|
Atomizer posted:Not voting is effectively reinforcing whichever candidate is in the lead. If you voted for the opponent you'd be helping them and hurting the former. Think of it this way: let's say Trump has the lead over Clinton by one vote, and you & one other person are the only two votes left uncast. If you two do nothing, or vote for Trump, he wins. If you vote for Clinton, she wins. Your votes determine the outcome of the election, and your inaction also has the power to do so. Not voting doesn't strictly count as a vote for "the other party" but not voting does have an impact. holy poo poo that's a completely different person.
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 13:23
|
|
I can confirm this. He's simply an elderly man with declining mental health. Compare him now to an early interview if you don't believe me:
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
The verbal ticks are still there and he is still an rear end in a top hat, so not much has changed. He was just better at hiding it back then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:The verbal ticks are still there and he is still an rear end in a top hat, so not much has changed. He was just better at hiding it back then. Well it's mostly that he looks functional, unlike the current version that belongs in a home.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
Atomizer posted:Not voting is effectively reinforcing whichever candidate is in the lead. If you voted for the opponent you'd be helping them and hurting the former. Think of it this way: let's say Trump has the lead over Clinton by one vote, and you & one other person are the only two votes left uncast. If you two do nothing, or vote for Trump, he wins. If you vote for Clinton, she wins. Your votes determine the outcome of the election, and your inaction also has the power to do so. Not voting doesn't strictly count as a vote for "the other party" but not voting does have an impact. That stuff about not voting = a vote for Trump only works if you live in a swing state.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Mate, a vote is a vote. Don't disenfranchise yourself needlessly just because you are "Guaranteed" to win.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:Mate, a vote is a vote. This is literally not the case in America.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
Just because some hick in the middle of bumfuck nowhere has a stronger vote doesn't mean you don't vote. You vote all the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
Yeah, like, the thing about First Past the Post as a voting system is that by its very nature it leads to a lot of "wasted" votes. Any vote for a third party is inherently wasted, since they're never going to gain anything from it. Any vote for the loser is technically wasted regardless of how well they do, since there's no gain from it. Any vote for the winner beyond the literal 1 vote they need over 2nd place to win is functionally wasted since there's no advantage to winning by a bigger majority than that. You can't even really argue that the Electoral College obfuscates that, since that's both a weird technicality and also still runs on a FPTP system anyway. The Electoral College understandably confuses people a lot, but that's not really super-relevant when FPTP inherently causes fairly significant voter apathy and disenfranchisement because people tend to feel like their votes don't count. And it's not like they're necessarily wrong, overall, but its really funny and weird that the more competitors someone has the less votes they actually need to win.  ...Though I don't see the US changing from it anytime soon anyway. Apparently alternative methods of voting are potentially unconstitutional?? Thanks, Maine Supreme Court for that bit of info! (Against the State Constitution, but still)
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
Not doing anything isn't going to change anything. If you refuse to vote, you're endorsing the state of things as they are. It may be difficult to shift things, but it's not impossible. There's a thing people say about if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. Also the presidential election is the big target, but the system is effected by the smaller elections, and your vote might actually mean more then because of lower turnout. My town recently ousted its own power mad tea party maniac from its city council, and it feels good. Atomizer posted:As an Internet Psychologist He still looks like trash with awful hair and talks in a similar way. Also, considering how he's got a long history of moronic business failures that makes me think he was never all there in the first place. There were theories like that about W Bush having early onset dementia too, and I'm more inclined to believe those, although from what I know of his career before the presidency, he wasn't too great in the first place either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:Just because some hick in the middle of bumfuck nowhere has a stronger vote doesn't mean you don't vote. You vote all the same. No, I vote because if I didn't I'd have no right to complain about our lovely government as much as I do. It's just really annoying to see the same old nonsense about a non-vote being the same as a vote for Trump. It's just not true, and you can't blame anyone from a populous area feeling disenfranchised over Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel in Montana's vote counting for many times more than theirs. Because that's hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:13
