[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;51430827]Democrats aren't neoliberal, for one. Neoliberalism is pretty much the opposite of the social democrat line.
Secondly - why, if Hillary was being backed by this super powerful conglomerate, would the election not be called in her favour? If they had the means and the will to rig the election, why didn't they? Why wait until now?[/QUOTE]
Neoliberalism was originally what social democracy is, during the time of FDR after Laissez-faire fucked the world and liberals wanted a middle ground between classic liberalism and social planning.
Now it's been hijacked by the New Democrats/Clintonites much like how Conservatism was hijacked by Reaganites and the Tea Party. Today Democrats, particularly Clinton and their ilk, are neoliberals. Shit, it was neoliberal policies that led the way to the '08 recession.
[editline]26th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=buckethead64;51431217]Clinton campaign said they are taking part in the recount.
Isn't this exactly what people mocked Trump for saying he would do?[/QUOTE]
I don't trust either campaign to be involved with any recount.
They're both so slimy and dirty I cannot trust a single word that comes from them.
[QUOTE=Episode;51431518]It's the lesser of two evils thing again. I can easily imagine Jill wanting Hillary in office much more than Trump.[/QUOTE]
sure she would, but still, even if hillary wasn't in it at all, proof that the system is rigged would do wonders for stein and her cause
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51430682]Hillary won the popular vote is not a valid argument for her winning this election. Voter turnout is significantly lower in non battleground states. I myself didn't even bother voting because my state has a 100% chance of turning the color I want. Trump and Hillary both campaigned with the electorial college in mind, and Hillary lost.[/QUOTE]
It actually is a valid argument because it relates to the democratic process by which our society determines who wins and who loses; that's the fundamental method by which we determine who wins and who loses at the end of the day. The idea that the electoral college system has any relevance here when it's already been thoroughly established that it's an archaic method that completely ignores the will of the people is bogus, and saying it does is just an attempt to distract from the fact that it either needs to be drastically reformed or abolished altogether.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k[/media]
This is a tired conversation.
Also, if you didn't vote, that's too bad. You didn't participate at all, so you have no right to give input one way or the other. Congrats on at least being honest about it I guess? In any case, the fact of the matter is Clinton had the majority support of voters-- more than 2 million votes for her than for Trump. She was wanted more than he was by a significant margin, yet we're still under a system (as has been pointed out before) that allows an outdated institution to step in and say, "Well yeah that's true: the majority of the nation did want her. She received more votes than any other candidate... but fuck you, we say that she lost and Trump won because reasons."
People are justifiably angry, and that anger is not just going to disappear. This is the second time in my relatively short life that this has happened: where the people preferred one candidate (who clearly won the popular vote) over the other candidate, but the electoral college system stepped in and handed the election to the other candidate anyway. And unlike Gore beating Bush, this time Clinton beat Trump by (again) a significantly greater margin (2+ million votes to Gore's 543,000+ votes).
[QUOTE=Govna;51431699]Also, if you didn't vote, that's too bad. You didn't participate at all, so you have no right to give input one way or the other.[/QUOTE]
Didn't read the rest of it, but yes, you do. Not voting is just a valid as voting and doesn't mean your voice isn't worth hearing.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51431765]Didn't read the rest of it, but yes, you do. Not voting is just a valid as voting and doesn't mean your voice isn't worth hearing.[/QUOTE]
I'm not gonna say everyone who didn't vote is retarded, but personally I think you should go for a spoiled ballot if you didn't like any of the options instead. In states where one party is dominant, I also think it's important to vote just to send a message.
With the wait times you supposedly have in the US, though, I understand why you may think it's a waste of time.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51431765]Didn't read the rest of it, but yes, you do. Not voting is just a valid as voting and doesn't mean your voice isn't worth hearing.[/QUOTE]
No you don't, and no it isn't. You have an obligation to participate in democracy, that's how it works. You can choose not to, but you're shirking your responsibility, and you're also surrendering your ability to comment to the people who actually did participate and can say that "I had a stake in things and did what I could to affect the future of the country".
