Cyberdemon
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > Election 2012: Conservatards vs Librodouches
Elect!
Obama
Romney
Others
Huy is a Faggot
View Results [Edit Poll (moderators only)]
Pages (7): « First ... « 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 »  
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:22. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
exp(x)


Posts: 2595
Registered: 04-04



Doom Marine said:
1. Listen to the way he treats the interviewer.


The video doesn't show what the interviewer said to piss Romney off.

Also: lol, religion

Old Post 11-02-12 15:43 #
exp(x) is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
eargosedown
Forum Regular


Posts: 916
Registered: 12-04


He can love and literally interpret whatever religion he wants.

I just don't like the fact that he used veto powers on his moral opinion against what the majority he represents desired.

Old Post 11-02-12 17:58 #
eargosedown is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15216
Registered: 04-02


More than his ties to religion, I'd worry about where he gets his money and what lobbies Romney is tied to: His top donors are linked almost unanimously to investment banks, other banking entities, or financial funds and consultancies. He's one of those people himself, serving their interests before anything else. I mean, now, in times when the world economy has been more or less wrecked by banks which lobbied to privatize the economies of nations and financial speculators that throw their costs on the general population... would you really want make one of their immediate agents president?

Old Post 11-02-12 18:58 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



exp(x) said:

The video doesn't show what the interviewer said to piss Romney off.

Also: lol, religion



My thoughts exactly.

Old Post 11-02-12 19:33 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03



exp(x) said:

The video doesn't show what the interviewer said to piss Romney off.

Also: lol, religion

Doesn't matter what interviewer said to piss him off; would we want someone with that temperament, who loses his cool so easily, as commander in chief and right next to an ICBM button? Have you seen Clinton or Obama this mad? I'm pretty sure from the context of what was shown, what set Romney off was the interviewer dared to question the contradiction between his public stance in office versus his faith.

This is Romney when he doesn't know he's being recorded. What I saw was a self-righteous religious nutcase who has no respect for others. This isn't Moderate Mitt, this is pure lunacy... this is a right-wing radical and one of the last person we would want in office.

Last edited by Doom Marine on 11-02-12 at 21:12

Old Post 11-02-12 21:04 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10


You really think Romney didn't know he was being recorded here? He's a long-time political figure and presidential candidate, giving an interview in a radio station. He knows fully well (as does anyone else in his position) that ANY time he gives an interview, it's being recorded.

Old Post 11-03-12 01:20 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03



Caffeine Freak said:
You really think Romney didn't know he was being recorded here? He's a long-time political figure and presidential candidate, giving an interview in a radio station. He knows fully well (as does anyone else in his position) that ANY time he gives an interview, it's being recorded.

I really think? Uh, no, it's what I researched:


The Blaze said:
This, of course, isn’t the first time the video has circulated. In a 2007 interview with Katie Couric , Romney claimed that he was “intense” during the exchange, but that he didn’t lose his temper. The candidate also said that he didn’t know that there was a camera recording the off-air exchange (he, in fact, referred to it as a “hidden camera,” although it may have simply been a standard studio camera that he was unaware of).

There you go, Romney doesn't know he's on camera during that radio break.

So to paraphase what Bucket brought up earlier: the only thing you've done is trying WAY too hard to pick apart at small potatoes, and you're not very good at it either. So what exactly is your point?

Old Post 11-03-12 01:33 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Doom Marine said:

I really think? Uh, no, it's what I researched:


There you go, Romney doesn't know he's on camera during that radio break.



I stand corrected. He was foolish for not realizing that, then.


Doom Marine said:

So to paraphase what Bucket brought up earlier: the only thing you've done is trying WAY too hard to pick apart at small potatoes, and you're not very good at it either. So what exactly is your point?



Please, if what I said qualifies at picking apart at small things, then "OMG, Romney got defensive during a 1-minute segment of an interview, I'm aghast in horror" certainly does as well.