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Every compelled apology made for free speech makes it that little bit easier to lose, and every compelled apology made by a liberal both compels and empowers ultra-right-wing pundits and trolls to silence-by-proxy everyone else because it's a sign of weakness. Kathy Griffin didn't apologize for "going over the line," she apologized because it's what she needed to do to regain her support network (and it's what her publicist *told* her to do, because said publicist wants to keep their job and keep cashing Kathy's checks as long as they're good), who always desert pariahs the second they say something that might harm *their* self-image and personal gain.  You used more polite language and I think "lean in" is pretty weak and misused in your post however, you've officially ticked off pretty much all of the checklist of the "stop giving a poo poo about the other side, never back down over anything no matter how big or small, and always remain on the offensive because eventually your opponents will be forced to either backpedal or find citable sources or they'll simply get so upset that they do something stupid and end up arrested or as an example which supports our side, while you can then claim that you were just kidding around and 'how can they be such sensitive snowflakes? It was only a joke!'" http://www.wnyc.org/story/episode-6-new-old-white-supremacist-movement/ "Lean in" is not about remaining on the offensive in a debate, it's specifically about helping to raise women up to achieve their goals in work, home, and life in general. Not the same at all.. Lean In is about women being more visible and more in control of their lives overall, not about attacking conservatism by leaning in, in order to push men/conservatives/etc away - that's only what Rush Limbaugh claims (all those mean feminazis, anyone?) coyo7e fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Jun 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
IRQ posted:No, I vote because if I didn't I'd have no right to complain about our lovely government as much as I do. Haha bullshit about the bolded. Voting (in a non-swing state) is, like the LEAST loving effort you can put into "having a right to complain". If you're out canvassing the area and trying to inform potential voters or volunteering at getting out the vote/gathering and signing petitions/writing your representatives THEN you have a solid right to complain. Voting (in a non-swing state) is literally like LIKE-ing a starving orphan in Somalia's Facebook page so you can say you helped them. OR, EVERYONE has the right to complain about poo poo if it impacts them negatively - it just matters morally upon whether you're a lovely rear end in a top hat FuckYouGotMiner/Racist or not. You're a better person though if when you complain and ask yourself "so what do I do about it?" you can actually say you've tried to act upon and improve the situation in some way. I 100% agree with your second paragraph, though. Hopefully once people start dying off over the next ten and fifteen years we can get those swing states to elect less pieces of poo poo retards. Drifter fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Jun 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
That vote isn't wasted. Look how much a bitch Donald is about it. He is till sore about it and I don't think he will ever let it go. that is worth something. Even if you are in a deep red state you vote as you never know if this is an election that flips the state even if it is for one election cycle. Never assume even in a deep blue state. That's another reason why a non-vote supports the other side. As for the system I am sorry that is what you have and that is what you have to work with. Depressing everyone around you and going nothing matters is the worse thing you can do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Haha bullshit about the bolded. Voting (in a non-swing state) is, like the LEAST loving effort you can put into "having a right to complain". If you're out canvassing the area and trying to inform potential voters or volunteering at getting out the vote/gathering and signing petitions/writing your representatives THEN you have a solid right to complain. Voting (in a non-swing state) is literally like LIKE-ing a starving orphan in Somalia's Facebook page so you can say you helped them. I did that in '08 and was pretty disappointed. Not like, holy poo poo Trump is the president disappointed, but Obama didn't even TRY for single payer and did a lot of stuff I really wasn't happy with. I didn't do anything for Bernie besides donate because now I have a full time job and I'm loving tired. In conclusion gently caress off with the self-righteous assumptions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
IRQ posted:I did that in '08 and was pretty disappointed. Not like, holy poo poo Trump is the president disappointed, but Obama didn't even TRY for single payer and did a lot of stuff I really wasn't happy with. I didn't do anything for Bernie besides donate because now I have a full time job and I'm loving tired. So read the rest of my loving post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Drifter posted:So read the rest of my loving post. No!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Hopefully once people start dying off over the next ten and fifteen years we can get those swing states to elect less pieces of poo poo retards. Same poo poo I used to think back in the mid 90's. One dies off, another piece of poo poo pops up in their place. Waiting for them to die off is not the answer because it will never happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
