Think of the French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron, Ciudadanos in Spain, Nowoczesna in Poland. These are early efforts to reimagine a liberalism which is neither right-wing nor left-wing in the traditional sense.
We can't continue assuming that politics is something which is decided elsewhere by distant leaders in a distant capital. Protest is insufficient too. If people who are willing to put time into demonstrations also prove willing to work on behalf of candidates in local elections - or to become candidates themselves - they will achieve far more. If all of this upheaval provokes more involvement, then we have a slim chance of ending up with more vibrant democracies eventually. The alternative, as you've hinted, is that democracy fails altogether.
I think this [ statement that Donald Trump would fight for LGBTQ people] is not just a story of the media spinning people up, but it's a story of special interests on the left, who also feel like their candidate lost, and stoking the flames on the fire because it helps spin up their supporters and help their donations and help their organizations. And it helps, frankly, polarize the country to their short-term benefit and at the expense, frankly, of progress for LGBTQ Americans.
If you go back and you look at the presidency over the course of history, presidents tend to do what they campaigned on. In the 20th century, presidents between Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter accomplished 73 percent of the things that they said they would do as candidates. Part of that is because once they get into office, their credibility, their ability to do anything depends on doing the things that they said they would.
Donald Trump really has, truly has motivated the Latino community more than any other presidential candidate, I think, in generations, and motivated them in a negative way.
Democracy in many parts of the world is undergoing a very deep crisis. Politics is becoming a branch of the entertainment industry. People vote not for the best leader, but for the funniest candidate.
In terms of objectives or agenda, Donald Trump has been the most transparent candidate that I can remember.
Donald Trump is sort of the first candidate of his type that non-politician, true outsider, was coming to shake up the system.
Trudeau motivated people between the ages of 18 to 35 to vote, and 82 per cent of them voted for him. That changed Canadian politics forever. If they stay motivated, and believe me, they are, no party can ever get a majority mandate again without winning at least 60 per cent of those voters. There hasn't been a Conservative candidate in 15 years that ever got on a campus anywhere here in any Canadian university and wasn't thrown stones at.
In the Senate race I went for some candidate endorsement meetings and three people there asked me: Do you go to a therapist? Because they could not believe that with the beating I took in the mayor's race I could still come in there cracking jokes and talking about the issues!
Why am I voting for Obama? Obama, of all the candidates, is the only one of the major candidates - even more than Hillary Clinton, when they were running against each other - to speak in favor of the defense of the Constitution and the separation of powers.
People are really excited by Obama abroad because he seems to be the first American presidential candidate who has ambition to go out of the country. In a sense, with the power of globalization, you are kind of electing the leader of the Western world to an extent.
What concerns me most is the horrible degradation our notions of truth, civility, and decency have undergone. Also the way that language has been malformed - we have been overcome with banality and the cynical misuse of language. When a candidate runs a campaign on a series of dog-whistles to bigots, then turns around and talks about "healing the wounds of division," that is right out of Orwell.
One thing we've learned about Donald Trump - this candidate first, president-elect, and now president - is that he has this sort of reptilian instinct for rooting out supposed enemies and finding people he can whip up distrust into rage.
A lot of people who voted for Trump, working class people, voted for Obama in 2008. They were seduced by the slogans "hope" and "change." They didn't get hope, they didn't get change, they were disillusioned. This time they voted for another candidate who is calling for hope and change and has promised to deliver all kinds of amazing things.
The Republican Primaries were quite interesting. The establishment had its candidate, [Mitt] Romney, a kind of a Wall Street lawyer and investor, and they wanted him in. But the base didn't want him.
Every time a candidate came up from the base, that is with popular support, the Republican establishment went into high gear to destroy them with massive propaganda attack ads and so on. It was one after another, each one crazier than the last.
In the Pro-Eligendo Pontefice Mass, despite knowing that [ Joseph Ratzinger] was a candidate [to become Pope], he wasn't stupid, he didn't care to "make-up" his answer, he said exactly the same thing [that we needed to clean up the dirt of the Church]. He was the brave one who helped so many open this door. So, I want to remember him because sometimes we forget about this hidden works that were the foundations for "taking the lid off the pot."
Our Supreme Court has lifted the practice of buying legislation to the level of a constitutional principle by repeatedly protecting corporate spending for and against political candidates, as well as promises and threats of such spending to bribe and blackmail such candidates, by appeal to the free-speech clause of the First Amendment.
Christians living in a democracy should always vote if they can. If they cannot in conscience bring themselves to vote for any of the candidates on offer (in the UK quite often there are several candidates for a parliamentary seat) they might consider deliberately spoiling the ballot paper as a sad protest which still says 'but I believe in being involved'.
In Cuba the elections for the powers of the State comes from the people, first it comes from meetings of the citizens at the base. In Cuba we call them blocks, the divisions of a city that is the term we use. Several blocks of neighborhoods that live in the same area gather in assemblies that are stipulated by law. In those assemblies the people choose freely among themselves who will represent them. The criteria takes into account the candidates characteristics, including if they are hardworking, If they are good people, if they have a clean past, and money has no bearing on who is nominated.
I was able to do that [showing up of Democratic benefits] when I was the candidate. But I've not seen or presided over that kind of systematic outreach that I think needs to happen.
I am the only candidate for mayor of London with the experience of being a transport minister.
There is a lack of interest in voting in the United States, and that troubles me. It is very necessary that people get registered, study the issues and be aware of the politics of our country. We will really be set back if people don't take the time to learn about the candidates who are concerned about the well-being of all the citizens and vote.
At our church I do not endorse politicians publicly. Because I am afraid that if I endorse one candidate, it would keep somebody from coming to our church. So I made one exception one time to put one bumper sticker on my car, but I don't ever do it anymore.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: