* Thaaaaaat's politics!

[squishy_ichigo]

[spoiler=* This town doesn't have a mayor. * But if there's ever a problem, a skeleton will tell a fish lady about it.]

* Thaaaaaat's politics!

[/spoiler]
So I've been thinking lately... you know what the best board on metconst is lacking? A place for people from all over the world to specifically shit on the current affairs of the american democratic system! I know, I know, you might be thinking to yourself 'whoa now suku, politics on the internet is a bad idea, you are just inviting people to flame and troll and all sorts of other bad things that are against the forum rules and are morally wrong in general' but I don't think that's fair. I for one know, having been around this forum since it was created, that people on this forum are pretty cool, and we can have a discussion without any problems! Trust me guys.

Here, let me start off. I'm not voting this November, but not because the two main contestants are both silly, but because I have a moral problem with the way that the electoral college system works in general. It's pretty sleazy that two different people's votes aren't treated equally. And the fact that it's 'winner takes all' is also pretty sickening. I don't see me ever voting in this country until something is done about this, which I don't expect to happen. Having a right to vote also means you have a right not to vote, I'm glad I live in a country where I'm not forced to vote between a GD and a TS.

[-DC-]

If you get upset, just check this out:
[spoiler]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95AR87ciruc[/spoiler]

Put together in less than a day.... just goes to show how much content this "debate" had.

For me, I feel like if I go vote, I'll be greeted by this:
[spoiler][/spoiler]

The voting poll stations this year should all read "Push button, lose game."

[Dark-SA-X]

I don't see me ever voting in this country until something is done about this, which I don't expect to happen. Having a right to vote also means you have a right not to vote, I'm glad I live in a country where I'm not forced to vote between a GD and a TS.

Well if you do not vote and your expecting certain people or group of people in any political race to make somethings happen in your local state during their term.
You technically don't have a right to be pissed off and wine if shit goes wrong.
When you have a chance to vote voice your selection and opinion if opted in that little windows xp/linux arc box.
Atleast if you vote yes you have a right to be angry during that time and maybe change the outcome in some sort of way.

Not trying to put a damper on you but yeah I feel the sameway about how you feel on some of your points you made.
If the government isn't willing try and help its people in their state and country during their term turn a blind to them and not vote.

[thedopefish]

[snarfblam]

And the fact that it's 'winner takes all' is also pretty sickening.

Squish, if you haven't already, I'd recommend reading up on the rationale of the electoral college. It was a compromise of sorts and the premise is that each state can decide for itself how to distribute its votes. The "winner takes all" aspect is not baked into the electoral college. In fact, two states don't do the winner take all approach. Rather than protesting the electoral college, it might make more sense to protest the way your state participates in the electoral college.

There are always proposals floating around for alternative approaches to elections. One I heard on the radio last week was to allow people to select a list of successive representatives such that if their first pick doesn't win, they still have some further say as to who wins (e.g. I could vote for Cruz, but if he doesn't win, I'd prefer Clinton over Sanders). For congress there is the idea to award seats to parties in proportion to the number of votes for each party. But changing the way voting works on a national level would be extremely difficult. Constitutional amendments are extremely difficult by design. Changing it on a state level is far easier and very possible if people are willing to campaign for a change, raise awareness, etc. It would still take an enormous amount of effort from an enormous number of people, but that's the difference between wanting a change and causing a change.

[RealRed]

You're in elementary school again.

Only two kids are gonna be your friend.

Pick between the testosterone driven moron who can't control himself or the kid who lies at every turn.

[Dark-SA-X]

You're in elementary school again.

Only two kids are gonna be your friend.

Pick between the testosterone driven moron who can't control himself or the kid who lies at every turn.

Back up choose between those 2 kids and you take on the aftermath of what they do that lands you in ISS for 2 weeks or OSS for a week ?
I have a better idea you started this question you be the first to go, I know where you're question is aiming at directly.

[RealRed]

Dark-SA-X are you old enough to vote?