GutBomb posted:Same poo poo I used to think back in the mid 90's. One dies off, another piece of poo poo pops up in their place. Waiting for them to die off is not the answer because it will never happen. Yeah given the number of college age pro-Trump shitheads there already are I don't think you can just write it off as a generational thing that will solve itself in time. If anything it's just going to be worse because all the people today grew up in such a polarized political atmosphere, where it's okay to bend/ignore the rules if it means defeating your opponent because THE SOUL OF AMERICA IS WHAT'S AT STAKE. The Cheshire Cat fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Jun 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Poorly informed young people's politics are as influenced by what their parents are and their relationship with them, or the people on their college campus, or whatever else. They're pretty fluid, but the consistent thing is that they don't vote so it won't matter. They'll probably change a little when they get old enough, because people hear new information and change. I know these boards have changed my view on a lot of things, and I'm sure some Bernie supporters scrunched up their nose at the mention of "Canadian-style healthcare" at some point in the 2000s until that Michael Moore film or someone else messaged it in a way where it sounded like something they want. Also, a lesson to learn is that if you elevate someone to The New Hitler there's going to be people who will support them just to strain their relationships and social ties. Human nature just really, really likes to advocate for the devil anywhere they can find it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 08:11
|
|
|
IRQ posted:That stuff about not voting = a vote for Trump only works if you live in a swing state. nice job fuckin the downballot
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:The verbal ticks are still there and he is still an rear end in a top hat, so not much has changed. He was just better at hiding it back then. It's not about the delivery or anything like that. Listen to him talk nowadays: he repeats himself, babbles on and on, he's basically talking because he likes to hear himself except he's not actually saying much. Also the whole thing about believing Breitbart and Faux News and all the conspiracy poo poo, on top of having his own personal Rasputin in Bannon (also, literally Putin) is a huge red flag regarding his mental health. SlothfulCobra posted:He still looks like trash with awful hair and talks in a similar way. Also, considering how he's got a long history of moronic business failures that makes me think he was never all there in the first place. I think that old video makes him appear pretty normal, if a little douchey. I've not heard those rumors about W though; are you sure you're not thinking of Reagan? The latter did have Alzheimer's, which wasn't diagnosed until after he left office but he certainly had some issues regarding his mental acuity during his tenure. His son (his real one, Ron Jr.) however insists that his mental decline began far earlier than his formal diagnosis. That's certainly backed up by his actions in office, from pretending AIDS didn't exist (or not caring, which is worse) to that whole "Iran-Contra" thing where he sold weapons to terrorists to launder the funds to other terrorists (and all the while pretending the Boland Amendments didn't exist, or not caring that they did, etc.) IRQ posted:That stuff about not voting = a vote for Trump only works if you live in a swing state. IRQ posted:It's just really annoying to see the same old nonsense about a non-vote being the same as a vote for Trump. It's just not true, and you can't blame anyone from a populous area feeling disenfranchised over Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel in Montana's vote counting for many times more than theirs. Because that's hosed up. Again it's not "not voting = supporting Trump;" rather it's that not voting just allows the vote leader to hold that lead, regardless of who it is. It also doesn't matter if you're in a swing state, but ultimately it's only the vote that takes the lead that matters. Since in reality no major elections come down to a single vote, the point of this all is that everyone should be discouraged from not voting because large groups of non-voters will have the power to affect the election. Dragonatrix posted:...Though I don't see the US changing from it anytime soon anyway. Apparently alternative methods of voting are potentially unconstitutional?? Thanks, Maine Supreme Court for that bit of info! (Against the State Constitution, but still) It would require a Constitutional amendment to change, yes. It's probably not going to happen any time soon, but is also extremely worth changing because the Electoral College being a rubber stamp was not the intended outcome; preventing jokers like W and loving Trump from getting in office is the whole point. coyo7e posted:Congratulations, you've officially embraced the playbook of the alt-right! No, he made a well-written post about how one side gets to lie constantly and get away with it, and the other side is under constant scrutiny and has to back down from any minor "infraction." Seriously, Trump lies constantly and gets adoring followers, overwhelming power, and Congressional lackeys for his transgressions. When have the Republicans faced actual consequences for their lies and actions? They get to lie about destroying the environment, lie about their voter suppression efforts, they can even do nothing and still get paid for it (shut down the Federal Government, refuse to allow Obama to fill a Supreme Court vacancy, obstruct efforts to reform American healthcare and then when that fails try to repeal all of the popular advancements, etc.) The list goes on and on. The two political parties play under different rules.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
Al Frankenstein has a piece in his new book about why "both sides are bad" thinking is wrong and damaging, and how it's gotten more prevalent over the last two decades. The problem is people watching the Republicans literally say "our goal is to make Obama a one-term president" and thinking "well, it takes two to fight. Both sides are at fault."
