US Elections 2012 Part II: The Conventions, Debates and Election results

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Ignoring the sports-like commentary.....


Whenever I see people complaining about the fall of American democracy or the coming of fascism, I have this urge to kick that person to the ground. Countries have lived through worse things and still maintained democracy, and that is because of the will of the people to stand up for what they believe in. If people are not going to have that kind of will when facing the lesser problems of today, I have to say those people deserve the fall of democracy if it ever comes to that.

Sorry, but I really, really need to link this short clip in response to your so called democracy:

This country isn't a democracy, it stopped being one for at least 30 years now.

[willx]

@Sugetsu - what do you think a democracy is? Venezuela is currently a democracy. Ancient Athens with all its slavery and warmongering was a democratic city-state. I'm just saying that even though a country is a democracy doesn't mean you will agree with it's policies..

I may be odd, and it's impractical for this discussion, but recently I have been thinking of democracy like a technology you unlock in a Civ game. It's great in many ways, better than most other forms of government tried, however doesn't necessarily work that well depending on overriding desired policy outcomes and particular civilizations. Oh, and it's possible to be an imperialistic democratic nation. And.. One of my musings is what's the next technology we unlock?

EDIT: And to be clear, the U.S. isn't nearly in as sorry a state as many other nations .. don't throw the baby out with the bath water..

[james0246]

This country isn't a democracy, it stopped being one for at least 30 years now.

The US has never been a democracy (thankfully so). They are a republic.

Though it is closer to an oligarchy now, but this can be shifted back toward a republic.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Sorry, but I really, really need to link this short clip in response to your so called democracy:

This country isn't a democracy, it stopped being one for at least 30 years now.

I don't believe that a political satire movie is sufficient enough to explain what you are trying to say. In fact, I can be blunt and just say you have no real position and am just using what other people say to try and make sense of the world, but then given I haven't spoken with you for that long, that would be going to far.


How about following this saying from the Bull Mouse?

In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

In the end, if all that people are going to do is complain and essentially do nothing, it would solely be the fault of those people if things happen. I have yet to see there being much action at all except talk.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

I have yet to see there being much action at all except talk.

Still curious what action you expect to see taken, since you denounce protesting.

[Sumeragi]

Have I denounced peaceful assembly which does not continuously hinder the workings of daily life and turn wherever they are into some squatter camp? If I have, please link the post, since I'm certain I'm not particularly open to people changing my own words into something completely different.

[Triple_R]

There's an old saying in politics: "Incumbents rarely lose in good economies; they rarely win in bad ones".

And the US has a bad economy right now. People are looking for somebody to blame (and punish) for that, and the current American Administration becomes an easy target.

The fact that Obama had a comfortable lead over Romney before the debates just shows what a very weak candidate Romney is. However, Romney has become a pretty good debater through a helluva lot of practice in the Republican primaries, while Obama was naturally rusty since he never had a primary challenge to go through this time.

My sense is that your average swing voter (i.e. the people that ultimately will decide the US Presidential election) has been thinking the following: "Our current economy is garbage, and so Obama has been a disappointment as President. He doesn't deserve to be re-elected, but this other guy Romney worries me. He doesn't seem to care about most middle class Americans like me. I guess it's going to be another one of those elections where I have to pick the lesser of two evils...".

So Obama's job is to either earn forgiveness or make his performance seem better than how its currently perceived (or make Romney seem unacceptable).

Romney's job is to make himself seem acceptable, and make sure that the public doesn't forgive Obama.

Romney's job is the easier of the two, so the fact he was completely failing at it until the debates shows his weaknesses as a candidate.

But given how widely viewed the debates are, Romney is now starting to achieve the "acceptable" part (where perception is what is most important). Will he fully achieve it? That probably depends on how the rest of the debates go (and how many gaffes Romney makes for his side, and how many gaffes Biden makes for his side; Biden saying that the middle class has been buried over the past four years is one of the worst gaffes I've ever seen - Not as bad as Romney's 47% stuff, but it plays right into the narrative that the Romney Campaign wants to tell).

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Have I denounced peaceful assembly which does not continuously hinder the workings of daily life and turn wherever they are into some squatter camp? If I have, please link the post, since I'm certain I'm not particularly open to people changing my own words into something completely different.

Protests don't work that way. Never have. That's a social gathering. By your own words there, you're saying the Civil Rights protests were not protests. The only part of what you said that doesn't apply to the Civil Rights movement is the squatter camp part.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

I don't believe that a political satire movie is sufficient enough to explain what you are trying to say. In fact, I can be blunt and just say you have no real position and am just using what other people say to try and make sense of the world, but then given I haven't spoken with you for that long, that would be going to far.

