United states elections(part one); what are you gonna do?

[milon]

Sorry if it is not helpful for the topic.

I had to share this
https://g.redditmedia.com/ui0cXEZO9B942C0C9zdV0mZbrfnJkR8jgEiVo_neMrk.gif?w=576&fm=mp4&mp4-fragmented=false&s=6c8cf1cbda3faf027e3604674b20955c

*wipes away tears*

(Was I laughing or crying?  I'll let you decide.)

[mumblemumble]

The entire prospect of the us ELECTIONS is fubared, and the 2 party system, messed up media (on both sides) lobbyism, electoral college, ect all makes the election an entire joke.

But given the options, trump would cause less damage than Hilary I think. I don't like the idea of frankenfoods, SJW bs getting more power, BLM support, and even more open migration, potentially with isis members (because it worked so well in the EU) nor do I think it would be worth any positives Hilary supposedly brings.

[KillTyrant]

I love seeing the arguments

"but if you vote for <insert 3rd party candidate here> than the person i dont like might win because <ill-concieved logic here>."

Or

"Your wasting your vote because they arent going to win, so you should vote for <insert D or R candidate here> so the person i dont like wins."

Its not wadting your vote if you pick a candidate you would actually want in the office as compared to just voting for someone you think is the lesser of two evils. The lesser of two evils is how we got into this shit show in the first place. Every 4 years, ive heard these same arguments pop in and out of existence like hawking radiation. No one bats an eye at the hypocracy of these spoken statements. This years electing was a little different in that 2 had to candidates that didnt mesh well with the status quo. Bernie and Trump. Bernie eventually came to lick the boot on hillary and pretended he didnt spend the last 9+ months highlight why she is the worse person for office. Party unity means nothing if you are backing a person that isnt representing you or your best interests. Trump is very against the grain with his wild speeches and proposals. He has no substantive platform and only got to where he is by being a showman. Hillary is beyond fake and should have been indicted like anyone else if they did what she did. She holds no opinion or stance, she changes with the polls and she uses the fact that she has a vagina as a proping up point on why you should vote for her. Gill Stein has 0 experience outside of her very narrow field of expertise and i dont have a clue about gary beyond the fact he is a libritarian.

As it stands, I wouldnt vote for any of the remaining candidates. Id have to look into Gary and see what his platform is before i could make an informed decision. As a side note though, those that abstain from voting are part of the democratic process as well. If they arent informed enough or have enough of a care to participate than i wouldnt want them voting. Obviously i would love for everyone to be active in their govt both local and federal but that isnt tbe case in real life. So people abstaining, in my mind isnt a undemocratic.

[mumblemumble]

Actually, first thing is kinda true. If i vote for someone who has no chance of winning,  my vote is equal to if i didn't vote,  wiped my butt with my vote,  or set my vote on fire.  The electoral college doesn't help either,  if say,  ron paul got a consistent 40 % vote in EVERY State,  and all states then hade landslides of 50% for R / D,  ron paul would still end up with 0 electoral votes, even if the ballot count per person was almost double any other candidate.

Ron paul is just an example,  but it shows how completely wrong our "democracy"  is.

Its been a while since I've researched this,  so feel free to correct me if I'm off.  But this is how i remember it,  and really it screws stuff HARD if there is a 3rd party.

People talk about 1st woman,  or gay president  (Obama is the first gay)  how about the first 3rd party president?



User was warned for this and following posts.  Reason: violation of Forum Rule #5: Stay On Topic

Forum Rules:  https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=122.0
5. Stay on topic: Please try to stay on topic. Ask yourself: Am I answering the author of the topic? Does this relate to the title of the topic? If you want to discuss something else, make a thread!


Original Post:

Welp, here we are again. This election really feels like picking the least poisonous drink.
Feel free to discuss the conventions below, BUT remember the forums rules and be good little demented colony overlords.

[KillTyrant]

Voting for who you want in office is very a waste regardless of what their chances of winning are. This isnt a highschool poll. We arent voting for most likely to succeed.

I have a couple questions for you.

