Chareth Cutestory
report this user
Sep 11 Chareth Cutestory commented on The Election Is Tightening—Don't Waste Your Vote.
@136: That's odd; their party platform seems pretty close to what 45% of Democratic primary voters supported in 2016. If you think that Green Party support is composed entirely of dumb fringe weirdos, I'd invite you to check out the thoroughly creepy and nationalistic DNC speech by General John Allen. When chants of "No More War!" are drowned out by dullards chanting "USA! USA! USA!," you know you're in the party of pragmatic rationalists...

Other scientific, non-fringe Democratic Party stances: Opposing legal cannabis (pre-Bernie), denying the influence of money in politi… (post-Bernie), believing that fracking is not harmful to the environme…, and so much more.

The truth is that the Democratic Party is the vanity party of the national stage. Their core supporters - a majority of whom are middle class professionals too complacent to engage in political action - can sigh a mournful sigh, repeat the aphoristic wisdom of lesser evilism, and then pat themselves on the back for doing their American duty by voting for that bland, corporate candidate. How brave. How rational. Thank god you're all here to save us from democracy.
Sep 9 Chareth Cutestory commented on The Election Is Tightening—Don't Waste Your Vote.
@108: "Logically inconsistent" doesn't always pair with "I don't get why you're doing what you're doing." An argument is logically consistent as long as it does not contain a contradiction. Our argument is that voting third party in a safe state will have a negligible effect on the outcome of the election, but will have a positive outcome for the third party and its associated political movements.

The first premise is that Washingtonians live in a safe state. The last time our state voted Republican was 1984. During the course of this comment thread, the win percentage for Clinton has actually bounced up from 92.7% to 93.5%. We currently have a 0.6% chance of tipping the election (i.e. being the state that decides it all). All of this holds true while a projected 11.5% of the population is voting for Gary Johnson. To tell me that my vote for the Green Party will cost Clinton the election is plain mathematical ignorance.

The second premise is that voting for the Green Party will help the Green Party. We've already discussed how, so we don't need to go into that again.

Therefore, as it stands, the only effect my vote will have on the election will be to provide support to the Green Party, which will help build an independent political movement on a local level for 2018, and on a national level for 2020. You can even borrow the logic of all those tepid Clinton supporters if you don't particularly like Stein: vote for the party, not the person.

As far as destroying the GOP, Clinton has already been wooing the far right, their policy makers, and their billionaires. If anything, they'll be absorbed into the Democratic Party after a massive Trump loss (much like Arlen Specter was in 2009), pulling it even further to the right than it is at the moment. I don't know about you, but I can't wait until we ditch this two party system for a one party system.

On top of that, people are making the strange assumption that Clinton will appoint traditionally liberal SC justices when Clinton is a clearly neoliberal. Even the Clinton supporters here agree with that assessment. We'll likely see a corporate-friendly, anti-union, and pro-government surveillance SC justice come out of a Clinton administration. They may have some left tendencies, but will be unwilling to take a bold stance on anything as controversial as Citizens United. Treading water isn't going to stop a more sophisticated Trump-like figure from winning in 2020.

@122: That sounds like a corporate Domino Theory, which worked so flawlessly last time. I'd rather not give multinational corporations the ability to sue governments over environmental regulations that could harm profitability for the sake of cultural and corporate imperialism.
Sep 8 Chareth Cutestory commented on The Election Is Tightening—Don't Waste Your Vote.
@61: Savage (and the rest of the Braindead Megaphone) repeat a fear-based pro-corporate political narrative, enabling its existence and increasing its effectiveness. Fairly simple.

@93: Wow, talk about logical inconsistencies. Where to start? Perhaps with the most condescending bit:

"Voting for president is one action that does nothing other than elect the president. The president will be Trump or Hilary. It will not be Stein or Johnson or Bernie. How you feel about this fact is irrelevant"

What you call a fact is demonstrably false. Voting for a third party helps that party qualify for ballot access, an incredibly expensive process, as well as secure matching federal funding. For a little more detail on that, The Stranger has you covered here (with a little help from the Green Party).

"Stein and Bernie, though important to mobilize people, are irrelevant to the actual work of activism."

Um, what? Better tell that to the 3,000 activists at the People's Summit, which was organized around the Sanders campaign.

"As well, in terms of foreign affairs, though they are imperialistic hawks, they are not as bad as the Reps that literally invade and destroy other countries without provocation or international support and that has a current candidate that openly discusses carpet bombing people."

Yet Clinton is actively seeking an endorsement from Henry Kissinger, a war criminal known for indiscriminate bombing, not to mention a comically long list of additional atrocities. Drone strikes and coup d'état's don't have the pizzazz of a good ol' carpet bombing, but they sure do have consequences.
Sep 7 Chareth Cutestory commented on The Election Is Tightening—Don't Waste Your Vote.
@3 And enablers, like you, will keep on enabling. Choosing the lesser of two evils has gotten us this far - a choice between two of the most universally hated political figures in our history, a pair that has more in common than most liberals would care to admit.

But really, I'm starting to wonder if you have any idea how this electoral college stuff works. You realize that it isn't proportional, right? You do understand that the popular vote is as symbolic as, say, voting for Jill Stein? In a safe state, like our state, Clinton is nearly guaranteed to win. According to your source, there's a 92.3% percent chance of a Clinton victory here, which is actually up from the last time I checked.

If Seattleites are supporting Clinton now and they'd rather be voting for someone else, they need to show the Democratic party. It won't cost Clinton the election. It will help build a third party movement that can challenge corporate politics in 2020.

As for the posters quivering with fear and moral outrage over people who refuse to compromise their morals, keep in mind that something like 4% of the whole damn country voted for Trump in the primaries, the very same unbalanced 4% that sent fucking insane Sarah Palin into national politics and then nominated an over-lacquered white guy wood carving in Mitt Romney.

The Republicans lost then, and they're going to lose now, unless the Democrats are somehow so stupid they can't remediate the establishment asshole vibe that Blue Dog/Third Way politicians give off before November. Then again, considering that the Democrats would rather have a President Trump than a President Sanders, maybe we should be worried about those swing states.
Aug 26 Chareth Cutestory commented on This Week on the Blabbermouth Podcast: WTF Is a "Neoliberal"?.
It depends on your ideology. If you believe that multinational corporations will act in the best interest of regular people as long as they're unregulated by the state, then you'd probably like neoliberalism a whole bunch. Same goes if you believe that union power needs to be limited or eliminated, or if you think welfare programs should be extremely limited, if not entirely cut, or if you have no issue with domestically consumed goods being manufactured via wage slavery abroad. Contemporary Democrats and Republicans broadly share this ideology, with a few exceptions.

The interview was oddly framed, though. The professor gave a great explanation, which seemed to justify the "insult" usage in a left context, yet the framing seemed to suggest otherwise. Either way, the interview was quality and I hope more of that stuff shows up around here.

David Harvey, the author of A Brief History of Neoliberalism, has a solid interview on the topic here - Neoliberalism Is a Political Project.
Aug 24 Chareth Cutestory commented on Hey Bernie Bros, "Revolution" Is Not the Best Way to Structure a Political Movement.
What a fucked up year. Before 2016, would anyone have imagined that an "alternative" weekly would regularly attack an anti-corporate, anti-racist, anti-War-on-Drugs, pro-gay rights, pro-womens rights, pro-union political movement? Could anyone have imagined spend so much time cheering the antithetical policies of a Wall Street sponsored candidate?

As others have already mentioned, the Sanders campaign didn't have the steady, produced feel of the Clinton campaign because real people were involved at the local level, not seasoned PR professionals. And the whole "disorganized" smear? Let's turn to that revolutionary haven, The New York Times, for a completely biased explanation of its origin:

Released Emails Suggest the D.N.C. Derid…

Then, there's this: "The Sanders diehards always emphasized revolution and righteousness, which made a lot of people familiar with their history books (cf. the Reign of Terror in France, Cuba after 1960, the Iran after 1979, Egypt after Arab Spring, etc., etc.) skeptical."

That is probably the most ignorant sentence I've ever read on this blog. I doubt that we'll be gifted with anything so beautiful, but I nonetheless await Frizzelle's attempt - hell, anyone's attempt - to draw together that roulette of disparate events in a cogent critique of the Sanders campaign.

Aug 18 Chareth Cutestory commented on Who's Leading Jill Stein In Texas Polls? Deez Nuts..
I'm beginning to wonder if this place is staffed by closeted, shame-riddled Jill Stein supporters.

It's okay to reject a terrible set of candidates. Just because you're different, just because the people around you think with fear and not their intellect, doesn't mean you should live a lie.

We live in a safe state with an expected margin of victory of ~20% in favor of Clinton, and we have a 1.7% chance of tipping the election - less than Stein's support in Texas, in fact.

So say it with me, Stranger writers. It's okay, we can vote for Stein and everything will be fine. Just breathe and say it with me. It's okay, we can vote for Stein and everything will be fine.
Aug 16 Chareth Cutestory commented on Clinton's Leadership Team Is Majority Women (Yes!) and House Republicans Want Her Indicted for Perjury (LOL).
You forgot to mention that Salazar is pro-TPP and pro-Fracking, and yet another example of Clinton's disingenuous/dishonest rhetoric.

During an appearance at an oil and gas industry conference Salazar said, "We know that, from everything we’ve seen, there’s not a single case where hydraulic fracking has created an environmental problem for anyone. We need to make sure that story is told."

Read all about it here:…