In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Please dispense with the holier-than-thou broad strokes condemning those who actually find cause to be alarmed by current events, it adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I wouldn't mind it so much if people were at all focused on how ineffectual our system is and why he's going to get away with it and what we need to do to stop it from happening in the future, but that's not what any of this is about.
It's just 100+ pages of "OMG TRUMP RUSSIA!!?!?!?"
Ummm, yeah, it's kind of a big deal. Our top elected official is waist-deep in a pretty serious scandal, and the implications are fucking awful. Just because you think it's not the biggest deal of them all doesn't mean other people can't feel differently. Idealistic pontificating about every last nook and cranny of corruption in the system is useless from a practical perspective, so people don't waste their time.
How many Americans think about changing your election process to open the door to more political parties? You have only two parties which are more or less the same.
One thing I've learned throughout this thread is that there is no actual barriers in the rules or process of the election system that bars other parties from participating.
It's entirely a social and cultural view of politics that sustains the two party system. Voters don't want to consider anything except Democrats or Republicans, and serious political contenders either stand alone as independents, or bring themselves into the parties to have a "serious" run.
Even on a State level, everything is Democrat or Republican, despite no requirement (from what I know) for State governments to affiliate with Federal.
Yes but the problem is more complicated then that.
The real fault is First Past The Post (FPTP). Winning is all the matters, coming second does nothing.
So assuming the following hypothetical situation.
Left group 1: 20% Left group 2: 25% Center group 18% Right group 1: 5% Right group 2: 32%
Right group 2 wins the election and their candidate becomes Senator/President whatever No one else's vote matter
If Left group 1 and 2 work together as 1 party they would have 45% (assuming no one leaves for another party) and they win instead.
FPTP systems devolve into a 2 party system because winning is all that matters and you need the largest possible coalition of voters to beat the other side.
If an independent were to rise in votes their ideals would get snatched up by whatever party is closer to their ideology to allow that party to capture his votes. Because splitting votes between the 2 means that neither wins. This is also why there are so many lies. Politicians want X but need to promise Y to win voters because voters who want X are not numerous enough to get you elected.
In a proportional system where coming 2nd isn't worthless you get a lot more nuance in choice because candidates can afford to cater to a more niche voter bloc.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials(and otherwise) having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else. Coming in and condemning people for not holding the same values as you doesn't take the conversation anywhere, it just makes people not willing to listen to you.
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Please dispense with the holier-than-thou broad strokes condemning those who actually find cause to be alarmed by current events, it adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I wouldn't mind it so much if people were at all focused on how ineffectual our system is and why he's going to get away with it and what we need to do to stop it from happening in the future, but that's not what any of this is about.
It's just 100+ pages of "OMG TRUMP RUSSIA!!?!?!?"
Ummm, yeah, it's kind of a big deal. Our top elected official is waist-deep in a pretty serious scandal, and the implications are fucking awful. Just because you think it's not the biggest deal of them all doesn't mean other people can't feel differently. Idealistic pontificating about every last nook and cranny of corruption in the system is useless from a practical perspective, so people don't waste their time.
How many Americans think about changing your election process to open the door to more political parties? You have only two parties which are more or less the same.
One thing I've learned throughout this thread is that there is no actual barriers in the rules or process of the election system that bars other parties from participating.
It's entirely a social and cultural view of politics that sustains the two party system. Voters don't want to consider anything except Democrats or Republicans, and serious political contenders either stand alone as independents, or bring themselves into the parties to have a "serious" run.
Even on a State level, everything is Democrat or Republican, despite no requirement (from what I know) for State governments to affiliate with Federal.
it doesn't bar participation; but actually winning is quite difficult due to the nature of human psychology, plus some social stuff that's built up. Also the nature of first past the post elections makes it somewhat more prone to 2-partyness. plus the growth of the party apparatus (apparati?) makes the trend stronger.
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Please dispense with the holier-than-thou broad strokes condemning those who actually find cause to be alarmed by current events, it adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I wouldn't mind it so much if people were at all focused on how ineffectual our system is and why he's going to get away with it and what we need to do to stop it from happening in the future, but that's not what any of this is about.