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
TheCenturion posted:Al Frankenstein has a piece in his new book about why "both sides are bad" thinking is wrong and damaging, and how it's gotten more prevalent over the last two decades. The problem is people watching the Republicans literally say "our goal is to make Obama a one-term president" and thinking "well, it takes two to fight. Both sides are at fault." Pretty much a political application of the "Anyone involved in a fight gets detention!" idea from school where they'd punish the bullies and the kids they pick on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
Yeah, this idea that both sides have equal value or that the truth is in the middle is misguided crap. Consider that one side actually has evil intentions and values and the other side doesn't, okay? This isn't Star Wars, we don't need to bring "balance to the Force."
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 14:11
|
|
|
Atomizer posted:Again it's not "not voting = supporting Trump;" rather it's that not voting just allows the vote leader to hold that lead, regardless of who it is. It also doesn't matter if you're in a swing state, but ultimately it's only the vote that takes the lead that matters. Since in reality no major elections come down to a single vote, the point of this all is that everyone should be discouraged from not voting because large groups of non-voters will have the power to affect the election. If that's not what it's about then people should stop trying to say that it is. There are plenty of GOOD reasons to vote. Saying not voting is a vote for trump is just as disingenuous as saying both sides are equally bad. stone cold posted:nice job fuckin the downballot This, for instance. But without the accusatory assumption.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
Atomizer posted:I've not heard those rumors about W though; are you sure you're not thinking of Reagan? The latter did have Alzheimer's, which wasn't diagnosed until after he left office but he certainly had some issues regarding his mental acuity during his tenure. His son (his real one, Ron Jr.) however insists that his mental decline began far earlier than his formal diagnosis. That's certainly backed up by his actions in office, from pretending AIDS didn't exist (or not caring, which is worse) to that whole "Iran-Contra" thing where he sold weapons to terrorists to launder the funds to other terrorists (and all the while pretending the Boland Amendments didn't exist, or not caring that they did, etc.) http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/5/254291/- Nope, there were theories about W too, although they're a bit harder to dig up seeing as how he wasn't nearly as far gone as Reagan was, and it was a long while ago. The main idea is that he was a much more skilled speaker back before the presidency, but after becoming president, he becomes much more simplified and childlike and can't keep his words straight. Although acting stupid could also just be a really effective tactic for the modern political environment. Sure you went to an ivy league college, but if you just talk all folksy and be confused by complicated things, then you can really reel in support from anti-elitists along with powerful special interests who want to control you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:Yeah, this idea that both sides have equal value or that the truth is in the middle is misguided crap. Consider that one side actually has evil intentions and values and the other side doesn't, okay? This isn't Star Wars, we don't need to bring "balance to the Force." My view is that is how politics is supposed to work but right now that just isn't the case as the Republicans are such loving assholes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
Hunt11 posted:My view is that is how politics is supposed to work but right now that just isn't the case as the Republicans are such loving assholes. The American constitution is fundamentally flawed as the basis of a democratic system and this was always where it was going to end up eventually.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/5/254291/- I always kind of got the impression that it was the latter (well not "always", but like, by the time I was old enough to have a bit more political understanding than when Bush entered office). W was more intelligent than he let on, but his folksy-ness and occasional stumbling over words gave him an "everyman" quality that made him more popular so he played into it. Like I'm not saying he was some sort of Nth dimensional chess player or anything, but even a mediocre politician is savvy enough to recognize when certain quirks boost their opinion polls and to lean into them rather than trying to curate a more "dignified" image that they know will be less popular with their base.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
GWB was an alcoholic for what, 20 years or so? That's gotta leave a lasting mark on a guy's mental faculties
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