Really tired of hearing people say "I didn't bother voting". Not only are you not contributing anything nationally when you behave that apathetically, but there's also the local and state aspects to consider as well: senators, representatives, governors, amendments and propositions, etc. People like that are part of the problem.
[QUOTE=Samiam22;51430233]Says a lot about a country when the loser gets 2.1 million more votes than the winner.
Additionally, Jill Stein ordered the recounts, she is not associated with Clinton.[/QUOTE]
"She only has more votes because Crooked Hillary rigged the election! Sad!"
[QUOTE=Govna;51431818]No you don't, and no it isn't. You have an obligation to participate in democracy, that's how it works. You can choose not to, but you're shirking your responsibility, and you're also surrendering your ability to comment to the people who actually did participate and can say that "I had a stake in things and did what I could to affect the future of the country".
Really tired of hearing people say "I didn't bother voting". Not only are you not contributing anything nationally when you behave that apathetically, but there's also the local and state aspects to consider as well: senators, representatives, governors, amendments and propositions, etc. People like that are part of the problem.[/QUOTE]
Tell this to all the youth college students who didn't go out and vote yet are protesting his victory.
Even I went out and voted even though it didn't matter in my county let alone state, all I did was split the Trump vote here by going for McMullin.
Great. If it'll put peoples minds at ease then Stein can spend as much money as she wants with this. I don't know why people expect a recount to automatically swing states in favor of Hillary. Trump is liable to increase his lead with a recount.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51431898]Thankfully that's not how free speech works. You don't "surrender your ability to comment"[/QUOTE]
They can say whatever they want but at the end of the day their input means jack shit when they didn't even exercise their right to to make their voice heard through voting.
The most powerful weapon in this country, the private vote, and these idiots did not even use it to get their candidate to win. They have no one but themselves to blame.
The whole election season the left leaners said 'this is not the time to vote third party/fix the system we'll do it next season' just like they did in 2012 and 2008 but it never happens and now they flip shit.
So guess what, we'll fix it next season.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51431897]Tell this to all the youth college students who didn't go out and vote yet are protesting his victory.[/quote]
Oh I already do. Good thing there were 64+ million people who voted against him.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51431897]Even I went out and voted even though it didn't matter in my county let alone state, all I did was split the Trump vote here by going for McMullin.[/QUOTE]
Better than nothing. Apathy is the worst thing that can happen in a democracy.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51431898]Thankfully that's not how free speech works. You don't "surrender your ability to comment"[/QUOTE]
Thankfully, free speech allows me to correctly call him out for not even participating in the first place. If they didn't participate, then there's no reason to pay attention to them. And the good news is the majority of people are intelligent enough to understand this principle. "You didn't contribute anything, you didn't even think about contributing anything, why the hell should I listen to what you have to say about this?" That's a good mentality to have because, again, democracy revolves around people exercising their ability to vote; if you don't exercise it, then you're shirking your responsibility to contribute and to help determine how your society will function-- so your complaints, criticisms, and comments in general about the way things turned out mean nothing... because you did nothing to be a part of any of it.
I don't even know why we have electronic ballots.
[QUOTE=Govna;51431972]Oh I already do. Good thing there were 64+ million people who voted against him.
[/QUOTE]
You won't catch me arguing against her majority, but rather against the people who didn't vote yet feel like protesting.
[QUOTE=Govna;51431818]No you don't, and no it isn't.[/QUOTE]
why
[QUOTE=Govna;51431818]You have an obligation to participate in democracy, that's how it works.[/QUOTE]
why
[QUOTE=Govna;51431818]you're also surrendering your ability to comment to the people who actually did participate and can say that "I had a stake in things and did what I could to affect the future of the country".[/QUOTE]
why
[QUOTE=Govna;51431818]Really tired of hearing people say "I didn't bother voting". Not only are you not contributing anything nationally when you behave that apathetically, but there's also the local and state aspects to consider as well: senators, representatives, governors, amendments and propositions, etc.[/QUOTE]
what if you don't want any of the candidates or fundamentally disagree with part of the process? didn't mention local or state elections and didn't care to.
[QUOTE=Govna;51431818]People like that are part of the problem.[/QUOTE]
why
you can attempt to disqualify people from voicing their opinions until you're blue in the face but i won't take it seriously when your whole post is nothing more than an assertion
[QUOTE=Swilly;51432004]I don't even know why we have electronic ballots.[/QUOTE]
Logistical nightmare.
[QUOTE=jordguitar;51432050]Logistical nightmare.[/QUOTE]
The entire process of holding an election is a logistical nightmare. If having accurate results is an important part of an election then having to spend more money and manpower on it shouldn't be a concern.
[QUOTE=Swilly;51432004]I don't even know why we have electronic ballots.[/QUOTE]
Theoretically it should reduce waste and make the counting process immediate rather than slow and prone to human error.
But because nobody is actually capable of securing fucking anything computerised today for some reason, these machines are liable to tampering too. It wouldn't be impossible to get them to work well, ensure nobody has access to the physical machine that serves up the polling options, make them thin clients. If you are going to communicate a vote over the Internet, use end-to-end encryption and ensure the data is signed so nobody can modify it with a MITM attack. Etc.
There's no reason these things shouldn't work other than the manufacturers not doing a good enough job.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;51432128]Theoretically it should reduce waste and make the counting process immediate rather than slow and prone to human error.
But because nobody is actually capable of securing fucking anything computerised today for some reason, these machines are liable to tampering too. It wouldn't be impossible to get them to work well, ensure nobody has access to the physical machine that serves up the polling options, make them thin clients. If you are going to communicate a vote over the Internet, use end-to-end encryption and ensure the data is signed so nobody can modify it with a MITM attack. Etc.
There's no reason these things shouldn't work other than the manufacturers not doing a good enough job.[/QUOTE]
Seeing as the boomer generation is still sort of in power and the sheer overwhelming majority of them have no idea how anything electronic works(hi DNC emails) or understand the concept of cyber security I blame their ignorance more than the technology.
When the younger X'ers and Millennials fully take power I imagine they'll have a greater understanding of networking technology and take the initiative to establish properly secured electronic ballots.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51432154]Seeing as the boomer generation is still sort of in power and the sheer overwhelming majority of them have no idea how anything electronic works(hi DNC emails) or understand the concept of cyber security I blame their ignorance more than the technology.
When the younger X'ers and Millennials fully take power I imagine they'll have a greater understanding of networking technology and take the initiative to establish properly secured electronic ballots.[/QUOTE]
I would be more worried with just general security and how to manage that. If even one little hole is in any part of the system, it will be exploited by someone halfway around the world who will never see any real consequences from their actions.
[QUOTE=jordguitar;51432189]I would be more worried with just general security and how to manage that. If even one little hole is in any part of the system, it will be exploited by someone halfway around the world who will never see any real consequences from their actions.[/QUOTE]
Nothing can be entirely immune to hacks, but it can certainly get well past the point that it's more logical and efficient to do it digitally. After all, must transactions are already done digitally, using systems with bank accounts and balances of said account that are connected directly to the Internet. If it's reliable enough to entrust our wealth to it, why shouldn't we trust a similar system for our vote?
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51432154]Seeing as the boomer generation is still sort of in power and the sheer overwhelming majority of them have no idea how anything electronic works(hi DNC emails) or understand the concept of cyber security I blame their ignorance more than the technology.
When the younger X'ers and Millennials fully take power I imagine they'll have a greater understanding of networking technology and take the initiative to establish properly secured electronic ballots.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but we'll still fuck it up in a different way probably.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51432047]why[/quote]
Because you didn't bother participating. If you didn't bother participating, then why should we listen to you? You're not helping, you're just being useless and apathetic. Again, democracy requires for people to actually get out there and do things with themselves; voting is the backbone for democratic society, so you have to participate in it-- or else you're just shirking your responsibility and aren't doing anything with yourself.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51432047]why[/quote]
Because democracy literally revolves around the "rule of the people". They have to participate, or else you cease to have a democracy. This is exactly why apathy is the worst thing for democracy. And he was apathetic, hence why he did not vote. If he's not participating like the rest of us are, then we have no reason to care about him or what he has to say.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51432047]why[/quote]
Because (to reiterate) democracy literally revolves around the "rule of the people". They have to participate, or else you cease to have a democracy. This is exactly why apathy is the worst thing for democracy. And he was apathetic, hence why he did not vote. If he's not participating like the rest of us are, then we have no reason to care about him or what he has to say. He has contributed nothing, so he does not matter.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51432047]what if you don't want any of the candidates or fundamentally disagree with part of the process? didn't mention local or state elections and didn't care to.[/quote]
Then you write-in who you want. You protest vote. You go out and physically protest for whoever you want. Etc. Also, his lack of concern for local and state affairs isn't doing him any favors here; it just continues to prove that he's apathetic not only about his country as a whole but about where he specifically lives as well. If he doesn't even care about something as basic as that, then we should we care what he has to say? We shouldn't. His opinion does not matter. He has contributed nothing, nor does he care to contribute anything.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51432047]why[/quote]
Because (for the last fucking time) democracy literally revolves around the "rule of the people". They have to participate, or else you cease to have a democracy. This is exactly why apathy is the worst thing for democracy. And he was apathetic, hence why he did not vote. If he's not participating like the rest of us are, then we have no reason to care about him or what he has to say. He has contributed nothing, and he never had any intention of contributing anything.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51432047]you can attempt to disqualify people from voicing their opinions until you're blue in the face but i won't take it seriously when your whole post is nothing more than an assertion[/QUOTE]
Well I really don't care if you take me seriously or not lol. There's plenty of other people out there who despise apathy about politics and government just as much as I do, and they despise it for the exact same reasons I do (and then some). So you see, it's not just me you're dealing with. It's a group of people who pretty well all feel the same about this subject. I can't tell if this is just willful ignorance on your part or not, but it's pretty important that in a democracy you have everybody pulling their own weight and exercising their ability to participate-- not being useless and apathetic. Again, they [i]can[/i] be useless and apathetic if they want to be, but they're hurting democratic society with their behavior, and the rest of us who actually get out and contribute will not care at all about them or what they have to say. If they aren't doing anything, then we have no reason to care about them and their opinions.
[QUOTE=matt000024;51432261]Yeah, but we'll still fuck it up in a different way probably.[/QUOTE]
yeah we probably will...
-snip-
Just watch this video and be enlightened [video=youtube;wScnlBEg27Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wScnlBEg27Q[/video]
[QUOTE=Govna;51432276]post[/QUOTE]
if democracy is so important than why is it undermined in the presidential election with winner takes all
you mistake and generalize apathy where theres really disenfranchisement. basically blaming the victim.
i do think local and state is important however
didn't clinton say that anyone who refused to accept the results of an election is a danger to democracy?
[media]https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/status/802628319422320640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/media]
[QUOTE=Svinnik;51432439]didn't clinton say that anyone who refused to accept the results of an election is a danger to democracy?
[media]https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/status/802628319422320640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/media][/QUOTE]
Stein asked for the recount.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51432454]Stein asked for the recount.[/QUOTE]
but the clinton campaign is helping with the recount
[URL="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/26/clinton-participate-wisconsin-recount/94473712/"]http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/26/clinton-participate-wisconsin-recount/94473712/[/URL]
[QUOTE]Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias said the Clinton campaign has found no evidence of election tampering, but is joining in the recount now that Stein has initiated it.
"Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides," Elias wrote on Medium, an alternative blogging site.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51432454]Stein asked for the recount.[/QUOTE]
And clinton's campaign said they are taking part in it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
