Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Fireplace

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:08 PM
Lostatsea Lostatsea is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9
Default Would you support a poly minded presidential candidate?

A little about me. I am in a poly relationship. Sure it has it's problems but as I sat down with my wife and talk for hours we have wondered "What can we do to improve the world around us?" I am not rich. We live day to day making every dollar count. I am vegan. I am for equal rights for every relationship type, what ever type it is. I think everyone should be who they are without the fear of legal prosecution for simply loving in a way that is nontraditional. We also have plans to solve some of the US hunger issues that many Americans face. Our military should be about keeping us safe at home and less about forcing other to become part of our less than perfect model of government. Soldiers become farmers who train to keep our borders safe while helping to feed the homeless and hungry. Food, power, clean drinking water, and medical care should all be a natural right not a form of control to keep poor people poor and rich people rich. Sure if you desire special things outside the scope of naturally grown food you should have the option to pay for it but none should starve for lack of a way to pay for food. As long as things like Food and Drinking Water that are necessary for survival there will always be people hungry. Sure we don't have all the issues worked out but we are working on a plan.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-06-2014, 12:43 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 4,947
Default

Sounds like a good plan so far.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-11-2014, 04:11 AM
nllswing nllswing is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 48
Default Would you support a poly minded presidential candidate?

" Would you support a poly minded presidential candidate?" - Sure, so long as I agree with the bulk of remaining issues.

"What can we do to improve the world around us?" - interesting thought. What remains is whether the world wants to be improved.

"I am vegan." - What do you think of meat eaters?

"I am for equal rights for every relationship type, what ever type it is. I think everyone should be who they are without the fear of legal prosecution for simply loving in a way that is nontraditional." - not bad. There is a lot that can be borrowed from business partnership law and applied to multimember families. Child custody issues during dissolution can be hanlded by already existing divorce precedent.

"Soldiers become farmers who train to keep our borders safe while helping to feed the homeless and hungry." - farming does not lack workforce. Currently some farmers are paid by the Federal government to not sow.

"Food, power, clean drinking water, and medical care should all be a natural right" - something almost like this was already experimented on 1/5 of the world's population from 1917 to 1989.


"Sure we don't have all the issues worked out but we are working on a plan." - not bad for a start. Keep posting.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-11-2014, 01:25 PM
Lostatsea Lostatsea is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9
Default

Answers to your questions might be summed up by the fallowing statements:

1) Everyone should be who they are regardless of who they are as long as they are not causing anyone harm in doing so. As long as things like abuse, neglect, and physical harm is not inflicted on others and everyone is allowed to be who they are of their own free will, then they should do so without fear of judgement for simply being different from the accepted norm.

2) As for the food industry, if it was no longer a for profit industry and more for mankind, then every farmer should plant and harvest as much food as they can to simply keep everyone fed. You probably going to laugh at me with this. Have you every watched the "Startrek Next Generation" series? After they reached a point of where money did not drive survival (at one time food was the drive for survival before we progressed, if you can call it progress, to the point of where out technology allowed for farmers to produce enough for other people to see other occupations outside the farming industry) then they simply worked for the betterment of mankind. Do I think we have progressed to the point where as a people we can put money down entirely? Not yet. Tomorrow? Who knows? Every journey begins with a step.

Next you have to evaluate the purpose of money. Money is way more that a simple form of commerce. It is a form of control and limiter to innovation to those who simply can not afford to build their ideas and put them forward to others who could and would benefit from it. So progress is limited by money. so what is the solution? I think a system where innovation is not limited by the dollar would also be great for mankind as an entirety. How do we achieve this? I am still working on that.

Some people believe that if we do away with money everyone will quit working. I don't believe this. People love themselves enough to work for survival. Sure there would be a huge lost of industry in the beginning but after a while people would adjust and celebrate being free to peruse dreams and life to it's fullest.

Then you have to ask "What in life is worth seeking?" How much of your day are you simply putting forward to making money just so you can give to someone else? We as a people have lost our roots. We are lost in greed living in a greed driven system. What does that do for us as a people? It demoralizes and makes us less caring about people and more caring about money.

