U.S. 2012 Election

News and current events discussion

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Jez » 9 Feb 12, 4:59 pm

skitzor wrote:
BBlunt wrote:and look what it did for him.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-08/s ... .svl=news2

he may have won states, but it didn't earn him many delegates.

I really don't see him winning. maybe there's a bit more attention on him his problems will come out. this guy is ridiculously socially conservative and has been called the most corrupt politician by a few different organisations.


His conservatism is a potential advantage though. He's much more likely to appeal to Tea Party voters (where a lot of the grassroots momentum is in the GOP), and if he did win the nomination it would pretty much kill the possibility of a conservative third party candidate entering the race.
Jez

User avatar
Forgotten What The Sky Looks Like
 
Offline
Posts: 2888
Joined: 12 Feb 03, 6:14 pm

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Kremmen » 14 Feb 12, 4:14 pm

A polititian is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country

Texas Guinan
Kremmen

User avatar
Padawan
 
Offline
Posts: 217
Joined: 18 Oct 10, 2:32 pm
Location: Cairns

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Wyld » 14 Feb 12, 5:51 pm

WOAH.

That, was amazing.

Tripled by the fact that it was on FOX.

Amazing.

Thanks Krrrrrrrrrrremmen.
Mostly Minecraft via http://www.twitch.tv/wyldstein/ Wooh!

Image
Wyld

User avatar
Known to wear a cool hat
 
Offline
Posts: 10080
Joined: 15 Aug 03, 6:33 pm
Location: Living Large in Adelaide Status: Cranky & Accurate

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Sathias » 14 Feb 12, 5:54 pm

The only part I disagree with is the conclusion that Ron Paul is the answer. I'm not convinced things under Paul would be any different. I think Bill Hicks is right on the money with this.

Image

"Only the madman is absolutely sure." - Robert Anton Wilson
Sathias

User avatar
Not allowed to leave
 
Offline
Posts: 9122
Joined: 30 Jul 03, 10:49 pm
Location: South Australia, home of Coopers

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby skitzor » 15 Feb 12, 12:24 am

Wyld wrote:WOAH.

That, was amazing.

Tripled by the fact that it was on FOX.

keep in mind that was fox business, not fox news. as you can see, they are quite different. still impressive it was on the fox network, but that guy has been there for a while and he says that sort of **** all the time.

Sathias wrote:The only part I disagree with is the conclusion that Ron Paul is the answer. I'm not convinced things under Paul would be any different.

well for one Paul would probably end up vetoing everything as there aren't enough Libertarians in the house and senate. I don't know how much power the President has to bring up new legislation, but I think he would need the support of the house or senate.

I personally don't even agree with his stance on most issues. it seems like it would make some of the bad things about America even worse.
Image
skitzor

User avatar
Forgotten What The Sky Looks Like
 
Offline
Posts: 2775
Joined: 1 May 03, 3:10 pm
Location: snapping necks and cashing cheques

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Bek » 15 Feb 12, 11:20 am

Yeah, he kind of ruined his whole point about how elections / public opinion / differences between the parties are **** by suggesting the solution to this is to... elect someone. Or as someone on reddit put it, finishing "with a ron paul dickride"
What can change the nature of a man?
Bek

User avatar
Offline? What's 'offline'?
 
Offline
Posts: 3709
Joined: 11 Feb 09, 8:02 pm
Location: Modron Cube

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Jeatalong » 16 Feb 12, 1:22 pm

Wyld wrote:WOAH.

That, was amazing.

Tripled by the fact that it was on FOX.

Amazing.

Thanks Krrrrrrrrrrremmen.

At a training course so i can't youtube.

What did he say or do?
Die with style. Fly with Neh'bu Kau Be'Hude
Image
Jeatalong

User avatar
EvE Moderator
 
Offline
Posts: 5022
Joined: 20 Dec 03, 5:51 pm
Location: Parkes

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby skitzor » 16 Feb 12, 1:39 pm

Jeatalong wrote:At a training course so i can't youtube.

What did he say or do?

