Thread: About congress's last debacle

What you're doing here is agreeing with me except you're trying to contrast the terms 'talk into' and 'condition' when they basically mean the same thing. Not sure why.

Because "talked into" implies some sort of rational method of winning the public over. It implies they used reason. I'm implying they used persistence to drown out reason. I'm actually trying to explain to you HOW they were talked into this, basically. You said yourself you didn't understand how.

Originally Posted by Xei

I think I've seen Gary Johnson on Youtube and he seemed great, although I think I recall him saying something concerning about something important.

I never realised your education to military ratio is so ridiculously out of line. I mean, it's literally beyond all reason, less than a tenth! On this side of the pond education takes about double the money of defence, so that's a difference of a factor of more than 20. It's unbelievable that the American population has been talked into it.

HAHAHAH, yeah, that's how they did it.

Well, nobody is voting for the candidates proposing to drastically reduce military spending and increase education spending. So I guess they've been talked into doing that.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Because "talked into" implies some sort of rational method of winning the public over. It implies they used reason.

Okay, well that wasn't the implication I intended.

No one votes for them because no one knows about them except for people who inform themselves from sources other than corporate-funded media.

Originally Posted by Xei

Well, nobody is voting for the candidates proposing to drastically reduce military spending and increase education spending. So I guess they've been talked into doing that.


Okay, well that wasn't the implication I intended.

Sort of, but I don't think most people even realize that they are doing that. They see a situation where 2 candidates have opposing views on other issues they consider important, things like healthcare, and they completely ignore the fact that they have the same views on military spending. Or they know about it but they think the other issue is too important to let the other candidate win. So many people in this country refuse to vote 3rd party or independent because they are literally afraid of the other parties candidate.

This is mainly because of the way media is used. To coerce rather than inform. These people have been convinced that voting for a third party candidate is a waste of a vote. This is basically what my 2 of government teachers said even(in class, and I didn't even go to public school).

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but only the richest people in America can afford a decent campaign that will hold up against the big dogs - you almost need massive big bank financing like Obama had in order to be considered a contender. And that kind of financing comes with a price tag attached. We're talking about candidates who are pretty well bought and paid for by huge corporations like oil companies or big banks. Nobody else even gets far enough to be heard about on television.

And who's gonna vote for a candidate they didn't see on TV like the "real" candidates?

And people wonder why we are always bitching about the U.S. candidates. Outside the U.S. (and even to the more naive U.S. citizens), there seems to be this misconception that our electoral system is one that actually works, or is as simple as; "everyone gets an honest opportunity to see what their candidates are going to be like in their Presidency, so if we take a vote on who should win, we can only blame ourselves if that person fucks things up! It's brilliant!" It doesn't, and it's not. Top candidates are bought; campaign promises are broken; votes are miscounted; machines are rigged; questions are dodged; sincere (if possible), less-wealthy candidates are swept into obscurity; people vote more out of bias and prejudice than with an actual awareness of the issues; lawmakers create laws based on either dogmatic precedence or a need to line their pockets; voters are conditioned by manipulative and polarizing, mainstream media outlets (why do you think FOXNews calls itself the "Most Powerful" name in news?' Anybody ever actually stopped and tried to figure that out?); information is withheld and classified; geo-political events are coordinated in ways that would help to sway popular opinion toward certain goals. etc. etc.

At face-value, the system looks like something that should work. At it's most basic, 'democracy' seems like just that; a way for every voice to be heard, and for everyone to have a God-given chance at changing the course of history, by offering their perspective on things. It's a fairy tale - a rouse - and it's not how our government actually works, I'm afraid.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

At it's most basic, 'democracy' seems like just that; a way for every voice to be heard, and for everyone to have a God-given chance at changing the course of history

It did work that way until it became a big money game. Now career politicians are all multi millionaires if not multi billionaires. And they don't want to lose that cushy position, so they do whatever it takes to keep it - total cut-throat politics and mudslinging.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

It did work that way until it became a big money game. Now career politicians are all multi millionaires if not multi billionaires. And they don't want to lose that cushy position, so they do whatever it takes to keep it - total cut-throat politics and mudslinging.

Agreed. I should have been more specific. It was much more just, back in the day, I'm sure. But, of course, the longer the will of the power-hungry is suppressed by the will of the every-day Joe, the more aggressive the power-hungry will become in trying to resume and retain their power. Once they figure out how to work 'within the system', in order to do that, the system itself becomes corrupt. These days, it's become increasingly easy to exploit loopholes and sway the opinions of the masses. That 'win at all costs' mentality that permeates nearly all positions of wealth and power, on some level (lawyers, politicians, CEOs), is not going to go away anytime soon, and it's why so many of the American people are so jaded, these days, when it comes to voting. What's the use in voting for someone, if the chance that they are actually telling the truth in their campaigns might as well be 50/50, ya know?

Some guy said about the removal the Italian and Greek PMs that he'd rather be led by the first 100 names in the phone book. I feel the same way about the US electoral process.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Some guy said about the removal the Italian and Greek PMs that he'd rather be led by the first 100 names in the phone book. I feel the same way about the US electoral process.

I'd rather be led by a bunch of first graders. In kindergarten they teach you that hitting and stealing are wrong. If politicians could do that(and extend these rules to their agents) they'd be better than the guys in office.

Originally Posted by StonedApe

I'd rather be led by a bunch of first graders. In kindergarten they teach you that hitting and stealing are wrong. If politicians could do that(and extend these rules to their agents) they'd be better than the guys in office.

And in kindergarten economics, they know that you need money to be able to pay for something.

Xei and O' should just get it over with and fuck, release all that built up tension that seems to bubble up whenever they post in the same thread.

Originally Posted by GavinGill

Xei and O' should just get it over with and fuck, release all that built up tension that seems to bubble up whenever they post in the same thread.

You'd like that, wouldn't you? Dirty boy.
Lol.