Do you think a candidate must be willing to do an unpopular act if its to the benifit of those that voted them in?

What do you mean by obama being gay?

What do you propose as an alternative form of govt as opposed to what we currently have?

[mumblemumble]

If a candidate is honest, hopefully. popularity shouldn't be a factor, but todays media is retarded, everyone uses fallacies and omits truths.

Obama is gay because michelle obama is actually micheal. Michelle is a man,  you can tell by the bone structure, shoulders, big hands, and a particular segment on ellen degeneris where you could see the penis bouncing around in his pants when they were doing a dance. Some may say this is still straight, but I beg to differ. Theres no such thing as a feminine penis.

An alternative form would be 100% IMPARTIAL MEDIA first off, which reports FACTS on it, and ONLY FACTS. 2 party system, eliminated, and dissolving the democratic and republican party entirely (the promises one needs to make to be backed up by either party). removal of ALL personal stuff from politics unless it can be argued to have an effect on politics. Removal of electoral college, make the vote PERSON BASED. Strict, id verification for voters to ensure no fake votes. IQ test for voting required (nothing nuts, but nothing sub 75) to ensure no voters are pants on head retarded. Revision, and case by case basis for felonies in voting prevention (allow it, and perhaps dissolve felonies if behavior stays consistent for 3+ years, depending on what crime entails)

[KillTyrant]

If a candidate is honest, hopefully. popularity shouldn't be a factor, but todays media is retarded, everyone uses fallacies and omits truths

Humans arent honest by nature so that isnt really something id bank on. I also think you misunderstood my question. I was asking if you agree that the person you are voting into office may need to do things you dont think are best/right/ect but you trust that they are doing it because they have knowledge that you dont.

Obama is gay because michelle obama is actually micheal. Michelle is a man,  you can tell by the bone structure, shoulders, big hands, and a particular segment on ellen degeneris where you could see the penis bouncing around in his pants when they were doing a dance. Some may say this is still straight, but I beg to differ. Theres no such thing as a feminine penis.

uhhh... So explain their kids? Im not really going to entertain a rumor. Seems rather childish to attack a person as such using pseudo-science and half baked conspiracy. There are plenty of pictures of Beyonce looking pretty manly but that doesnt make the assertion correct.

An alternative form would be 100% IMPARTIAL MEDIA first off, which reports FACTS on it, and ONLY FACTS. 2 party system, eliminated, and dissolving the democratic and republican party entirely (the promises one needs to make to be backed up by either party). removal of ALL personal stuff from politics unless it can be argued to have an effect on politics. Removal of electoral college, make the vote PERSON BASED. Strict, id verification for voters to ensure no fake votes. IQ test for voting required (nothing nuts, but nothing sub 75) to ensure no voters are pants on head retarded. Revision, and case by case basis for felonies in voting prevention (allow it, and perhaps dissolve felonies if behavior stays consistent for 3+ years, depending on what crime entails)

The media has nothing to do with a form of gov't. There are impartial media outlets out there that actually have journalistic integrity. They just arent popular because they're boring. However, again this isnt something sanctioned through the government thus isnt apart of it. Eliminate the two party system and then what? The democratic and republican parties are made up by the electorate. Dissolving that means nothing. These people will still have the same ideals. Anything can be argued to have an effect on something. Especially if that person is a representative of that something. Thats the meaning of semantics and politicians and lawyers are very good on drawing on that skill.
The electoral college is a means to prevent the tyranny of the majority. Its the last safeguard if the American people try to bring into power a person that can become a dictator or undo the government as a whole. Its meant to be a means to ignore the will of the people if the will of the people falls within the bounds of insanity. Any representative democracy will inherently be less democratic than its direct cousin. When you ask for NPV (National Popular Vote) You are asking for a whole different sent of problems. If you want to know what I am talking about then you need to look no further than Mexico. They run on a NPV system and not too long ago the winner had 35.89% of the vote while the loser had 35.31%. The loser practically started a civil war with his millions of followers because of the loss of less than 1%. If the loser wanted a recount, you would have to recount every single hundreds of millions of ballots. Which takes time and money and this could literally cripple the economy and legislation. "People who pretend that the Electoral College system is undemocratic are not only ignorant of the history and purposes of the U.S. Constitution, but they probably don't even understand baseball. Basing the election on a plurality of the popular vote while ignoring the states would be like the New York Yankees claiming they won the 1960 World Series because they outscored the Pirates in runs 55-27 and in hits 91-60. Yet, the Pirates fairly won that World Series, 4 games to 3, and no one challenges their victory." -Phyllis Schlafly
Voter fraud happens in such low frequency is a waste of public tax dollars to try and prevent a crime that is less popular than J-walking. You would prevent Americans from being able to participate in the democratic method? I thought thats why you wanted to abolish the electoral college? Also high IQ doesnt mean a person will make smart decisions about politics. I dont really have a comment for the felonies thing. Im not left or right on that issue.

