[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhV9aZOqmz8[/media]
Thought this was interesting. Does not necessarily represent my views.
does he think romney is gonna be any better?
maybe if the only thing he was hanging on was the "abortion" crack
Wasn't it some Jewish lobby that funded the original ad?
Well, no candidate is going to fix THAT. There's way too much economic, corporate interest in that sort of thing for the president to just say 'Hey, let's bail'. He's [I]just[/I] the president anyway. Welcome to capitalism.
So you can either overthrow the government in a glorious revolution or just elect the guy who's less of a cunt. That'd be Obama. He's changing jack shit but at least he doesn't have any batshit conservative right wing plans
[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;37841943]Wasn't it some Jewish lobby that funded the original ad?[/QUOTE]
People keep bringing this up as if it means something. I'm not sure if people are confused by Zionism vs American Jews or if Jews just carry a blanket negative, but it's irrelevant.
[QUOTE=H4ngman;37842074]Well, no candidate is going to fix THAT. There's way too much economic, corporate interest in that sort of thing for the president to just say 'Hey, let's bail'. He's [I]just[/I] the president anyway. Welcome to capitalism.
So you can either overthrow the government in a glorious revolution or just elect the guy who's less of a cunt. That'd be Obama. He's changing jack shit but at least he doesn't have any batshit conservative right wing plans[/QUOTE]
Why wont the people of America revolt? Are they too afraid to lose their comfort to rise from the darkness of capitalistic oppression and control of the corporations?
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842348]Why wont the people of America revolt? Are they too afraid to lose their comfort to rise from the darkness of capitalistic oppression and control of the corporations?[/QUOTE]
no it's because they don't want to
[QUOTE=thisispain;37842360]no it's because they don't want to[/QUOTE]
lazy people
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842348]Why wont the people of America revolt? Are they too afraid to lose their comfort to rise from the darkness of capitalistic oppression and control of the corporations?[/QUOTE]
Because things haven't gotten to a point where people are well-informed enough on something tragic to actually have the nerve to do shit.
Not to mention if there was some sort of a revolution in America, the world's stability issues to follow would be crushing to the entire human race.
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842348]Why wont the people of America revolt? Are they too afraid to lose their comfort to rise from the darkness of capitalistic oppression and control of the corporations?[/QUOTE]
Because we're a democratic society. We don't need to resort to mindless violence and bloodshed to change our country (at least we shouldn't in this day and age). Shit isn't going to happen over night, and with time we will overhaul our current political system to something that is a bit better. Changing our government and country though violence is only temporary/sort sighted way to do things. If we destroy our home what the fuck are we going to come back to? Nothing, it would be pointless.
We seem to be doing well compared to other places, not the best of situations but it could be way worse.
[QUOTE=BeardyDuck;37841570]does he think romney is gonna be any better?[/QUOTE]
Gary Johnson most likely. Too bad third parties struggle so much.
[editline]29th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=BeardyDuck;37841570]does he think romney is gonna be any better?[/QUOTE]
Things like that just make me groan. How did we fall to a party system where we have to vote for lesser evils.
[QUOTE=BeardyDuck;37841570]does he think romney is gonna be any better?[/QUOTE]
he probably thinks a two party system sucks. the choice between obama and romney is a terrible, terrible thing and is in no way democratic
I loved the idea of wake the fuck up but I disagreed strongly with some of the views expressed.
Likewise I disagree with some of these views as well.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37844784]Gary Johnson most likely. Too bad third parties struggle so much.
[/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
This should explain it rather well.
[QUOTE=Call Me Kiwi;37845207][video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
This should explain it rather well.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for posting that. That is an amazing fucking video!
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842383]lazy people[/QUOTE]
Yeah man totally, it's so easy to revolt against the government, even with a strong National Guard.
This isn't the 1700s with a cause much larger.
[QUOTE=Call Me Kiwi;37845207][video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
This should explain it rather well.[/QUOTE]
I watched the whole thing A++ post.