Ok let me be real clear then:

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Whenever I see people complaining about the fall of American democracy or the coming of fascism, I have this urge to kick that person to the ground. Countries have lived through worse things and still maintained democracy, and that is because of the will of the people to stand up for what they believe in.

You believe that you live in democracy. You don't. There is nothing you can do to change the US with mild actions. The media will shut you down, just like they have done to the Occupy wall street movement. The country is an oligarchy right now and the result of this election could solidify that foundation even more.

The ultimate goal of the GOP is to privatize everything. They want a laissez faire state, and Americans all over the country are supporting this idea even if it is against their own interest, why, because they can't think critically.

The only way to change the US in my opinion is through some bloody revolution that I certainly don't want to take part of, or through the course of decades of intense protests.

[Ridwan]

@Sumeragi : To be fair, getting worked up over unruly protesters only amounts to scratching the surface. Protests that have gone wrong, are wrong. But one doesn't cure diseases by bludgeoning their symtomps. It's but appropriate to set apart the actual problems to address from their reflections in public sphere, and avoid falling into the trap of getting too incited over the later. Frankly, you do come accross as setting the bar too low on how proper protesting should be so far, but perhaps it's only us being stucked in the emotional quicksand....


Oh and one more thing I should inform everyone in this thread about : don't romanticize democracy too much. No governmental system is immune to elite domination and corruption, including democracy of every incarnation. US has never been a perfect democracy. No country has ever been.

[willx]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Ok let me be real clear then:

You believe that you live in democracy. You don't. There is nothing you can do to change the US with mild actions. The media will shut you down, just like they have done to the Occupy wall street movement. The country is an oligarchy right now and the result of this election could solidify that foundation even more.

The ultimate goal of the GOP is to privatize everything. They want a laissez faire state, and Americans all over the country are supporting this idea even if it is against their own interest, why, because they can't think critically.

The only way to change the US in my opinion is through some bloody revolution that I certainly don't want to take part of, or through the course of decades of intense protests.

Emphasis mine. I'm not American so I don't have the same skin in the game as you all do .. but I dislike it when people are being illogical. FYI, I'm also a card-carrying member of a Canadian political party.

You say in your own words 1) There's nothing can be done, 2) There's some media conspiracy that shut down "Occupy" and 3) The country is already an oligarchy and this election could make it worse.

I'm not going to address 2) because both sides, Dems/Reps point at the media and say it's being unfair to them. When they cover protests, the protesters say their message is being taken out of context and they're being censored.. and the more conservative say they're being "sensational." There's no conspiracy.

But, for your points 1 & 3, they contradict each other logically. You get that right? The fact that it could be worse means that it also could possibly not be. The fact that the Republicans may not get elected means there is stuff you can do -- you could go out, volunteer, be part of the democratic electoral engine. Or maybe your time is otherwise too valuable? Donate money? Offer to round up people and drive them to the polls? Just because you don't necessarily see the difference you make doesn't mean you can't do anything.. Otherwise you're being apathetic and can't see how a single person contributes to the whole. Remember giant skyscrapers and all that humanity has accomplished, are at the end of the day .. built by men and women. A lot of them. One step at a time.

@Aegir - Not trying to romanticize democracy, not at all (as you could see from my comment above), but we're here discussing political rhetoric, I'm not willing to give people a free pass to just state it here and walk away

[Ridwan]

It's just hard to see Romney winning. Obama wasn't in the shape for the last debate, but he still has everything else going for him. For anyone who doesn't like any of the big two can vote for any of the minor candidates that have no chance of winning should any come closest to your views. That will at least make a statement, regardless of whether it will be heard by anyone...

@wilx : I certainly didn't direct it to anyone in particular, especially you. I directed that to this thread in general. As for how I think of political debates in general, see my signature.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by willx

I'm not going to address 2) because both sides, Dems/Reps point at the media and say it's being unfair to them. When they cover protests, the protesters say their message is being taken out of context and they're being censored.. and the more conservative say they're being "sensational." There's no conspiracy.

Seriously? There might not be a bunch of people meeting in a dark room in an undisclosed location but there is definitely a very selective way in which the media chooses what to prioritize. For example; the SOPA story had virtually no coverage in the mainstream media simply because the media corporations had lobby for it. Occupy wall street doesn't have the backing of wealthy donors and actively refuses to get involved with money and politics, this is something that the tea party embraced, hence it received wide coverage by the main stream media.