[billycop32]

Obama is gay because michelle obama is actually micheal. Michelle is a man,  you can tell by the bone structure, shoulders, big hands, and a particular segment on ellen degeneris where you could see the penis bouncing around in his pants when they were doing a dance. Some may say this is still straight, but I beg to differ. Theres no such thing as a feminine penis.

STRIKE ONE/WARNING: Mumble, I won't allow this kind of stuff on my poll. keep this political, not body shaming or conjecture. whether or not the first lady is now the first man is none of our business, and has no place in this debate.

[mumblemumble]

I don't really agree, generally speaking that public shouldn't have information. SO no, I don't agree with someone doing this, but I know it will happen.

The kids are possibly adopted? Cmon, you can give ANY 2 people kids, doesn't mean THEY had them..... Would also explain how they act. As for beyonce, I think you are speaking of one, stars are in makeup / airbrushed ect, 24/7, so looking without makeup is hideous by comparison. This an African decent people have higher testosterone on average for males and females.

Media is a HUGE part, they control what people think about, guide attetion onto certain things, and mark what is "socially acceptable". This wont control everyone, but it controls a mass majority.

Disolving the parties, I mean basically wipe the slate clean. Currently republicans, and democrats, if they want support from either party must sign something basically guaranteeing a decision on certain things. I'm essentially saying take THAT group, forcing that, destroy them, and then start over without it. This way its not ultra polarized.

>tyranny of the majority
You fucking what? Sorry, this is the stupidest stuff I've heard in a LONG time, when a govornment fears the people that is liberty. And a dictator getting in power isn't THAT less unlikely due to the college, not in the slightest. All this means is a big way to manipulate votes, and control power. Your comparison to baseball is also shit : its not which party has the most money, which has the most guns, which is the loudest, but who the most of exist. College was made for back in the days before electronics, and was never gotten rid of. Besides that, tyranny of majority is already protected by CONGRESS being different.

Fraud is hard to tell how often it happens. How often do people get murdered and never get caught? Well, depends.... How many cold case disapearings would you count? We don't know how much voter fraud happens, because the counted cases are CAUGHT cases. Shitty argument.

IQ is important because if someone is completely devoid of intelligence, they fall for the media thing listed above. Also your defense is similar to saying a blind person should be allowed to drive, because seeing people crash too. Shitty argument. If people are that low in intelligence, I don't trust them to be smart enough to pick someone to run the nation.

Felonies aren't even left or right : Theres a huge difference between say, a guy who rode a bus without paying, got charged (this is theft of government resources, a FELONY) compared to rape, murder, human trafficking, ect.

[RickyMartini]

Obama is gay because michelle obama is actually micheal. Michelle is a man,  you can tell by the bone structure, shoulders, big hands, and a particular segment on ellen degeneris where you could see the penis bouncing around in his pants when they were doing a dance. Some may say this is still straight, but I beg to differ. Theres no such thing as a feminine penis.

I've now officially decided that you're simply a troll on this forum.

[Kegereneku]

Oh my Pastafarian god ! Mumble you really give us quite a laugh here.
It's just a shame you make some relatively valid opinion look utter nonsense by association.