[QUOTE=Call Me Kiwi;37845207][video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
This should explain it rather well.[/QUOTE]
I was gonna mention the problem with third party candidates, but this video summed it up very well. That's one of the main factors of why Al Gore didn't win the 2000 election. Ralph Nader got over 2 million votes, which would've helped Gore tremendously, considering how close the election was. Gore had a bit over half a million votes over Bush (which is incredibly close), but because of the electoral college system, Bush still won the election.
This is why we need several elections, where we vote for say, 8 candidates, and every election, the least popular one or two is dropped from the next election. This would help for getting a more accurate representation of the voters. Because then the people who voted for unpopular candidates aren't immediately disregarded.
[QUOTE=BlueFlash;37845545]I was gonna mention the problem with third party candidates, but this video summed it up very well. That's one of the main factors of why Al Gore didn't win the 2000 election. Ralph Nader got over 2 million votes, which would've helped Gore tremendously, considering how close the election was. Gore had a bit over half a million votes over Bush (which is incredibly close), but because of the electoral college system, Bush still won the election.
This is why we need several elections, where we vote for say, 8 candidates, and every election, the least popular one or two is dropped from the next election. This would help for getting a more accurate representation of the voters. Because then the people who voted for unpopular candidates aren't immediately disregarded.[/QUOTE]
Exactly what we need.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE[/media]
Brings up a lot of legitimate points. Surprisingly well done for a Libertarian group. Shit would still be worse under Romney though.
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842348]Why wont the people of America revolt? Are they too afraid to lose their comfort to rise from the darkness of capitalistic oppression and control of the corporations?[/QUOTE]
smeismastger confirmed for being Bane's alias
seriously though taking on the National Guard, police and armies of the United States THEN attempting to set up a nation half as powerful as the US would just be ridiculously difficult and impractical
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842383]lazy people[/QUOTE]
Even if a comparatively under-armed revolution does manage to succeed, revolutions don't exactly have a stellar track record for creating a new regime that's actually better than the old one.
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842348]Why wont the people of America revolt? Are they too afraid to lose their comfort to rise from the darkness of capitalistic oppression and control of the corporations?[/QUOTE]
too fatty
[QUOTE=Call Me Kiwi;37845207][video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
This should explain it rather well.[/QUOTE]
this makes a few main points that are important to note but it also doesn't acknowledge the issues with massive multiparty systems. believe it or not, dual party systems experience minimal corruption in comparison to multiparty systems, because they rely less on outside actors to get anything done. the factions that get formed in multiparty systems can create an environment where a candidate elected for one party will misrepresent his constituents by voting in line with another party due to obligations. this happens less in a dual party system because while lobbyists do take a huge toll, the thing is that they generally put money into a party and set of constituents that [I]already[/I] has their interests in mind.
the real problem with elections is the middle group, they have no set ideological theory for why they vote; they're usually issue advocacy. ie, a woman will have extremely conservative ideology but vote democrat because she believes in the right to choose and doesn't believe in capital punishment (which happens a lot). these individuals who have no thought process beyond a specific issue or two are extremely liable and vulnerable to switch between parties that gives us that flip flopping back and forth every election.
democracy has inherent flaws. there is no perfect system of democracy. a two party system has its own issues, a multiparty system has its own issues. this is why they need to be balanced, there's a reason no pure presidential systems last very long. that's why we separate the powers among the executive judicial and legislative branches.
[QUOTE=smeismastger;37842348]Why wont the people of America revolt? Are they too afraid to lose their comfort to [b]rise from the darkness of capitalistic oppression and control of the corporations?[/b][/QUOTE]
Are you 14?
[QUOTE=Wolverunder;37847652]Are you 14?[/QUOTE]
Are you implying there is no oppresion from capitalism and corporations?
[QUOTE=MR-X;37844096]Because we're a democratic society. [/QUOTE]
Since when?
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37847893]Are you implying there is no oppresion from capitalism and corporations?[/QUOTE]
everything is fine just enjoy your mcdonalds food and coca cola products and do not question anything
[QUOTE=Call Me Kiwi;37845207][video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
This should explain it rather well.[/QUOTE]
I was just going to post that. A form of alternative vote would be amazing. How would we be able to change it though? We would need some hell of a petition.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