I could go on and on but if you don't agree with me there is nothing I can do to convince you otherwise.

But, for your points 1 & 3, they contradict each other logically. You get that right? The fact that it could be worse means that it also could possibly not be. The fact that the Republicans may not get elected means there is stuff you can do -- you could go out, volunteer, be part of the democratic electoral engine. Or maybe your time is otherwise too valuable? Donate money? Offer to round up people and drive them to the polls? Just because you don't necessarily see the difference you make doesn't mean you can't do anything.. Otherwise you're being apathetic and can't see how a single person contributes to the whole. Remember giant skyscrapers and all that humanity has accomplished, are at the end of the day .. built by men and women. A lot of them. One step at a time.

You are right about this point though, I could embrace the rules of the game and help promote democrats. But in all honesty I am very disheartened by the political system. Besides, if the democrats win it won't change the direction in which the country is headed, it will only slow down the changes. The first priority is to get money out of politics and that isn't something that neither party is willing to do. The occupy wall street movement is fighting for this change... but look at what the coverage they are getting.

I am for something far more drastic and revolutionary called the Zeitgeist movement, which wants to do away with politics and corporations, among many other things, and for that I am doing way more than just talking about it.

[ganbaru]

Romney to stop talking about former slain SEAL after mother's complaint
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8991JW20121010

Doherty's mother complained about Romney, who faces President Barack Obama on November 6, using the story of her son's death.

"I don't trust Romney. He shouldn't make my son's death part of his political agenda. It's wrong to use these brave young men, who wanted freedom for all, to degrade Obama," Barbara Doherty told 7News in Boston.

A Mitt Romney Abortion Timeline
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczyn...edium=buzzfeed
Can we still talk of flip-flop if he change 8 time of position on this subject?

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

A Mitt Romney Abortion Timeline
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczyn...edium=buzzfeed
Can we still talk of flip-flop if he change 8 time of position on this subject?

Well.... It depends on how you count things.

1. Essentially pro-choice (I support Roe v. Wade)
2. Pro-choice ("Unequivocally")

(Shift)

3. Pro-life but will maintain status quo

(Shift)

4. Will change law if given the chance (assuming there is consensus)

5. Supports extending amendment to ban abortion (Not directly challenging Roe v. Wade)

(Shift)

6/7. Return abortion to the states (Overturn Roe v. Wade)

(Shift)

8. Courts decide abortion (regardless of personal opinion)

(Shift)

9. There is no official legislation that is part of current agenda. However, if one comes along, he will support.

There has been a minimum of five shifts (not necessarily flip flopping), with more depending on whether you consider you consider 1/2 or 4/5 a shift.

[Urzu 7]

After the debate, which a lot of people think Romney 'won' (which is crazy, he didn't even stand by his positions and a lot of his points of debate didn't hold up well), people say Romney has regained some ground. Has it hurt the Obama campaign much? I see ABC News hyping this up, but I don't know how much of it is true, and how much of it is ABC News hyping things up (as we all know, TV News broadcasts always hype up things).

How negative has it been for the Obama campaign? Are their chances still good, it is just that Obama pretty much had an oppurtunity to send the Romney campaign to it's grave that night?

How is Obama doing in the swing states, generally speaking, compared to Romney? How is he fairing a week or so after the debate? I know he had a good lead.

[Mr. DJ]

People scare me sometimes...

CNN took a poll about PBS's budget...

7% of people thought they received about HALF of the US Budget...you gotta be fucking shitting me.

30% thought their budget was 5%

They actually get 0.014% (22.3 million) and Romney wants to cut funding *facepalm* meanwhile we've spent like 5 trillion on our "War on Terror" -_-

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Mr. DJ

CNN took a poll about PBS's budget...

7% of people thought they received about HALF of the US Budget...you gotta be fucking shitting me.

Somebody please tell me all those people are rednecks that live in the mountains and never made it beyond eighth grade... ._.

Oor maaybe...most of those votes were from goons from 4chan just trolling us all.

[SaintessHeart]

The rednecks do actually receive a substantial sum.....through farm subsidies.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Mr. DJ

People scare me sometimes...

CNN took a poll about PBS's budget...

7% of people thought they received about HALF of the US Budget...you gotta be fucking shitting me.

30% thought their budget was 5%

They actually get 0.014% (22.3 million) and Romney wants to cut funding *facepalm* meanwhile we've spent like 5 trillion on our "War on Terror" -_-

Talk about a snapshot of why the USA is on the slippery slope of dark oblivion.