Anyway, to answer someone who is certain to have a IQ above 75 :

"People who pretend that the Electoral College system is undemocratic are not only ignorant of the history and purposes of the U.S. Constitution, but they probably don't even understand baseball.

Careful, I know you are answering Mumblemuble but don't put everybody else at his level...
The Electoral College system was never meant as a safeguard, it is a old relic of history, born when it was more an Union of distinct state than the super-polity it is trying to be nowadays, It was revised several time but mostly continue as it is out of Bureaucratic Inertia, Fear of change and legit difficulty to do so.
I'd dare you to change it now with Trump around and very emotional people (yet given huge power) looking for anything that would support their interest.

I shudder to think that I'm backing that guy but "The Tyranny of the majority" don't apply with a correctly made Democracy (I say that from a country which use a Two-round system but I'm not taking it as the basis for it).
The point of Democracy isn't to "confront the populace" to a set of ideas that have been pre-approved by neo-dictators giving no alternative. While you can of course generate approval (by more or less ethic way), Democracy is mainly about candidate reading what the population want for change, and trying to build it along what you* (as a president) want to do with the country.
As a result there's nothing bad or illogical in (say) Sander deciding to join with Clinton, the objective was not to brainwash more populace to your cause, it was to get your (and your supporters) ideas becoming a reality. And you can't do that if the one elected don't care the slightest bit about those.

*I don't think we can't remove the Ego from the equation, even if we were to leave computer & mathematic principle in charge, the Ego would simply shift to whoever build the computer or round-up the details.

On the opposite, the American Electoral College do in fact facilitate madman/tyrant to get the power (proof right now, Trump is "an insane candidate" by your standard), as they have less people to convince (from less social class) or bribe and then by giving them more legitimacy than they actually have.
There's nothing bad in a 51% election win (if the count is considered reliable), but it is absurd to pretend a 51% support translate into 70% because you asked less peoples.

[/personal opinions]

[KillTyrant]

After reading through your retort I think im going to take you alot less seriously. Ill still respond but you seem to have your head firmly placed up your seventh planet.

I don't really agree, generally speaking that public shouldn't have information. SO no, I don't agree with someone doing this, but I know it will happen.

You are failing to comprehend my point. So ill give you an example. You think you dont have cancer. However, the oncologist you willingly went to, does.

The kids are possibly adopted? Cmon, you can give ANY 2 people kids, doesn't mean THEY had them..... Would also explain how they act. As for beyonce, I think you are speaking of one, stars are in makeup / airbrushed ect, 24/7, so looking without makeup is hideous by comparison. This an African decent people have higher testosterone on average for males and females.

This is quite frankly the stupidest thing I have read so far on this forum. As for the African bit, Please present your source for that claim.

Media is a HUGE part, they control what people think about, guide attetion onto certain things, and mark what is "socially acceptable". This wont control everyone, but it controls a mass majority.

The media is protected by freedom of the press and freedom of speech. If someone wants to say in the news that michelle obama is a man, than they have the freedom to do so (although you are potentially at risk for libel slander). Its up to the people themselves to decide to what they listen to. As I stated, there are alot of impartial media outlets out there that say what the facts are without opinion spin. By trying to forcefully negate this part of society, you will only drive it underground all while convincing the tinfoil wearing morons that because these news outlets are being dissolved, because they are speaking the truth thus they have to be silenced.

Disolving the parties, I mean basically wipe the slate clean. Currently republicans, and democrats, if they want support from either party must sign something basically guaranteeing a decision on certain things. I'm essentially saying take THAT group, forcing that, destroy them, and then start over without it. This way its not ultra polarized.

You do understand that you need division in peoples mentalities. Even though I dont not agree with most of what youre saying, I fully appreciate the fact that you are here saying it because it forces the issues at hand and gives a different perspective. When you have an echo chamber where people just yes each other, you are liable to make stupidity decisions at the behest of the group you represent. Having that polarization prevents a potentially harmful bill/law/amendment from passing through without it being impeded. Obviously there are pros and cons because this impediment happens to "good" bills/laws/amendments but if its has enough bipartisan support than it will pass regardless.

