third party. It would be unreasonable to expect the third party to win the presidency, but the more people vote third party, the louder the message of dissatisfaction to the major parties. 

The only caveat to that - and we don't have enough information yet - is who Biden picks as his running mate. He's currently 77 years old; if he wins, he'll be 78 when he gets sworn in. Rumors are flying that he's losing his mental sharpness. I don't know if that's true, but I have to take it into consideration. I have to figure that his vice-president may very well finish out Biden's term, if elected. Trump isn't in a much better situation - currently 74, and some people say he's losing his marbles, too. But if Biden picks a numbskull - by which I mean someone with whom I disagree vehemently - then I wouldn't vote third party. I'd have to vote for Trump to avoid the possibility of the numbskull finishing out Biden's term. 

A third party vote is worthless if you only support the third party platform with your presidential election vote.  

Political principles need to be supported way ahead of time, and in local political races as well.  

 

I don’t think it matters who the Vice President will be.  There is no political power wielded from there. 

[Luigi]

17 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

A third party vote is worthless if you only support the third party platform with your presidential election vote.  

Political principles need to be supported way ahead of time, and in local political races as well.  

 

I don’t think it matters who the Vice President will be.  There is no political power wielded from there. 

I agree about the political principles being supported way ahead of time, and spreading, to build a strong base, and so forth. 

Correct that the vice-president has very little political power (other than chairing the Senate), until the president dies. Then the VP has complete presidential power. Biden is already 77; he'd be 78 when he's sworn in; he'd be 82 if he completed his term. I assume he's healthy, but one never knows, does one? 

[dUSt]

I was once in the "a third party vote is a wasted vote camp", just look back to the 2016 posts. lol

I’ve came to the realization that once one of the two parties think they have your vote locked down (Republicans with the pro-life vote and Democrats with the black vote) they stop doing anything to actually earn that vote. If the pro-life movement wasn’t tied to Republicans like it is today we’d have BOTH parties still fighting for our votes like we did in very recent history. Now look what’s happened. Republicans take our vote for granted and Democrats view as as a lost cause, kicked us out, and now only try to appeal to the extreme opposite.

If the pro-life vote just mobilized one election cycle to focus all of our power on a third party candidate it would have a huge eye opening impact on the importance of the pro-life vote.

Nobody will give concessions to someone under contract. The free agents get the big money.

 

[Lea]

On 6/26/2020 at 12:48 AM, little2add said:

BTW: a 3rd party vote would be worthless, i fear

As someone living in good ol' Europa, I can only recommend getting yourself a multi-party representation. It makes voting not necessarily easy, but easier, I guess - having more candidates with good prospects of winning a seat, it's way more likely for everybody to find somebody near their values and political ideas. Plus having to form coalitions fuels democratic ways of decisionmaking. 

After WW II my country started of with two main parties, now there are up to six of them in the parliaments. And yes, about each of them somebody initially said "Voting for this new group means wasting the ballot!"

[dUSt]

I think  we should move to a ranked voting system. Instead of picking one winner take all candidate, when you vote, you rank your candidates in order of preference. Then, you start eliminating the results until one candidate emerges with over 50% of the vote.

For example:

Trump, Biden, Kanye and Francis are the candidates. Here's how I vote:

1. Kanye
2. Francis
3. Trump
4. Biden

Votes are counted, and only 1st choices are tallied. The results:

Trump = 40%
Biden = 25%
Kanye = 15%
Francis = 20%

Nobody wins yet. Kanye received the least votes, so anyone who voted for Kanye will now have their second choice candidate count instead. Now results look like this:

Trump = 40%
Biden = 25%
Francis = 35%

Still nobody with the majority. Biden now has the least votes, so anyone who voted for Biden will now move to their next choice. Results now look like this:

Trump = 45%
Francis = 55%

Francis wins, because he was preferred to more voters over Trump, even though he would have lost in today's system. This system is better because voters would never have to settle on the "lesser of two evils" in fear of their vote not counting.

 

[little2add]

Do you fund the electoral system.  The entire system is bias and non-representative.   Outlaw lobbyist,  special interest groups and behind closed door legislation.   

Starting with term limits and accountability of personal wealth acquired after becoming public  servant.