outunderthestars
Banned
Or a bad Rage Against the Machine T-shirt.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
United States Election: Nov 6, 2012 |OT| - Barack Obama Re-elected
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
Or a bad Rage Against the Machine T-shirt.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Bigger sample size, lower range for the confidence interval
(thanks college statistics!)
(thanks college statistics!)
Karma Kramer
Banned
Hey I tried to debate points a few pages back but was ignored. Everyone's too interested with who is gonna win and not about the issues. So all I can do now is remind people (maybe) that we own this country and we don't have to continue this charade. Just voicing my opposition to the way things are headed in this Democracy of ours.
as opposed to what? the echo chamber that these threads are? nobody has to agree, but man, if anyone posts that they think romney might win, or that they don't care for obama from right or left, it's a pile on every time. god forbid a civil libertarian or true progressive might criticize obama. not that romney's better at all. not surprising "outsider" people don't want to participate in these threads.
I like your posts, don't stop.
If there is a pile on for anyone who believes that Romney is going to win, it's only because it's a delusion that runs face-first into the countless polling models that have been run throughout this campaign.
And I don't believe you'll see anyone on GAF claiming that Obama is a true progressive (unless they're Kosmo, and he's banned). What most people argue -- and, I agree with this -- is that third party candidates cannot exist in the current frame work that we have because of our first past the post system. We're not a parliamentary system, which is much more welcome towards the existence of third parties. And if the Green Party or the Libertarian Party did somehow gain dominance in an election and become the two major parties, they would revert to the same dichotomy that we see today.
If you really want to change the way that corporations run politics, vote for a Democrat who will put in Liberal SOCTUS justices that can overturn Citizens United and drastically cut back the ways in which elections are funded. And fundamentally change the electorate. One is easily achievable, the other will take years.
How do you suggest we change it? We'll be saddled with this broken system for at least another decade or two, until all of the older voters die off and we're actually able to shift some of the mindset of the country.
2000 called, they want your Ralph Nader talking points back.
NullPointer
Member
I'm interested in who wins because of the issues. I think your problem is timing. At this point, with the election nearing its conclusion and people scrambling to get out the vote, doing your public service message of reminding people that we're fucked no matter what happens just comes across as an angry old man screaming at the clouds.
Yeah, we get it.
The problem is never simply having an opinion contrary to the perceived consensus. The problem is always the lack of support and the quality of the reasoning behind those positions. If you think Obama will lose, you need to explain how the polling is biased in his favor. I'm not familiar with the positions you've taken or those you're speaking on behalf of, but anyone who comes in and parrots some PR nonsense about over sampling or other such debunked talking points will not be treated kindly.
The same goes for disagreements with the Obama platform. Reasonable criticisms that aren't simply GOP talking points will at the least earn respect from good quality posters. Just be sure you can argue and support those positions. Everyone grows tired of those who cannot or simply do not.
Bel Marduk
Banned
I gladly support Obama on most issues and also think he's going to win. It is, in the US in 2012, a two party system. Pontificating on behalf of a third party is nothing more than intellectual masturbation.
i've seen people post endless terribly hilarious electoral maps with obama winning states he has no chance of. then i've seen people post romney winning maps where they have him hitting a few swing states for a narrow victory and they get bombarded with SOURCE? SOURCE? SOURCE? i'm not talking about people coming in and calling silver the left's rush limbaugh or garbage like that. Fact is, this forum and others like reddit are highly biased towards a specific ideology, and pretending it's not an echo chamber is kind of crazy. consequently it also shouldn't be surprising that the gang up mentality that exists turns off anyone from participating who doesn't meet the orthodoxy.
Wow, so original. Haven't heard that cliche bullshit before.
and my point continues to be made.
Xdrive05
Member
Because as well all know, talking points are not true if Ralph Nader used them 12 year ago.
Sorry, I was on my phone. I'm talking about Obamacare. But you and I have been around this one a couple of times before.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Starting now by supporting Third Party candidates. Listen to this section of a speech by Ralph Nadar on how we change it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsPGHBLcLtc#t=19m00s
All you need is 1% of the population to be active with the political process. IE so each District has about 1,000-2,000 people who instead of bird watching or watching football, they go to town halls, they keep an eye on our congress. And that is all you need for change. A few of us can enact change. Suggesting its too hard or that we should wait is the wrong approach. It's immoral. We know our rights are being taking away, we know the corporations are getting more power, and we know Obama is in bed with them. We need knew yardsticks to measure our country. Obama should be asked what he plans to do to give power back to the people from a few. But the fact that he doesn't even get into that, in depth, well its the giant corporations. Wealth gap, who knows how much wealth now in off shore accounts.
20-25 TIMES MORE PRODUCTIVE PER WORKER THAN in 1900.... and how can a economy grow 25 times more and not abolished poverty, decent housing, decent opportunities, medicare for all, etc etc... The corporate system is defective because it cycles again and feeds off itself. We no longer live in a capitalistic society, but crony. Huge tax cuts, payoffs to big corporations. no consequence of actions (BP Oil), Wars started unilaterally based on LIES. No accountability, no transparency because the news media sucks...
polyh3dron
Banned
It really doesn't apply here. There are huge differences between the candidates this time and like in 2000, if you don't vote for the guy on the left, you're basically allowing the guy on the right to get elected. And 2000 sure worked well for us, now didn't it.
NullPointer
Member
They're unsafe at any speed.
The third parties in this country are shit and will never accomplish anything with how they operate.