I just tried to look for a transcript of his rant, but didn't have any success.
edit: see end of my post, the rant is there.

honestly, it's better for you to take a look at it when you can because there's quite a bit of stuff in there.

however, I guess his main point is that the current two party political system is broken because each side is extremely similar. people think they have a real choice as the two sides are made out to be different, so they don't look any further. he then finishes with Ron Paul is the answer to a bunch of problems in America because he is actually different to the current candidates.

there a whole bunch of other things he mentions as problems with America, but I felt that was his overall point.

Judge Napolitano is a fairly prolific Libertarian in America (has his own show/segment), and obviously loves Ron Paul. if Ron Paul won the Republican ticket, most people wouldn't be surprised if Paul picked Napolitano as his VP.

EDIT: found it.

What if Democrats and Republicans were two wings of the same bird of prey?

What if elections were actually useful tools of social control? What if they just provided the populace with meaningless participation in a process that validates an establishment that never meaningfully changes? What if that establishment doesn’t want and doesn’t have the consent of the governed? What if the two-party system was actually a mechanism used to limit so-called public opinion? What if there were more than two sides to every issue, but the two parties wanted to box you in to one of their corners?

What if there’s no such thing as public opinion, because every thinking person has opinions that are uniquely his own? What if public opinion was just a manufactured narrative that makes it easier to convince people that if their views are different, there’s something wrong with that — or something wrong with them?

What if the whole purpose of the Democratic and Republican parties was not to expand voters’ choices, but to limit them? What if the widely perceived differences between the two parties was just an illusion? What if the heart of government policy remains the same, no matter who’s in the White House? What if the heart of government policy remains the same, no matter what the people want?

What if those vaunted differences between Democrat and Republican were actually just minor disagreements? What if both parties just want power and are willing to have young people fight meaningless wars in order to enhance that power? What if both parties continue to fight the war on drugs just to give bureaucrats and cops bigger budgets and more jobs?

What if government policies didn’t change when government’s leaders did? What if no matter who won an election, government stayed the same? What if government was really a revolving door of political hacks, bent on exploiting the people while they’re in charge?

What if both parties supported welfare, war, debt, bailouts and big government? What if the rhetoric that candidates displayed on the campaign trail was dumped after electoral victory? What if Barack Obama campaigned as an antiwar, pro-civil liberties candidate, then waged senseless wars while assaulting your rights that the Constitution is supposed to protect? What if George W. Bush campaigned on a platform of nonintervention and small government, then waged a foreign policy of muscular military intervention and a domestic policy of vast government borrowing and growth?

What if Bill Clinton declared the era of big government to be over, but actually just convinced Republicans like Newt Gingrich that they can get what they want out of big government, too? What if the Republicans went along with it?

What if Ronald Reagan spent six years running for president promising to shrink government, but then the government grew while he was in office? What if, notwithstanding Reagan’s ideas and cheerfulness and libertarian rhetoric, there really was no Reagan Revolution?

What if all this is happening again? What if Rick Santorum is being embraced by voters who want small government even though he voted for the Patriot Act, for an expansion of Medicare and for raising the debt ceiling by trillions of dollars? What if Mitt Romney is being embraced by voters who want anyone but Obama, but don’t realize that Romney might as well be Obama on everything from warfare to welfare?

What if Ron Paul is being ignored by the media not because theyclaim he’s unappealing or unelectable, but because he doesn’t fit into the pre-manufactured public opinion mold used by the establishment to pigeonhole the electorate and create the so-called narrative that drives media coverage of elections?

What if the biggest difference between most candidates was not substance but style? What if those stylistic differences were packaged as substantive ones to re-enforce the illusion of a difference between Democrats and Republicans? What if Romney wins and ends up continuing most of the same policies that Obama promoted? What if Obama’s policies, too, are merely extensions of Bush’s?

What if a government that manipulated us could be fired? What if a government that lacked the true and knowing consent of the governed could be dismissed? What if it were possible to have a game-changer? What if we need a Ron Paul to preserve and protect our freedoms from assault by the government?

What if we could make elections matter again? What if we could do something about this?
Image
skitzor

User avatar
Forgotten What The Sky Looks Like
 
Offline
Posts: 2775
Joined: 1 May 03, 3:10 pm
Location: snapping necks and cashing cheques

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Jeatalong » 17 Feb 12, 8:06 am

zomg - many canadites one party - USA are communists :P
Die with style. Fly with Neh'bu Kau Be'Hude
Image
Jeatalong

User avatar
EvE Moderator
 
Offline
Posts: 5022
Joined: 20 Dec 03, 5:51 pm
Location: Parkes

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Nekosan » 18 Feb 12, 1:15 am

AAAAAAWWWWWWWW SHIIIIIIIIIIIT :shock:





I love how they get away with this ****, "lets just make up the election results".
Nekosan

User avatar
Offline? What's 'offline'?
 
Offline
Posts: 3387
Joined: 3 Jan 06, 6:23 pm

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Novocaine » 18 Feb 12, 7:15 am

Sathias wrote:The only part I disagree with is the conclusion that Ron Paul is the answer. I'm not convinced things under Paul would be any different.


Ron Paul is way too radical. In some ways it would be good for him to get in, in other ways it would be bad. In all honesty I think that even if he did legitimately win the election it would be covered up and victory would be given to someone else.

This whole election campaign is embarrassing anyway, even more so than previous years.
PLAYGUUU AAHHHH!
Novocaine

User avatar
Forgotten What The Sky Looks Like
 
Offline
Posts: 2154
Joined: 16 Sep 05, 12:37 pm

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Sathias » 18 Feb 12, 8:26 am

Nekosan wrote:AAAAAAWWWWWWWW SHIIIIIIIIIIIT :shock:





I love how they get away with this ****, "lets just make up the election results".


Unbelievable... at what point do they get in neutral UN staff to make sure fair elections are held? :shock:
Image

"Only the madman is absolutely sure." - Robert Anton Wilson
Sathias

User avatar
Not allowed to leave
 
Offline
Posts: 9122
Joined: 30 Jul 03, 10:49 pm
Location: South Australia, home of Coopers

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Wyld » 18 Feb 12, 10:53 am

I'm in two minds with Ron Paul.

Yup, he's a bit of a mad snake, and some of his ideas are .. well, even the word radical doesn't cover the whole scope and depth of them. The thing is, the other candidates are just as bad but in different ways.

Paul *could* fix much of what's wrong over there. The other candidates will only continue them.

I think in a pros and cons view, across the board, Paul is probably the better option overall, wackyness included.

Also, I'm quite sure a whole bunch of his 'out there' ideas simply won't fly within the entire political machine. Problem is, will he even be able to fix the **** that needs it also ..
Mostly Minecraft via http://www.twitch.tv/wyldstein/ Wooh!

Image
Wyld

User avatar
Known to wear a cool hat
 
Offline
Posts: 10080
Joined: 15 Aug 03, 6:33 pm
Location: Living Large in Adelaide Status: Cranky & Accurate

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby Nekosan » 18 Feb 12, 2:37 pm

Better to have a CHANCE at fixing it by electing someone who will admit it's broken than to just ignore the problem, I think they actually need a huge shakeup at this stage, it's the only thing that can hope to help.
Nekosan

User avatar
Offline? What's 'offline'?
 
Offline
Posts: 3387
Joined: 3 Jan 06, 6:23 pm

Re: U.S. 2012 Election

Unread postby skitzor » 19 Feb 12, 9:50 am

Nekosan wrote:Better to have a CHANCE at fixing it by electing someone who will admit it's broken than to just ignore the problem, I think they actually need a huge shakeup at this stage, it's the only thing that can hope to help.

ehhh. a shakeup at the top won't do much. he needs support in the house and senate.
Image
skitzor

User avatar
Forgotten What The Sky Looks Like
 
Offline
Posts: 2775
Joined: 1 May 03, 3:10 pm
Location: snapping necks and cashing cheques

PreviousNext

Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

x

#{title}

#{text}