webmeister posted:GWB was an alcoholic for what, 20 years or so? That's gotta leave a lasting mark on a guy's mental faculties All I know is that footage of Dubya speaking publicly in the early 90s showed a coherency he sorely lacked a decade later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Voting (in a non-swing state) is literally like LIKE-ing a starving orphan in Somalia's Facebook page so you can say you helped them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
IRQ posted:If that's not what it's about then people should stop trying to say that it is. There are plenty of GOOD reasons to vote. Saying not voting is a vote for trump is just as disingenuous as saying both sides are equally bad. If you haven't noticed Republicans vote for R just to win. The left/centre keeps dunking themselves finding that GOOD reason when it is quite obvious as to what they need to do. quote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. This is the context as to why I see a non-vote as a vote for your enemies. Right now you don't have the luxury of not voting. There is no sideline. This also. Never assume ever your vote is worthless while you have the opportunity to vote, it matters. pwn posted:No, it isn't. Voting contributes a vote to a candidate. Liking a post about a starving Somalian orphan doesn't help them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:If you haven't noticed Republicans vote for R just to win. The left/centre keeps dunking themselves finding that GOOD reason when it is quite obvious as to what they need to do. I mean if you're talking about the 2016 election then no, they dunked on themselves by picking a terrible candidate who ran a terrible campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Quit blaming Hillary and blame yourself. It was just as obvious then as to what the other side represented as it is now. Rs voted just to win then as those people continue to do even now. You are dunking yourself and others even now as you try to excuse not voting. You are perpetuating voter suppression by telling their vote doesn't matter when it drat well does no matter where you are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:The American constitution is fundamentally flawed as the basis of a democratic system and this was always where it was going to end up eventually. Unsurprising when you consider that everyone figured it would be rewritten in a few decades at the outside. Of course the Constitutional Convention remedy remains risky due to the popularity of really stupid ideas. It would be nice if Congress at least went and expanded the size of Congress instead of sticking with the stupid numbers from 1912 though. A lot of good things are likely to happen just from reducing district sizes. BIG HEADLINE posted:All I know is that footage of Dubya speaking publicly in the early 90s showed a coherency he sorely lacked a decade later. It was pretty much a purposeful affectation to make it easier to win in Texas. He just stayed in character for so long that it became his default. From what little of his post Presidential interviews I've seen, he's noticeably less W now that he's retired to paint bad pictures. Still all about that stupid accent of his though, probably worked too hard to get it and had little reason to lose it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
The constitution has its problems, but the articles of confederation that preceded it were such a garbage fire that it really overshadowed all the issues. Also, have a governor W vs. president W comparison. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvVilAlCBYc
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
IRQ posted:I mean if you're talking about the 2016 election then no, they dunked on themselves by picking a terrible candidate who ran a terrible campaign. This. Martin god drat O'Malley would have performed better, and had the republicans put up someone normal like Rubio this would have been a blowout loss for the Dems, as shown by it still being a blowout loss downballot which means plenty of people voted R there but not for President. Oh, and to the guy who said "great job loving the downballot": you realize you can vote there and abstain on the big one, right? Which is EXACTLY what many leftist grassroots groups recommended and did. Finally - the idea that not voting takes away your right to complain is so bizarrely wrong. If only abstaining from a vote meant being able to dodge the consequences of the decisions made by those who did. I'm sure convicts who have had their right to vote forcibly removed for such dire offenses as driving while black or possession of marijuana are happy to hear they've no right to complain, too. TXT BOOTY7 2 47474 fucked around with this message at 06:55 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
I wonder if this week will all be about the UK clusterfuck that is going on along with the testimony
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
oohhboy posted:Quit blaming Hillary and blame yourself. This attitude is why she lost, by the way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 09:50
|
|