The Green Party and Libertarian Party needs to focus all their efforts on the state level, focusing on getting house seats, becoming mayors, maybe even shooting for governor.
They need to build from the ground up, not blow all their load on the pie in the sky dream of president. Even if they became president, through some craziness, they would accomplish nothing because everyone in the house and senate would be Dems and Republicans and work against them.
How is it cliche bullshit?
Do you have examples? I've seen electoral maps with Obama winning close battleground states but I haven't seen anyone post a map seriously that shows him winning clear Romney states. And even when people start to wonder if Obama could pick up states he isn't projected to be close in the response is usually to look at the polls and stop dreaming.
Do you have a position you'd like to present and defend? I promise that if it's reasonably well thought out you won't be thrown out of the thread.
Black Republican
Member
If you're concerned about huge tax cuts for corporations, abolishing poverty, and providing universal, government-supported health care, why did you throw your weight behind Ron Paul? In fact, if you're advocating the Green Party platform right now, why did you support a party whose domestic agenda is nearly the Green Party's diametric opposite?
Karma Kramer
Banned
Gore won the votes in Florida but bent over and took it. He could have challenged it and had them wait till they counted all the votes (which is what democracy is about) and he would have won. So stop peddling this bullshit. And stop blaming third parties because YOUR guy lost. If you want Obama to win, go out and knock on doors. Don't guilt trip other individuals with their own beliefs.
The more delusional the better the tears
there are dozens of politics related threads, I can't begin to show you the specific example I was referencing. I have zero reason to make it up, it's simply my personal observations.
i believe i did present and am defending a position - that these politics threads tend to be the type of pile-ons that discourage dissenting voices. some people are quite reasonable. the majority are drive by "lol fuck third parties" or "all republicans are insane" and are posted with no recriminations, as long as they are the "correct" opinion.
I still enjoy reading these threads, because there are good posters who cut through the garbage, but there is a lot of me tooism, pile on, and echo chamber. don't mind me, i'm going back to lurking.
Karma Kramer
Banned
I supported Ron Paul because he was the best GOP option during the debates. I wanted the GOP to have someone who is anti-bush era foreign policy, someone who would actually challenge Obama on the crap he has been doing the past 4 years. Also Paul is not for crony capitalism, Wall Street, BP, etc would have all been jailed for their violations (like they should be) and while that kind of stuff would continue, it would be less frequent.
Journeywalker
Member
It's not a bad point to make, but you're pissing into the wind if you think people will be interested in that conversation at this point in the election season.
It's sad that Congress has forgotten that there's this thing called governance, and--unlike politics--it isn't a zero-sum game. I think, however, that people will be more receptive to these kinds of conversations between the close of the election and April 29th, the end of the first 100 days.
heliosRAzi
Banned
And Ron Paul doesn't like the Civil Rights Act of 64
Sir Garbageman
Member
This is a fucking travesty. That is all.
SteveWinwood
Member
Ron Paul thread 4.0
Xdrive05
Member
Sure it does. He said a factual statement, and it's as true now as it was back then.
I agree. Doesn't change the fact that whoever wins, America loses in the same exact way. Just to a lesser degree if it's Obama. It's a fact of the direction in which things are going.
Obama will do some good things again, and he will continue to fuck us over in other ways which conveniently shift power from the people to the few. Just like the last four years.
It sucks, and I think the alternative is much worse, but let's not act like we're ushering in the golden age by keeping him in office. Tallest midget and all that.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Obama and Romney don't like the Human right to due process.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
Unban RidleyScott pls mods.
Any one of the US Senate could have challenged the 2000 election, but none chose to. If something happen this time there will be at least Republican Senator that will challenge it.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Nice post.
In a Ron Paul administration, violations by Wall Street firms wouldn't be violations at all. If you're concerned about regulatory capture, you are supposed to enhance oversight, not eliminate it.
Well good for you.
It's cliche bullshit because I hear it the time with ZERO examples of how Obama is "shifting more power to the few" etc. or how it impacts their lives.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Source? This is completely false. Listen to this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gLDzDklTRU
Also let me fix that for you...
SouthernDragon
Member
Wait, did someone just complain that we're all too preoccupied with poll watching in a thread about THE ELECTION 2 days before ELECTION DAY?
...
Obama enhanced oversight.
This whole "both parties are just as bad" is fucking lazy.
...
Obama enhanced oversight.
This whole "both parties are just as bad" is fucking lazy.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Well by not prosecuting Bush on War Crimes, Wall Street, BP Oil, etc... and increasing prosecutions on Medical Marijuana, then yeah he is shifting more power to a few by allowing them to push their profits and agenda without consequences.
Why? The NDAA? Gitmo? Both of those situations have asterisks on them in terms of the ability of the President to veto or dissolve that's more complicated than a Reddit drive by post.
Obama's choice to appeal and defend the most controversial part of the NDAA is disconcerning. But it's more complicated than "Gitmo is open, the NDAA is signed, Obama hates civil liberties"
Dude Abides
Banned
Ron Paul thinks the government has virtually no business regulating business. Ron Paul thinks tort litigation should replace environmental regulation. He'd be BP's best friend.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Not really his legal team is actively trying to keep that part of the bill in. He wants it... you just choose to believe his rhetoric.
http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-administration-fights-for-the-ndaa-2012-9
gutter_trash
Banned
what is going here? 3rd party supporters hijacking thread? you won't bust 2%
- Status