>tyranny of the majority
You fucking what? Sorry, this is the stupidest stuff I've heard in a LONG time, when a govornment fears the people that is liberty. And a dictator getting in power isn't THAT less unlikely due to the college, not in the slightest. All this means is a big way to manipulate votes, and control power. Your comparison to baseball is also shit : its not which party has the most money, which has the most guns, which is the loudest, but who the most of exist. College was made for back in the days before electronics, and was never gotten rid of. Besides that, tyranny of majority is already protected by CONGRESS being different.

"Contrary to modern perceptions, the founding generation did not intend to create a direct democracy. To the contrary, the Founders deliberately created a republic -- or, arguably, a republican democracy -- that would incorporate a spirit of compromise and deliberation into decision-making. Such a form of government, the Founders believed, would allow them to achieve two potentially conflicting objectives: avoiding the "tyranny of the majority" inherent in pure democratic systems, while allowing the "sense of the people" to be reflected in the new American government" -
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2004/11/the-electoral-college-enlightened-democracy

Other related links should you actually educate yourself
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-reason-for-the-electoral-college/
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/detoc/1_ch15.htm - Read "TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY"

Your presuppositions are astounding. Liberal or republican at the end of the day means nothing. they are both ideologies are are subject to blind fanaticism. The electoral college is meant to be a safeguard against such emotional banter from the masses and have "educated" people cast the final votes.

BTW- The baseball analogy was a quote hence why I put it in quotations and gave it credit to who said it.

Fraud is hard to tell how often it happens. How often do people get murdered and never get caught? Well, depends.... How many cold case disapearings would you count? We don't know how much voter fraud happens, because the counted cases are CAUGHT cases. Shitty argument.

You cant be really making this kind of comparison... Murder and other violent crimes are much more common than voter fraud. Can you present a valid case for this kind of layer of security being added to warrant the economic burden? I mean, can you present hard numbers that actually so that voter fraud is a big deal. Because right now it seems like you are saying "we dont know" and I think something that is a rampant issue would most definitely be "known"

IQ is important because if someone is completely devoid of intelligence, they fall for the media thing listed above. Also your defense is similar to saying a blind person should be allowed to drive, because seeing people crash too. Shitty argument. If people are that low in intelligence, I don't trust them to be smart enough to pick someone to run the nation.

<insert Morpheus meme here>
What if I told you that the electoral college was comprised of people with higher than 100 IQ.

By the way, comparing my logical argument to something else that is completely outlandish is rather dishonest of you especially when I was pointing out the clear hypocrisy within your own template.

Felonies aren't even left or right : Theres a huge difference between say, a guy who rode a bus without paying, got charged (this is theft of government resources, a FELONY) compared to rape, murder, human trafficking, ect.

I wasnt refering to the political spectrum. I meant I didnt care enough to actually place an argument for or against. However, if I had to pick a stance. I would agree that non-violent felonies shouldnt be stripped of their constitutional rights.

[KillTyrant]

Oh my Pastafarian god ! Mumble you really give us quite a laugh here.
It's just a shame you make some relatively valid opinion look utter nonsense by association.

Anyway, to answer someone who is certain to have a IQ above 75 :

"People who pretend that the Electoral College system is undemocratic are not only ignorant of the history and purposes of the U.S. Constitution, but they probably don't even understand baseball.

Careful, I know you are answering Mumblemuble but don't put everybody else at his level...
The Electoral College system was never meant as a safeguard, it is a old relic of history, born when it was more an Union of distinct state than the super-polity it is trying to be nowadays, It was revised several time but mostly continue as it is out of Bureaucratic Inertia, Fear of change and legit difficulty to do so.
I'd dare you to change it now with Trump around and very emotional people (yet given huge power) looking for anything that would support their interest.

I shudder to think that I'm backing that guy but "The Tyranny of the majority" don't apply with a correctly made Democracy (I say that from a country which use a Two-round system but I'm not taking it as the basis for it).
The point of Democracy isn't to "confront the populace" to a set of ideas that have been pre-approved by neo-dictators giving no alternative. While you can of course generate approval (by more or less ethic way), Democracy is mainly about candidate reading what the population want for change, and trying to build it along what you* (as a president) want to do with the country.
As a result there's nothing bad or illogical in (say) Sander deciding to join with Clinton, the objective was not to brainwash more populace to your cause, it was to get your (and your supporters) ideas becoming a reality. And you can't do that if the one elected don't care the slightest bit about those.

*I don't think we can't remove the Ego from the equation, even if we were to leave computer & mathematic principle in charge, the Ego would simply shift to whoever build the computer or round-up the details.

On the opposite, the American Electoral College do in fact facilitate madman/tyrant to get the power (proof right now, Trump is "an insane candidate" by your standard), as they have less people to convince (from less social class) or bribe and then by giving them more legitimacy than they actually have.
There's nothing bad in a 51% election win (if the count is considered reliable), but it is absurd to pretend a 51% support translate into 70% because you asked less peoples.

[/personal opinions]

When i get a free moment, i shall respond. Im just putting this reply here as a place holder. Please check back within a day or so for this being edited into a proper response

[mumblemumble]

think what you want, but review pictures of michelle.

Hands are huge, bigger than mine. Shoulders are very broad.  Face is highly masculine, and ellen degeneris clearly shows SOMETHING bouncing.

No full on proof, but I'm doubtful, plus that one lady in hollywood said he was, and ended up dead not long after.

The difference with an oncologist (if they are worth their salt) is that they will SHOW the information they have. you guys specifically brought up a decision made for us on information we don't have. Transparency is important, lack of it leaves room for deception. A doctor once told me my hand was just fractured after an incident, but then refused to show xrays. I told them to fuck off.

African genetics and testosterone : http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/89/3/188.full https://chancellorfiles.wordpress.com/2006/02/24/black-women-and-sexual-genetics/ Keep in mind, second one is opinionated with a lot of unfounded opinions AFTER (that black women are thus stronger and more sexy to all races.... because you know, opinions have no meaning.) also video of her on ellen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvAxiHEezeM not hard proof, but extremely indicative, also pictures of her bone structure indicate its male. http://anthropogeny.com/Testosterone%20and%20Socioeconomic%20Differences%20in%20Mortality.htm Video on male / female proportions https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpD5EdXvluw

The excuses on the college are just that : excuses. No matter how you slice it, you say that the majority DOESN'T matter, and random lies, and districts matter more than the people "because reasons". I think if more people vote for someone, they should get in. Even if elections are expensive counting more votes, I think its well worth it for a more "true" democracy.

Problem with media is most media is paid for by companies who don't have our interests, ignore REAL issue, and focus on BS like bruce jenner and stuff rather than things which effect us. Mass shootings are also glorified, encouraging more of them, arguments are misrepresented, facts are omitted, and facts are ignored, while arguments are constantly fallacious.  I don't care for most media, ESPECIALLY not hollywood : To be honest, if hollywood got bombed to dust TODAY, I would shrug and smile, and go on with my life, content that negative things have been removed.

Again, with fraud, if you have huge openings, and no way to DETECT (like just walk in and vote, no ID needed) then how are you going to TELL if someone is cheating? Its like having a big room full of money people walk in and out of, and 0 logs of how much is there, how much is taken out or put in.... how the hell will you even TELL if people are grabbing money if theres no way to TRACK it? Same issue with voting, having no way to ID people means theres 0 way to track if someone votes 20 times in different areas. This is why I suggest ID laws, so its at very least always trackable, a bit more than now.

Electoral colleges having high IQ is irrelevant,  serial killers also have high IQ, so stating  group is trustworthy based on IQ is dumb.  Maybe they do things right (according to their rules, at least)  but I wouldn't trust someone based on IQ alone, ever.

[Ykara]

Well, Hillary Clinton is the devil, Gary Johnson supports Black Lives Matter, Jill Stein wants female quotas, so if I lived in the US, I'd vote Trump.