[Zhs2]

Let's say I'm coming into this election knowing nothing about my two candidates. I know one is boisterous and loud and makes lots of promises he's recanting on, but the other is firm, experienced, yet obviously telling you mostly what you want to hear and not necessarily what they will actually do. What's the most important factor in voting here then? Whether or not the position being filled will have its potential exercised in a worthy manner? If that's the case, then I'm basically deciding between "upfront, yet potentially stupidly" and "powerfully, yet potentially backhandedly". Which is the lesser of two evils?

That is the essence of politics.

[Dark-SA-X]

Dark-SA-X are you old enough to vote?

Lets find out shall we go visit my profile sometime, if you can't verify that from there then you must not be able to read.   :pwuh:

@Zhs2: I understand what your saying but you vote on which candidate.
One who you feel most confident with that can get the job done or make some great impact towards that goal.
I voted for obama twice, reason being he is indeed a humble guy, he did indeed try to make things better.
When you got a bumbling republican party who won't give the man a chance from day one or even support him and collaborate without all the BSing.
Who is really at fault in the end, one thing obama shouldn't have done is allowed gay marriage to be legal.
Now the aftermath is following through the cracks of the floor and that will take an act of god to get that under control.

All in all I'm satisfied with my vote

[Zero One]

* Looks at American political situation *


Ahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa

* Looks at British political situation *


oh, right, fuck

[squishy_ichigo]

>gay marriage
>act of god
was that a coincidence of your odd speech patterns that make people think you are twelve, or are you a religions man darkhyphenessehhhypeneks?

Personally, I think it's pretty silly to legally discriminate against people based on their age, sex, gender, ethnicity, skin color, religion, disabilities, marital status, sexual orientation, so on and so forth. (yeah, you might think I repeated a few things there, and if you do, well, 'that's like, your opinion maaaaaan') We live in a country where we pride ourselves on being the land of the free, where all 'men' are created equally, but then turn around and throw legal obstacles in the way of anyone that isn't a white christian adult male. I for one, as a white male even, am glad that the white majority is coming to an end soon.

[spoiler=Also, I guess for some backdrop, so you can try and understand where I'm coming from when I discuss things.]I currently identify as an agnostic nihilist (in that I do not believe in any of the religions, but I do understand that as a mere mortal, I do not know everything, and am humble enough to understand that I could very well be wrong; and at the same time, that life has no inherit value or meaning, and that all value or meaning in life is created by humans to make them feel better about themselves), than leans progressive, but understands the benefits of conservatism. I liked some of the things that both Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders had to say, but idealism isn't enough to get things changed, especially when everyone else thinks you are crazy.[/spoiler]

[Lunaria]

Lets find out shall we go visit my profile sometime, if you can't verify that from there then you must not be able to read.   :pwuh:

Yes, because people never lie about anything on the internet⸮

[Dark-SA-X]

Lets find out shall we go visit my profile sometime, if you can't verify that from there then you must not be able to read.   :pwuh:

Yes, because people never lie about anything on the internet⸮

So where are you going with this again, if you don't believe thats my real age, then oh well for you.  :grin:
I was born on 1980 of this month so I am as old as I mentioned. :/

[Quietus]

I think that the fact we have a name for the players (politicians) and a name for the game (politics) just about says it all - it's just a big game. Where's the option to vote for the level-headed person who is actually going to get shit done? Nope, I refuse to play a part in the joke that is politics. :nope:

[Lunaria]

Honestly I'm way too fucking apathetic to give two shits about politics for the most part, the winner is usually always the rich elite and the rest can go fuck themselves.

[personitis]

Well if you do not vote and your expecting certain people or group of people in any political race to make somethings happen in your local state during their term.
You technically don't have a right to be pissed off and wine if shit goes wrong.

So if I vote for one side over the other, both of which are fucked, I'm allowed to be pissed at the whole system despite seeing this before hand?

I'm alright with the whole "if I have the right to vote, I have the right to not vote" ideal but it comes with the issue where if far too many people get into that mindset, we run ourselves into the ground. I've always been on the opinion that people in power want almost nothing but to further their own agenda. As such, I'll continue to go about my life with my eyes on, but hands out of the cookie jar. Need to at least be aware when something that's going to affect me majorly will crop up.

I also see the whole politicking thing as a game of "whose opinion is right" which is just silly but that could also just be flawed thinking on my part.

[Dark-SA-X]

I've always been on the opinion that people in power want almost nothing but to further their own agenda. As such, I'll continue to go about my life with my eyes on, but hands out of the cookie jar. Need to at least be aware when something that's going to affect me majorly will crop up.

Well every political person running for whatever agenda or certain purpose has a reason for doing so good or bad.
I think its important that if you don't want someone in office or a seat in your local state office, make a choice and vote.
If their work reputation meets up with what they say publicly and their not looking to ruin the country vote for them.

[squishy_ichigo]

I might actually be assed to get out and vote if it was guaranteed the ballot had a 'none of the above' option on every single ballot in the country. In which case begs the question, what happens when 'none of the above' gets the majority of the votes............

[Scyzer]

I want to lay some shit on about America's polical system, but we had Tony Abbott, so I can't really say anything.

[squishy_ichigo]

So I was listening to an NPR program the other day (which I do pretty frequently at work), Fresh Air with Terry Gross, and she was interviewing a guy that was investigating The Trump Foundation, seems like he's been doing stuff that borders on illegal. It was a pretty good listen if you have the time and interest.

You can listen to it here (click the play button) or read the transcript if you want: http://www.npr.org/2016/09/28/495782978/journalist-says-trump-foundation-may-have-engaged-in-self-dealing

[spoiler=Here's an excerpt that I particularly enjoyed]
FAHRENTHOLD: Well, the most amazing one we've found, I think, is a case involving something called the Palm Beach Police Foundation. That's a very - a charity in Palm Beach, obviously, that puts on one of the year's - the biggest events in the social calendar, the policeman's ball at Mar-a-Lago, a club that Trump runs. So this is what happened. Trump decides that he wants to make a donation to the Palm Beach Police Foundation. But he doesn't use his money and he doesn't want to - apparently doesn't want to sort of draw money out of the Trump Foundation. So what he does is he calls another foundation, the Charles Evans Foundation, which is - that was founded by a Hollywood producer who was at that point dead. It was his relatives and his widow running this charity after his death. Trump goes to the other foundation and says, look, I'm raising money for the Palm Beach Police Foundation. I need you to give me something. They said fine. We'll give you - I think it was $150,000. But Trump says, look, listen, don't give it straight to the Palm Beach Police Foundation. Give it to me, and I'll give it to them, OK?

The assumption they had was that Trump was gathering money from a lot of people and sort of bundling it together. Well, what happened was Trump just took the money they'd given him, the 150,000, gave it to the Palm Beach Police Foundation as his gift, adding nothing of his own, adding no money from his foundation or money from his own pocket. He turns their gift into his gift, and then he not only gets an award, he gets a giant crystal palm tree for his selfless support of the cause. He also gets to keep their business. He gets to butter up a client who pays $270,000 for one night at Mar-a-Lago. So he comes out with much - he hasn't spent any of his own money, and he comes out with $270,000 in revenue, having only donated a donation from somebody else.[/spoiler]

[Grimlock]

So I was listening to an NPR program the other day (which I do pretty frequently at work), Fresh Air with Terry Gross (probably is  :wink:), and she was interviewing a guy that was investigating The Trump Foundation, seems like he's been doing stuff that borders on illegal. It was a pretty good listen if you have the time and interest.

You can listen to it here (click the play button) or read the transcript if you want: http://www.npr.org/2016/09/28/495782978/journalist-says-trump-foundation-may-have-engaged-in-self-dealing

[spoiler=Here's an excerpt that I particularly enjoyed]
FAHRENTHOLD: Well, the most amazing one we've found, I think, is a case involving something called the Palm Beach Police Foundation. That's a very - a charity in Palm Beach, obviously, that puts on one of the year's - the biggest events in the social calendar, the policeman's ball at Mar-a-Lago, a club that Trump runs. So this is what happened. Trump decides that he wants to make a donation to the Palm Beach Police Foundation. But he doesn't use his money and he doesn't want to - apparently doesn't want to sort of draw money out of the Trump Foundation. So what he does is he calls another foundation, the Charles Evans Foundation, which is - that was founded by a Hollywood producer who was at that point dead. It was his relatives and his widow running this charity after his death. Trump goes to the other foundation and says, look, I'm raising money for the Palm Beach Police Foundation. I need you to give me something. They said fine. We'll give you - I think it was $150,000. But Trump says, look, listen, don't give it straight to the Palm Beach Police Foundation. Give it to me, and I'll give it to them, OK?

The assumption they had was that Trump was gathering money from a lot of people and sort of bundling it together. Well, what happened was Trump just took the money they'd given him, the 150,000, gave it to the Palm Beach Police Foundation as his gift, adding nothing of his own, adding no money from his foundation or money from his own pocket. He turns their gift into his gift, and then he not only gets an award, he gets a giant crystal palm tree for his selfless support of the cause. He also gets to keep their business. He gets to butter up a client who pays $270,000 for one night at Mar-a-Lago. So he comes out with much - he hasn't spent any of his own money, and he comes out with $270,000 in revenue, having only donated a donation from somebody else.[/spoiler]

I used to listen to NPR a few years ago.  I tried to give them a chance, I really did but at the time I was listening  The hosts were just so negative and they offered little substance.  The last time I listened it was two female hosts and all they talked about was Bush (during Obama's 2nd term).  They went on and on getting more and more heated blaming any failure of the Obama administration on Bush.  I'm thinking "give me a damn break, we're in Obama's 2nd term!  At what point is he accountable for his own results with these people".  I tried several times to listen but I just couldn't take the mediocre hosts they had at he time.  Maybe they've gotten better where you are but unfortunately for NPR it appears most people in my area felt the same as me, their ratings tanked and they aren't even on the radio over here anymore.

It's good someone is investigating Trump, both candidates need to be thoroughly investigated for our sake (especially Hillary with her "gazillion" scandals).  Personally I'm disappointed with our choices this time around, there we're infinitely better choices on both sides that got passed over....  I look at them and I'm like "Hillary, really!? What the phuq is wrong with you people! Trump, really!? What the phuq is wrong with you people!  I have to say though of the two I find Hillary disgusting and repulsive, she's a proven phony and a serial liar.  Trump has his own brand of issues too but Hillary takes cake.

[squishy_ichigo]

I mentioned it in irc, when snarf said he also listened to NPR, but I only listen to a few programs everyday, because I find the rest of it to be quite awful. I tune in everyday for The Diane Rehm Show from 10am-12pm EST every morning, then I turn the radio off until 2pm EST where I try and listen to a program that is different every day of the week, and recently I've been giving Terry Gross' Fresh Air a chance at 3pm EST. I will turn off the radio any time they have shitty guests or a boring topic that I don't want to listen to. This last week they have been having a fundraising drive, so that cuts into the programs, so I've mostly not been listening in this week, because who wants to listen to asshats beg for money all day long, acting like their station is the best thing since sliced bread.

I can't listen to 'normal' news programs, they just stink of something fowl. Amusingly or not, there was a period of time a few years ago when I was giving Alex Jones a shot, (back when Ron Paul was running for president, and I time I found a few conspiracy theories interesting) but that got real old real fast. As I've said, I don't consider myself liberal or conservative, I do try and give both sides a fair shake, but mostly its just garbage frothing from their mouths. The only real reason I tune into NPR is because I have nothing better to listen to at work (I drive for a living), the classical music station is fuzzy, and regular music gets old really fast, not to mention all the commercials.

[ProjectXIX]

suku told me to post this so he doesn't double post: http://imgur.com/gallery/iUPN4

[spoiler=more importantly though let's all remember how good this song is]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpLRJyWe814[/spoiler]

[squishy_ichigo]

With only four weeks to go until the election, and today being the final day to register to vote in my state, I've decided to add a poll to this thread. Feel free to 'vote' for whoever it is you feel is the best candidate, regardless of if you are a legal United States citizen of proper voting age or not. The Poll will stay open for 28 days, and you can change your vote at anytime during this period.

Between the recent Trump controversy and the wikileaks on Hillary, with only four weeks until the election, things sure are heating up!
[spoiler=trump video here]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wM248Wo54U[/spoiler]