Since only about 50% of the people even vote the winners already have less than 50% of the people supporting them. When someone is elected president you can assume that only about 20-30% of the entire voting eligible population supports them.
Since only about 50% of the people even vote the winners already have less than 50% of the people supporting them. When someone is elected president you can assume that only about 20-30% of the entire voting eligible population supports them.
Taking a 3rd side is taking a side. Nothing you said changes the fact that neither party can represent some people, or that both parties have SERIOUS flaws.
While Republican programs are going to make the top 10% even richer, and everyone else utterly destitute.
DV: This guy speaks the truth. Both parties are talking about minor issues when the effin housing market is/has gone to hell, the economy sucks, gas is expensive and risen $2/gal+, and people are worrying about how they can pay their bills. Instead they fight about if we should teach crap like "faith based science, evolution, or anything related" as brxndxn says. They talk about how they will "pull out" of Iraq, well that's going to take 4+ years if we started today to pull troops/equipment out. They won't be home tomorrow, but it's being talked about as if they were.
----------
What does your precious truth have to do with anything. Before anybody can do anything they have to get elected. The one who gets elected will be the one who most successfully navigated all the meaningless shit politicians raise up as issues. Those issues that people will actually vote on aren't issues at all but paranoid delusions they have been given.
People are chimpanzees who vote for the joker who breaks off the biggest tree limb and prances around the best with it, he who promises them the biggest banana, and looks like he's good at taunting leopards from a tree.
You want real issues but politicians are a lot more aware of how people really vote than you probably will ever be. What you get is smug satisfaction and what they get is elected.
Ask yourself who you are, who you really are, rich, poor, upper, lower middle class? Then vote for the asshole who may in fact and constitution have something in common with your interests, somebody whose party pretends to represent your class. You may then put that person in office and get a bone.
----------
What does your precious truth have to do with anything. Before anybody can do anything they have to get elected. The one who gets elected will be the one who most successfully navigated all the meaningless shit politicians raise up as issues. Those issues that people will actually vote on aren't issues at all but paranoid delusions they have been given.
People are chimpanzees who vote for the joker who breaks off the biggest tree limb and prances around the best with it, he who promises them the biggest banana, and looks like he's good at taunting leopards from a tree.
You want real issues but politicians are a lot more aware of how people really vote than you probably will ever be. What you get is smug satisfaction and what they get is elected.
Ask yourself who you are, who you really are, rich, poor, upper, lower middle class? Then vote for the asshole who may in fact and constitution have something in common with your interests, somebody whose party pretends to represent your class. You may then put that person in office and get a bone.
PodW: Taking a 3rd side is taking a side. Nothing you said changes the fact that neither party can represent some people, or that both parties have SERIOUS flaws.
--------------
Nor can anything change the fact that that third party will also have flaws and is a wasted vote that won't be cast for the less seriously flawed party that could win.
--------------
Nor can anything change the fact that that third party will also have flaws and is a wasted vote that won't be cast for the less seriously flawed party that could win.
So does that mean that you won't be voting for him in this election or that you'll be taking the "lesser of three evils" approach?
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
I am not content with being thrown a bone.
In your philosophy it is better to be a live jackal than a dead lion. Perhaps. But it is better still to be a live lion.
ZV
Moon, you are changing the point of what I have said again, while throwing out personal attacks. I didn't say that they shouldn't talk about these small issues because that's what they know will win votes. I never said I knew more about how to win votes. It doesn't matter who I am, what social-economic "class" I am in, nor does it matter my reasoning for whom I vote for.
Yeah politics is dirty, generally meaningless during the campaigns because they have to try to get elected so they can do what they want anyways. The only people who get "a bone" are the interns (haha get it?
) and the lobbyists that threw money at them. The only reason the average citizen gets any benefit from that is because it just so happens their interests align with the lobbyist/special interest group/big money/etc. I am saying the issue that needs changing is how our two party political system works, because IMO it's not working to well right now. You say I should vote for who "pretends to represent your class." Why? I don't want to vote for what they PRETEND to represent, nor do I want to vote for somebody that doesn't align well with my beliefs and goals. I will vote for the person I believe has the best chance at changing things for the better (at least to better my life, because that is the reason you vote for a person). I don't feel my two main choices will do that, but 3rd parties can't win in our current political landscape.
I don't believe in voting for the lesser of two evils. I believe in voting for the lesser of many evils. Often times, this means that I narrow the choice down to two though which is why the expression is changed.
So does that mean you will be writing Ron Paul's name on the Ballot or yours?
On a side note...
"All politicians are evil, but some politicians are more evil than others".
Ron Paul.
I don't buy that. Evil is bigger Government, Government legislation of personal lifestyle or Government's intrusion to personal liberty.
Svnla
Lifer
- Nov 10, 2003
- 17,986
- 1,388
- 126
I don't believe this thread is about me, so let just say I studied hard, kept my nose clean, went on to college with grants/scholarships/work study/part time jobs..blah blah blah..typical immigrant successful story.. <good paying job plus my own business and a tax paying citizen>.
I have no doubt that helping the poor is a good thing, no one will dispute that. But how long and how much are enough? Are we helping them or are we creating generations after generations of "helpless" government dependents? I don't understand how could immigrants <millions of us> like myself came here with nothing but within a few years <10 years or less>, we were able to achieve the American dream but native born US citizens and minorities could not do the same WITH THE SAME opportunities/resources that are available. Yes, life is not fair, racism is still alive and on and on, but what are you going to do about it or just shake a fist at it and won't do anything to better yourself with the land of opportunities known as the USA?
The differences maybe huge on paper/philosophy but in reality, I, and millions of independents did not see that <see my op about lobbists, money/big corporations, corruptions, self serving politicians on BOTH sides earlier in this thread>.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter