Page 3 of 6
#81
Quote by willT08
Which are actually the swing states? I can't be bothered to google that shit. Watching some guy from Lancaster get demolished in a rap battle.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/electoral-map
___

Quote by The_Blode
she was saying things like... do you want to netflix and chill but just the chill part...too bad she'll never know that I only like the Netflix part...
#82
Quote by due 07
They never will gain momentum because the two-party system is deeply entrenched into the structure of American society and the people who wish to preserve it most are the most powerful people in the country and own the political system.



So in other words we shouldn't even try?


Screw that.
#83
Quote by daytripper75
So in other words we shouldn't even try?


Screw that.


You really shouldn't. Unless you like wasting your time, effort, and money.
#84
Quote by TunerAddict
You really shouldn't. Unless you like wasting your time, effort, and money.






I'd rather say I tried, than just submit to the system as is.
#85
Quote by daytripper75
So in other words we shouldn't even try?


Screw that.

Indeedle.

I mean, I'm voting for Jill Stein, but I live in a blue state and will be voting anyway, so yeah.
#87
Quote by daytripper75



I'd rather say I tried, than just submit to the system as is.


If you think spending time, effort, and money so that you can always say that "you tried," then go for it.

While you're at it, might as well try to outrun Usain Bolt in the 100m dash.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but it is just the reality of the situation. As a result of how our democracy operates, people form into 2 distinct parties to compete for power. Change the system and other parties becomes viable. If you leave it as is, you won't see a 3rd party compete, because the size requirements to compete in our system are just too large.
#89
Quote by daytripper75
You're right. I give up. I'm not even going to vote now.

Good on ya.
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#90
Quote by daytripper75
You're right. I give up. I'm not even going to vote now.


I don't vote, man. Utility of voting is outweighed by its costs.
#92
This is the first I've heard of Jill Stein and this Green New Deal so pardon my ignorance but I would like to air some concerns...

...offering public sector jobs which are “stored” in job banks in order to take up any slack in private sector employment

...

• We will end unemployment in America once and for all by guaranteeing a job at a living wage for every American willing and able to work.
Not going to lie. There's some good stuff in that Green New Deal. But these two points here mean that none of it matters because your country would go bankrupt in a month (that's a hyperbole, calm down).

Public sector jobs are funded by one of two means. Either taxes or debt. By creating arbitrary public sector jobs just for people who can't find work in the private sector you're effectively throwing money down a black hole. The fact that these jobs would otherwise not exist were it not for the artifical need to 'prevent unemployment', necessarily means that you're giving someone a good wage for doing completley unnecessary work. There's no added value to the economy from the job being done. Furthermore, would each job be invented to match the person's particular skill set? This idea is completely unrealistic. You may as well just give them the money at which point it's just glorified welfare. And on a somewhat related note, what if someone is simply not willing to work?

Cutting the military budget by 50% as proposed would go a long way to helping fund these kinds of programs but it wouldn't be nearly enough given some of the other things in there (ie. free education, free healthcare).

Personally, I think 'free education' is a nice but misguided idea simply for the fact that many areas of study simply do not add value to the economy. Again, it's basically throwing money away. Sure it's nice that little Johnny can learn all about Medieval History but then what's he going to do when it's time to enter the workforce? Sit in one of those fancy public sector jobs doing something that isn't needed and is completely unrelated to what he learned anyway? Education should be subsidized as needed by the market (both public and private). At least healthcare has the benefit of keeping people alive and healthy and therefore paying taxes. Which brings me to the next point:

The right to fair taxation that’s distributed in proportion to ability to pay
You would need more than a proportional taxation scheme. The proportion would have to be exponentially increasing to generate any substantial amount of income which would at least be somewhat offset by the obvious disincentive for higher earners to stay in the country. Some of that money would likely also have to be redirected to crack down on increased tax evasion.

I just don't quite see all of this being feasible. Which I mean, is probably not all that much of a criticism given the other parties' platforms.
#93
Quote by willT08
Well if I was daytripper I'd vote Jill Stein. Unless you're in a swing state, your single vote isn't gonna mean much to Obama or Romney but it'd mean a lot more to her.

PA is a swing state (and an important one at that), idk what was up with that link.
#94
Damn link deceiving me. Then please daytripper, go vote Obama. If Romney gets in the whole world is gonna feel repercussions.
#95
Quote by due 07
PA is a swing state (and an important one at that), idk what was up with that link.

Yea, I thought it may have been a little off, but I don't really know enough to make that call.

I knew PA was a swing state.
___

Quote by The_Blode
she was saying things like... do you want to netflix and chill but just the chill part...too bad she'll never know that I only like the Netflix part...
#96
PA is an important state, yes. The state has gone Democrat for a while now. There is little chance that Romney can win it.


Hell, even Kerry won PA in 2004.

The last time PA went Republican was in 1988.
#97
Quote by due 07
PA is a swing state (and an important one at that), idk what was up with that link.


Obama is up by 11 in PA. Hardly much of a swing state anymore.
#98
Quote by daytripper75
So in other words we shouldn't even try?


Screw that.

Conventional means are less than worthless. You're validating the system. Now the asshats can say "you voted for us, you even had other options!"

We should probably just fire them and stop voting or something
#99
Quote by WaterGod
Obama is up by 11 in PA. Hardly much of a swing state anymore.

Oh I didn't realize. Although idk if that number takes into account the voter suppression efforts and the fact that republicans will be better at getting people out to the polls on election day.
#100
Quote by TunerAddict
If you think spending time, effort, and money so that you can always say that "you tried," then go for it.