Will you ever see me or someone like me on the ballet for president? Not likely. The wealthy would kill me to protect their money driven elevation and control they have over the entire nation. In the mean time the hungry go hungry while the wealthy sit fat and happy. The poor stay poor and the rich stay in power.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-11-2014, 04:49 PM
Inyourendo's Avatar
Inyourendo Inyourendo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: sw missouri
Posts: 859
Default

Bedroom choices of a politician is not something I factor in when I vote
__________________
Sue, openly in a vee with Nate (polysexual, many fwb) and Sam (Mono)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-11-2014, 07:00 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 4,947
Default

Re (from Lostatsea):
Quote:
"As long as things like abuse, neglect, and physical harm is not inflicted on others and everyone is allowed to be who they are of their own free will, then they should do so without fear of judgement for simply being different from the accepted norm."
Some things begin to get complicated here. First, how should we define "abuse?" heck even "neglect?" Does a spanking count as physical harm? Does sado-masochism count as physical harm? What if the masochist is so submissive that xe isn't quite sure whether xe consents?

Also what do we do with someone who says, "Who I am is a person who never has to see or hear about homosexuality." Not that the words in question are faulty, just that at some point we'd have to draw the line between, for example, "who someone is," and, "who someone can't be because it would violate someone else's rights and freedoms." What if "who I am" is a 30-year-old teacher who's romantically entwined with her 15-year-old student? What if "who I am" is a respectable nieghbor who lives in a nieghborhood with houses of conservative colors and appearance? Can I call the cops to stop someone nextdoor from painting their house purple?

In a nutshell, how do we draw the line between where one person's nose ends, and the next person's nose begins?

Next, how similar is your plan to communism? "From each according to hir ability, to each according to hir need." No money, right? How do we then define "ability" and "need?" Who's required to do which work; who's allowed to receive which benefits from which work?

Re:
Quote:
"Some people believe that if we do away with money everyone will quit working. I don't believe this."
I agree. Most people want to make some kind of valuable contribution to society, however they can. And they are inclined to do work on the things that most interest them.

We are also agreed that there is far too much gap between the rich and poor in the United States (to say nothing of even more corrupt countries).

As for getting on the Presidential ticket, that would take a lot of doing. First of all, there are a battery of tests you must pass to qualify to run, such as being born/raised in the United States, being of a certain age, having certain experience, etc.

Then there is the problem of becoming the official candidate for the Republican or Democratic Party. Because any third-party candidate is virtually guaranteed to lose. Ross Perot came about as close as any third-party can get, largely because he had buttloads of money and connections.

Which brings us to next problem. It's virtually possible to get elected President without buttloads of money and connections. You need serious airtime on TV. And what if you couldn't get nominated as a third-party candidate? Would you try to run as a write-in? I'm guessing no President has ever won as a write-in (but I could be wrong).

You'll need a platform that appeals to enough people to make them want to vote for you. And remember that people tend to fear change. So if you are selling a lot of revolutionary ideas, you'd have to be really skillful at selling them.

I know I sound like a wet blanket, but I only mean to describe the current political landscape as I see it. Lots and lots of obstacles to overcome, that's all I'm saying.

I'd love to have a President who made radical sweeping changes for the good -- such as cooling the military engines and sticking to protecting our own borders. Although, helping the Ukrainian people at this time for example is something that I'd support, and would hope that many nations (not just the U.S.) would pitch in (and brainstorm to come up with a plan that would involve the least violence and the most long-term improvement of people's lives in that land).

A really great President would have both realistic plans for improving things in the short term, as well as realistic plans for improving things even more idealistically in the long-term. And he/she'd be able to sell these ideas convincingly to the American people. And he/she would have a talent for convincing the ever-at-odds Republican-versus-Democratic House and Senate to work together on making these changes happen.

A great President must often balance complicated moral issues as well. When I saw the 2012 film "Lincoln," I was struck by how many "shady backroom deals" Lincoln had to condone in order to get the Thirteenth Amendment passed. A leader's decisions aren't always cut and dry where ethics are concerned.

Perhaps this thread will offer suggestions for future Presidential candidates, even if we're unable to field a viable candidate of our own? What would it take to get the kinds of changes we'd like to see into the White House?
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:44 AM.