Find me a candidate

I've already whittled it down to three must-haves (pro-life, not a hawk, actually sees structural inequality as something that needs to be addressed). I feel like that's a relatively small number.

Not that this makes you wrong--but right now I think I'd rather not vote than give in on one of the remaining three

 

Sanders is easily the most genuine and likable (my opinion) of all candidates. Doesn't mean he would make a good president, but at least he has substance.

 

Write-in.

 

Oh look, you disagree with me thinking not all structural inequality is due to government monopoly by stating an example of a cause of structural inequality that isn't due to a government monopoly. Outside the box.

 

A distinct possibility. Although it's going to take some hunting to even find a write-in I can support

 

You're going to wake up with your b-hole sore and greasy no matter who you vote for. You have to decide if you want rich people to tell you we have to take from the rich to give to the poor, or if you want rich people to tell you we have to make the rich richer and it will trickle down to you.

 

Float's planning to write-in Anderson Cooper and I'll do the same. Join us.

 

Is he "pro-life?"

 

He's pro-choice.

Tar's only write-in, off the top of my head: Tar. He's going to have to vote for himself.

I'd suggest a campaign that attempts to make concessions with the libertarians on government involvement, concessions with the republicans on foreign policy, concessions with the democrats on pro-choice... all while making no concessions of your own, on those issues.

Good luck!

 

I don't think Tar is old enough to be constitutionally eligible.

 

I feel like this is not an unreasonably extensive list of key issues, and I don't think my positions are an unreasonable combination or a random hodgepodge of issues. To me at least, they seem like they're all coming from one, consistent ideology--recognizing all of humanity as valuable brings me to support the families and unborn children, discourage war, and seek answers for those who are too often frozen out of the current system. It's just that there doesn't seem to be any party that shares that ideology. . .

 

There's always Jimmy Carter, then. He was mostly pro-life.

 

You would be correct. I could be a representative, but not senator or president.

 

Who said all? And structural inequality is garbage. Exists for everyone who wants to make an excuse.

 

The structural inequality stuff is massively over the top.

 

Rand Pauls my guy. As far as inequality, the only thing I'm worried about is third world poverty. Poor people in this country are obese. That was seen as a luxury throughout world history. There are people dying of highly treatable diseases and malnutrition in Africa and Southern Asia. Those are the people that I feel badly about.

 

I'll buy that it's exaggerated at times, but I've become convinced that it's definitely real. Read too many convincing stories, and it makes too much damn sense.

Yeah, the poor people in this country are not as bad off as poor people in other countries. Granted. But that doesn't mean there aren't problems that are very worth fixing. What's the reason poor people in this country are obese? Think it has anything to do with processed sugar being about the cheapest calories you can buy? Better than starving to death, certainly, but it's not an indicator that there aren't problems.

 

The poor in this country are obese, but what folks either don't realize or overlook is that they are often malnourished as well. Even with overeating, the sort of food that is most affordable doesn't contain enough nutritional value.

 

Which, if nothing else, puts a strain on our healthcare system.

 

Cecil Shoemaker