While you're at it, might as well try to outrun Usain Bolt in the 100m dash.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but it is just the reality of the situation. As a result of how our democracy operates, people form into 2 distinct parties to compete for power. Change the system and other parties becomes viable. If you leave it as is, you won't see a 3rd party compete, because the size requirements to compete in our system are just too large.


Political parties can fall too. The Republican party is in the process of disintegrating. Even if we're stuck with a two party system, that doesn't mean you can't eventually help a third party grow and become one of the major parties.

I'm backing daytripper on this cuz I ain't no principle sacrificin' pussy.
“Just to sum up: I would do various things very quickly.” - Donald Trump
#101
Quote by due 07
Oh I didn't realize. Although idk if that number takes into account the voter suppression efforts and the fact that republicans will be better at getting people out to the polls on election day.


Well most polls only poll registered voters or likely voters.
#102
Nate Silver has Pennsylvania as a 91% favorite for Obama, it's not really a swing state.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#103
Any relation to Duke Silver?
“Just to sum up: I would do various things very quickly.” - Donald Trump
#104
Quote by bradulator
Political parties can fall too. The Republican party is in the process of disintegrating. Even if we're stuck with a two party system, that doesn't mean you can't eventually help a third party grow and become one of the major parties.

I'm backing daytripper on this cuz I ain't no principle sacrificin' pussy.


The Republican party isn't going anywhere.

And did you not listen to a word I said? There cannot be a third party because of how representation in the country works. In a winner takes all system, it forces you to have only two competing coalitions. People have to band together to have a hope of winning. Having a bunch of small coalitions guarantees losing when there is a large one. Thus, they join to form one.
#105
No Duke Silver is fictional and Nate Silver is a renowned pollster, Jesus christ brad.
Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#106
Quote by bradulator
Political parties can fall too. The Republican party is in the process of disintegrating. Even if we're stuck with a two party system, that doesn't mean you can't eventually help a third party grow and become one of the major parties.

I'm backing daytripper on this cuz I ain't no principle sacrificin' pussy.

You also have no chance of changing anything through your chosen means.
#107
Quote by TunerAddict
The Republican party isn't going anywhere.

And did you not listen to a word I said? There cannot be a third party because of how representation in the country works. In a winner takes all system, it forces you to have only two competing coalitions. People have to band together to have a hope of winning. Having a bunch of small coalitions guarantees losing when there is a large one. Thus, they join to form one.


Yeah pretty much this. I'm also think Parliamentary governments can have multiple parties because it's much more based off of representation and they don't select who their prime minister is. If America was operating under parliamentary system then you would instead be voting for which parties or representatives would be more likely to elect Obama Prime Minister.
#108
There are countries that have parliament and a president.
Quote by beadhangingOne
What happened to Snake?

Snake?

Snake?

SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE?!


Quote by TunerAddict
you can take my mouse and keyboard from my cold, slightly orange from cheetos, dead fingers


Quote by Baby Joel
Isis is amazing
#109
Quote by Gibson_SG_uzr55
There are countries that have parliament and a president.


They still have a prime minister, and the presidents don't have as much power as you might think. Take Germany's president for example.
#110
Quote by WaterGod
They still have a prime minister, and the presidents don't have as much power as you might think. Take Germany's president for example.

true enough. I think it might help a bit. It would at least end this pathetic 4 charade every 4 years.
#111
I like the French election system the best
Quote by beadhangingOne
What happened to Snake?

Snake?

Snake?

SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE?!


Quote by TunerAddict
you can take my mouse and keyboard from my cold, slightly orange from cheetos, dead fingers


Quote by Baby Joel
Isis is amazing
#113


So who's been following the candidates' proposed policies?

<_<

"Which candidate would I most like to have a beer with!?!?"

>_>

*Non-specific and pointless bitching about the crappy bipartisan system*

<_<

"what offensive, but ultimately inconsequential thing did a candidate say while pandering at a fund raiser?"

-_-

....Whoever wins, we all get exactly what we deserve which is the exact same shitty quality of day to day life as if the other candidate had won. Every time I try to talk tax policy or international relations with someone (and I'm stupid enough to make the attempt often), he or she ultimately breaks into discussing the election in these *super fun!* but inconsequential terms. The populace is too stupid to make decisions based on the actual policy they want to see carried out. They care about feeling good about themselves and taking ideological stances that have nothing to do with tangible results.

The solution isn't to get rid of the two party system (though other changes like campaign finance reform and the removal of corporate personhood couldn't hurt), it's to take televisions and twitter away from the American public for a few years so that they can remember what a rational argument is and start making decisions based upon them.
#116
Quote by bradulator

I'm backing daytripper on this cuz I ain't no principle sacrificin' pussy.


My God, it's full of stars!
Last edited by Dreadnought at Sep 21, 2012,
#117
Quote by captaincrunk
you are submitting to the system as is.



How would you suggest changing things in that case? I'm just curious.
#118
Quote by daytripper75
How would you suggest changing things in that case? I'm just curious.

Become a zillionaire political donor and donate wisely.
#119
Quote by bradulator

I'm backing daytripper on this cuz I ain't no principle sacrificin' pussy.



#120
Quote by daytripper75
How would you suggest changing things in that case? I'm just curious.

you'll have to outsmart them because you can't outspend them. it will probably take greater freedom of information and a new form of government before we'll have something we could settle with. Representation doesn't seem like it has ever really existed, so I think it lacks any real power.