Old Post 11-03-12 01:47 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03



Caffeine Freak said:
Please, if what I said qualifies at picking apart at small things, then "OMG, Romney got defensive during a 1-minute segment of an interview, I'm aghast in horror" certainly does as well.

There you go again, peeling small potatoes. I'm not sure if you even heard what was uttered in the interview, Romney professing about Judgement Day prophecies and all the Jews dying before Christ makes a second return... and the worst part was, he really believed in these things. The guy was revealing to us what he truly stood for when the camera was off, a rarity unseen in the Moderate Mitt when facing the press.

The real horror is, he's shown to be religious fanatic who will say anything to get the Oval Office. That's the tip of the iceberg, the real tragedy is that his advisors will be the same neocons from the Bush Jr. era.

If Mitt wins the election, prepare for WWIII.

Old Post 11-03-12 02:05 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Doom Marine said:

There you go again, peeling small potatoes.
I'm not sure if you even heard what was uttered in the interview, Romney professing about Judgement Day prophecies and all the Jews dying before Christ makes a second return... and the worst part was, he really believed in these things. The guy was revealing to us what he truly stood for when the camera was off, a rarity unseen in the Moderate Mitt when facing the press.

The real horror is, he's shown to be religious fanatic who will say anything to get the Oval Office. That's the tip of the iceberg, the real tragedy is that his advisors will be the same neocons from the Bush Jr. era.

If Mitt wins the election, prepare for WWIII.



Addressing your comment towards me is peeling small potatoes?

I should clarify that I really don't like Romney either, primarily because I believe he's a flip-flopper, as many on the left have said. I don't believe we have a great choice in either candidate.

Anyway, I did listen to the interview, from beginning to end. I think you may have misunderstood what he says regarding the Jews. What he actually says, at about 1:34, is: "..Christ appears in Jerusalem, splits the mount of Olives, to stop the war that's coming in to kill all the Jews..." I'm pretty sure he's saying that Christ returns to save the Jews from extermination, as many branches of the Christian faith believe that the Jews are the "chosen" ones.

But enough about that. Every president we've had (that I'm aware of) has professed some branch of the Christian faith, though I suspect it's also done for political reasons in the case of some candidates. Romney isn't vastly different in this respect, except that he'd be our first Mormon president.

Part of my point is, I have a hard time believing that most presidents/presidential candidates really, truly believe what their religious texts say, front to back. Obama claims to be Christian, yet clearly doesn't interpret the Bible in a strict fashion (his stance on gay marriage is one example). Even in this video, Romney several times expresses that he doesn't want to talk about Mormonism and that he's not running as a Mormon president, probably precisely because he knows how fucking crazy some of their doctrine sounds to most people.

Old Post 11-03-12 03:14 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Doom Marine
took his ball and went home


Posts: 1655
Registered: 09-03


Finally a comprehensive reply. You were peeling small potatoes until I worked you up into something worth reading. Thank you for clarifying yourself.


Caffeine Freak said:

Part of my point is, I have a hard time believing that most presidents/presidential candidates really, truly believe what their religious texts say, front to back. Obama claims to be Christian, yet clearly doesn't interpret the Bible in a strict fashion (his stance on gay marriage is one example). Even in this video, Romney several times expresses that he doesn't want to talk about Mormonism and that he's not running as a Mormon president, probably precisely because he knows how fucking crazy some of their doctrine sounds to most people.

Deep down, everyone knows damn well that Obama is an atheist at heart.

Romney on the other hand, changes his position (lies) so many fucking time that it averages out to be moderate, but what does he truly believe in when the cameras are supposedly off?

Of all the crazy fucking Mormon doctrines, one stood out most glaringly in the context of Romney's lying is "Milk before Meat", or "Lying for the Lord."

So the loyalty and welfare of the Mormon church overrules principles like honesty. This of course, can be twisted in infinite ways that the end justifies the means.

Mitt was moderate enough to sell himself to Massachusetts, but once he was in office, he vetoed the fuck out of legislation, 844 times. 707 of them were overridden by overwhelmingly Democratic majority. By the second half of his term, his approval rating was in the 30's and he knew better not to run again... Bipartisanship in the Romney house is airbrushing history. If you really want to know where he stands on the issue, look up the stuff he has vetoed, including emergency relief funds, and civil service. His record as MA Governor speaks louder than words: he is on the far right.

Moderate Mitt will sell himself moderate once again until he is elected. He will say he is against abortion now, but once in office, will overturn Roe v Wade in accordance with his faith. Romney will say he is against tax cuts for the rich, then cut his buddies a check once the plebeians have elected him. Do not be fooled, this guy is dangerous.

Old Post 11-03-12 04:32 #
Doom Marine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10



Doom Marine said:


Deep down, everyone knows damn well that Obama is an atheist at heart.

Romney on the other hand, changes his position (lies) so many fucking time that it averages out to be moderate, but what does he truly believe in when the cameras are supposedly off?

Of all the crazy fucking Mormon doctrines, one stood out most glaringly in the context of Romney's lying is "Milk before Meat", or "Lying for the Lord."

So the loyalty and welfare of the Mormon church overrules principles like honesty. This of course, can be twisted in infinite ways that the end justifies the means.

Mitt was moderate enough to sell himself to Massachusetts, but once he was in office, he vetoed the fuck out of legislation, 844 times. 707 of them were overridden by overwhelmingly Democratic majority. By the second half of his term, his approval rating was in the 30's and he knew better not to run again... Bipartisanship in the Romney house is airbrushing history. If you really want to know where he stands on the issue, look up the stuff he has vetoed, including emergency relief funds, and civil service. His record as MA Governor speaks louder than words: he is on the far right.

Moderate Mitt will sell himself moderate once again until he is elected. He will say he is against abortion now, but once in office, will overturn Roe v Wade in accordance with his faith. Romney will say he is against tax cuts for the rich, then cut his buddies a check once the plebeians have elected him. Do not be fooled, this guy is dangerous.



That wiki link is indeed disturbing. I can't comment further on it right now, but that's one more reason I'm skeptical about Romney.

Anyway, I'm curious what makes you think Obama is an atheist. Obama attended the same church for 20 years, and disavowed it (conveniently, I might add) sometime during his 2008 campaign, only when the pastor (Jeremiah Wright) came under fire for some controversial comments.

According to polls taken throughout his term (just shy of 3 years) as governor, Romney didn't hit the 30-percent approval range until June of 2006, when he had roughly 6 months left, and this was due mostly to his frequently being out of state, and transferring his interests to national politics as he prepared for his run at the 2008 presidency. Up until then, his approval rating stayed above 50%, and didn't drop below that until he announced in March of 2006 that he wouldn't be seeking a second term.

Romney and Ryan have both stated they're pro-life except in the case of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at stake. There's no ambiguity there. So I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with the Roe v Wade part.

I'll do more research on the specific legislation that he vetoed tomorrow. It seems he introduced a lot of new fees to close the deficit the state was facing, and refused to label them as taxes, even though some of them very clearly were.

Old Post 11-03-12 05:38 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Csonicgo


Posts: 4434
Registered: 03-04


Huy brings up a good point, and The Washington Post thinks the same thing.

Mitt Romney’s campaign insults voters



The same presumption of gullibility has infused his misleading commercials (see: Jeep jobs to China) and his refusal to lay out an agenda. Mr. Romney promised to replace the Affordable Care Act but never said with what. He promised an alternative to President Obama’s lifeline to young undocumented immigrants but never deigned to describe it.


Not only is he a bad liar... he's just a bad person.

And now there's this: Romney: Elect Me Or House GOP Will Wreck The Economy

Anyone sick of this ultimatum shit? I am.


In what his campaign billed as his “closing argument,” Mitt Romney warned Americans that a second term for President Obama would have apocalyptic consequences for the economy in part because his own party would force a debt ceiling disaster.

“You know that if the President is re-elected, he will still be unable to work with the people in Congress,” Romney said. “He has ignored them, attacked them, blamed them. The debt ceiling will come up again, and shutdown and default will be threatened, chilling the economy.”



Asshole.


Caffeine Freak said:



Romney and Ryan have both stated they're pro-life except in the case of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at stake. There's no ambiguity there. So I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with the Roe v Wade part.



That's not what they have said. In fact, they've waffled on this too.
Abortion: New spin from a Romney surrogate


The exceptions he favors are quite narrow. According to the Guttmacher Institute, pregnancies resulting from rape accounted for about 1 percent of all abortions nationwide in 2008, the last year for which statistics are available, and pregnancies resulting from incest made up less than 1 percent. The institute had no figures on abortions performed to save a woman’s life, but said the combined exceptions are certainly below 5 percent of all abortions — in other words, for more than 95 percent of all currently legal abortions in the United States, Romney favors not merely leaving them up to the states but banning them altogether.

Old Post 11-03-12 05:40 #
Csonicgo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
exp(x)


Posts: 2595
Registered: 04-04



Doom Marine said:
Deep down, everyone knows damn well that Obama is an atheist at heart.


Old Post 11-03-12 05:53 #
exp(x) is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Bucket
ROCK & LOAD
COCK BEEN BLOWED
IN YOUR MOUTH,
MANJUICE EXPLOAD


Posts: 4927
Registered: 01-04


I respect Penn's views on a lot of things, but he has trouble refraining from painting issues in black and white. I would label Obama as a deist or agnostic theist.

Old Post 11-03-12 07:32 #
Bucket is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Belial
Senior Member


Posts: 2274
Registered: 09-05



Doom Marine said:
"Lying for the Lord."

Wow. For me that puts them on par with scientologists.

Old Post 11-03-12 11:52 #
Belial is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
DeathevokatioN
Forum Staple


Posts: 2520
Registered: 03-10


It's funny that Csonicgo calls Mitt Romney a liar because Obama during election campaign and Obama during presidency are 2 different people... that said Mitt Romney is a liar. :P Both will increase the country's debt, slowly attack your liberties (NDAA anyone?), not audit the fed, and bully and destabilize third world countries under the facade of humanitarianism and protecting the people there. Hillary Clinton just sent something like 45 million to Syria to fund an even worse regime than the one in place. Libya's living conditions went from one of the highest in Africa to a chaotic destabilized mess that has an orchestrated genocide against black people going on now. It is no coincidence that whenever a government, no matter how evil you think they are (except for Germany ofcourse) gets overthrown by the West that the living standards go down. And Mitt Romney's arrogance is the biggest issue?


myk said:
More than his ties to religion, I'd worry about where he gets his money and what lobbies Romney is tied to: His top donors are linked almost unanimously to investment banks, other banking entities, or financial funds and consultancies. He's one of those people himself, serving their interests before anything else. I mean, now, in times when the world economy has been more or less wrecked by banks which lobbied to privatize the economies of nations and financial speculators that throw their costs on the general population... would you really want make one of their immediate agents president?
Totally agreed, although I will say the same for Obama, they're only real differences seem to be they give different lip service at debates... Goldman Sachs and Wall Street lobbyists have Obama under their belt just like they own Romney. Just like how over here the government and the so called opposition "white man's party" (which don't protect our interests either) is owned and controlled by the same banks and financial elite who serve their own interests at the expense of everyone else. Really the only solution would be to do a lot of internet research and look for people who share your views that aren't given as much coverage by the mainstream media because that too is owned by interests and don't have ties, as you said.

Old Post 11-03-12 16:33 #
DeathevokatioN is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Bucket
ROCK & LOAD
COCK BEEN BLOWED
IN YOUR MOUTH,
MANJUICE EXPLOAD


Posts: 4927
Registered: 01-04


Oh look, we got ourselves a Libertarian. Tell us again how going back to the gold standard will make everything better.

Old Post 11-03-12 20:01 #
Bucket is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Caffeine Freak
black and shiny


Posts: 709
Registered: 05-10


Ha, I was actually thinking about that Penn Jillette video when I made the comments about presidents and religion.

Old Post 11-03-12 20:20 #
Caffeine Freak is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Gez
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 11040
Registered: 07-07


Old Post 11-03-12 21:17 #
Gez is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Csonicgo


Posts: 4434
Registered: 03-04



Bucket said:
Oh look, we got ourselves a Libertarian. Tell us again how going back to the gold standard will make everything better.


Because when we go back, everyone will trust each other and everything will be unicorn farts and rainbows.

Old Post 11-03-12 23:36 #
Csonicgo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Bucket
ROCK & LOAD
COCK BEEN BLOWED
IN YOUR MOUTH,
MANJUICE EXPLOAD


Posts: 4927
Registered: 01-04


Well, obviously we need to go back to the economic and social policies of the 19th century, because the USA emerged as a superpower then. We also need to find a way to roll back the planet's population to about 2 billion.

Old Post 11-04-12 00:45 #
Bucket is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
DooMAD
Bitcoin IS a religion.


Posts: 1492
Registered: 07-02



Bucket said:
Oh look, we got ourselves a Libertarian. Tell us again how going back to the gold standard will make everything better.

You might dismiss the views of others by making light of the situation, but I doubt you have any better suggestions as to how to fix it. Whether you share DeathevokatioN's views or not, at least admit there's more truth in what he's saying than has ever passed through a presidential candidate's mouth.

Old Post 11-04-12 19:24 #
DooMAD is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Csonicgo


Posts: 4434
Registered: 03-04



DooMAD said:

You might dismiss the views of others by making light of the situation, but I doubt you have any better suggestions as to how to fix it.



Bad suggestions are still bad suggestions. Pointing that out doesn't require that a person has to give better ones. The "good suggestion" would to drop the retarded "I've god mine" mentality. But, Not even libertarians are ok with this.

And no, there's no "real" truth in what he's saying. This "both sides are bad, so vote for the person that will never make it in a million years" has been stupid since... well, since ever.

Old Post 11-04-12 20:43 #
Csonicgo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
DooMAD
Bitcoin IS a religion.


Posts: 1492
Registered: 07-02



Csonicgo said:


Bad suggestions are still bad suggestions. Pointing that out doesn't require that a person has to give better ones. The "good suggestion" would to drop the retarded "I've god mine" mentality. But, Not even libertarians are ok with this.

And no, there's no "real" truth in what he's saying. This "both sides are bad, so vote for the person that will never make it in a million years" has been stupid since... well, since ever.


No more stupid than allowing the cycle to continue by being duped into believing you only have two choices.

Old Post 11-04-12 22:41 #
DooMAD is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Technician
Still no custom title


Posts: 7867
Registered: 08-04



Csonicgo said:
This "both sides are bad, so vote for the person that will never make it in a million years" has been stupid since... well, since ever.
It's that kind of pessimism that has led to this absurd two party system. If everyone who refuses to vote because they find the current system unsatisfactory votes for a third party instead, you'd start seeing better and better chances of bringing a third party to the light.

Don't succumb to the "I'll pick the person with the smallest cock to fuck me in the ass" mentality. Vote for what you want.

Last edited by Technician on 11-04-12 at 23:10

Old Post 11-04-12 22:59 #
Technician is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Bucket
ROCK & LOAD
COCK BEEN BLOWED
IN YOUR MOUTH,
MANJUICE EXPLOAD


Posts: 4927
Registered: 01-04


I don't support the two-party system just because I skew mostly Democrat. But it's not my problem that third-party candidates can't mobilize the undecided crowd. The "mad as hell" approach is demonstrably prone to failure, and there aren't any votes to be had at the fringe.

DooMAD said:
You might dismiss the views of others by making light of the situation, but I doubt you have any better suggestions as to how to fix it. Whether you share DeathevokatioN's views or not, at least admit there's more truth in what he's saying than has ever passed through a presidential candidate's mouth.
Keynesian economics, which is embraced by most progressives and authoritative economists, works in real life. It does that because it takes real life into account. The Libertarian approach, based on Ludwig Von Mises economics, is an ideal in a vacuum - a pointless Nirvana fallacy that would revert us to Colonial times (which is what hard-line Libertarians secretly want, anyway).

Old Post 11-04-12 23:13 #
Bucket is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Csonicgo


Posts: 4434
Registered: 03-04



DooMAD said:

No more stupid than allowing the cycle to continue by being duped into believing you only have two choices.




Technician said:
It's that kind of pessimism that has led to this absurd two party system. If everyone who refuses to vote because they find the current system unsatisfactory votes for a third party instead, you'd start seeing better and better chances of bringing a third party to the light.

Don't succumb to the "I'll pick the person with the smallest cock to fuck me in the ass" mentality. Vote for what you want.



The real problem is the system that allows for a two-party set-up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

Old Post 11-04-12 23:14 #
Csonicgo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
exp(x)


Posts: 2595
Registered: 04-04


http://www.fairvote.org/instant-runoff-voting

Old Post 11-04-12 23:45 #
exp(x) is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15216
Registered: 04-02



DooMAD said:
No more stupid than allowing the cycle to continue by being duped into believing you only have two choices.
Minor parties play marginal roles and there is no guarantee they will play the same role if they get big. High level decision making can only be measured under its own conditions. It's one thing to declaim and demand certain things from a few parliamentary seats, another to run a country.

As for what DeathevokatioN said, without even going into details about each candidate's career, compare what businesses or institutions the main donors for Romney and Obama are linked to. Sure, they're both high ranked politicians linked to palace idiosyncrasies, but they aren't working for the same types of factions, even if the line blurs sometimes and they must take certain things more or less for granted.


Technician said:
It's that kind of pessimism that has led to this absurd two party system. If everyone who refuses to vote because they find the current system unsatisfactory votes for a third party instead, you'd start seeing better and better chances of bringing a third party to the light.
It's financial meddling, not the fact that two parties tend to come out on top. Or perhaps what I'm saying is a better way to really pinpoint what this "two party system" really is.

The parity in US voting would make no sense otherwise. The two party setup can't be as "balanced" as it is in the US without something forcing it. Sooner or later, if history unfolds and changes occur, one of the parties is bond to fall back in popularity, with new factions coming mainly from the winning party.

My impression is that if you use enough financial or elite firepower to ensure a "nonpartisan" environment that tends toward 50/50 results by conditioning media and institutions, and nothing stops it through organized resistance and popularizing politics, conservative interests are being sustained artificially or forcefully through nondemocratic means over the interests of huge chunks of the population, especially in a situation where few people have a lot of financial power and most have little, comparatively.

Reducing the issue to the voting system, when it doesn't necessarily work this way outside the 1st world and without considering the effect of the media, the control of private banks over the Federal Reserve, the management of social services by huge companies, US-based financial power outside the US, its excessively large military, is delusional and quite useful to whoever wants to sustain this status quo.

Even in countries with a much more multi-party setup you also get similar representativity problems, with the increasing amount of "socialist" parties and factions in parliamentary systems that end up acting like conservatives, showing that the issue is tied to current neoliberal ideology and not voting nuances.

In any case, things like the electoral college and optional voting are alienating the voting population from politics, since one makes your choice more indirect and the other makes you think ignoring politics isn't a retarded idea.


exp(x) said:
http://www.fairvote.org/instant-runoff-voting
In double ballot voting you can rethink your vote depending on who the candidate is running against, which can result in relative choices that aren't represented in a list of preferred candidates, and there may be a period in between with additional debates or proposals before the second round.


Compared to traditional runoff elections, IRV saves tax dollars, reduces money in politics and elects winners when turnout is highest.
Voting price discounts! Get your electoral coupons, save money!

Old Post 11-05-12 07:21 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:22. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (7): « First ... « 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 »  
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > Election 2012: Conservatards vs Librodouches

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.