It's just 100+ pages of "OMG TRUMP RUSSIA!!?!?!?"
Ummm, yeah, it's kind of a big deal. Our top elected official is waist-deep in a pretty serious scandal, and the implications are fucking awful. Just because you think it's not the biggest deal of them all doesn't mean other people can't feel differently. Idealistic pontificating about every last nook and cranny of corruption in the system is useless from a practical perspective, so people don't waste their time.
How many Americans think about changing your election process to open the door to more political parties? You have only two parties which are more or less the same.
One thing I've learned throughout this thread is that there is no actual barriers in the rules or process of the election system that bars other parties from participating.
It's entirely a social and cultural view of politics that sustains the two party system. Voters don't want to consider anything except Democrats or Republicans, and serious political contenders either stand alone as independents, or bring themselves into the parties to have a "serious" run.
Even on a State level, everything is Democrat or Republican, despite no requirement (from what I know) for State governments to affiliate with Federal.
Yes but the problem is more complicated then that.
The real fault is First Past The Post (FPTP). Winning is all the matters, coming second does nothing.
So assuming the following hypothetical situation.
Left group 1: 20% Left group 2: 25% Center group 18% Right group 1: 5% Right group 2: 32%
Right group 2 wins the election and their candidate becomes Senator/President whatever No one else's vote matter
If Left group 1 and 2 work together as 1 party they would have 45% (assuming no one leaves for another party) and they win instead.
FPTP systems devolve into a 2 party system because winning is all that matters and you need the largest possible coalition of voters to beat the other side.
If an independent were to rise in votes their ideals would get snatched up by whatever party is closer to their ideology to allow that party to capture his votes.
This is also why there are so many lies. Politicians want X but need to promise Y to win voters because voters who want X are not numerous enough to get you elected.
In a proportional system where coming 2nd isn't worthless you get a lot more nuance in choice because candidates can afford to cater to a more niche voter bloc.
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Please dispense with the holier-than-thou broad strokes condemning those who actually find cause to be alarmed by current events, it adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I wouldn't mind it so much if people were at all focused on how ineffectual our system is and why he's going to get away with it and what we need to do to stop it from happening in the future, but that's not what any of this is about.
It's just 100+ pages of "OMG TRUMP RUSSIA!!?!?!?"
The Russia story is still developing and we don't know what/if he will get away with anything. The problems with our electoral system and overall governing is largely already understood but still important. Just because people are keeping up with the never ending flood of new information on Russia doesn't mean they don't know about or care about other issues as well. I can be aghast about Russia/Trump developments and also know that gerrymandering is bad.
The Russia/Trump connection may end up being one of the most wild and insane political stories of my lifetime. While some will be too brash or hyper focused on Russia/Trump, don't think problems with our overall political system aren't being exposed by this mess. People I've known my whole life that probably couldn't tell you who their state senator was in 2015 are suddenly actively engaged in the political process. If nothing comes comes from the 2016 election, it definitely sparked an interest in politics to a larger audience and ignited the otherwise abject and apathetic in meaningful way.
Politics and society move at a snails pace but I truly believe a significant portion of the electorate has become more aware as a result of this shit show and I think that's a good thing down the road. Progress is made by incredibly slim margins, if even a small percent of the previously apathetic or disenfranchised become engaged, those inches turn into miles over the years.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Or you could snidely ignore the article posted about the class action lawsuit bringing that issue through the court system.
Honest question here, in your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government done in this case?
Okay, I feel like I need to explain why the rocketing of the prison population was a bipartisan effort, and why Democrats like Bill and Hillary Clinton (pretty prominent Democrats) embraced prison labor even in their own home (Gov Mansion) Bill had the power to stop it and didn't, Hillary didn't even think it something worth thinking about. Instead she pontificated on what intellectual shortcomings made these people work for practically nothing for her just for a chance to be outside the prison walls for however long they could (or volunteers as some may call them)
That's symbolic of the Democratic party when it comes to prison labor (modern American slavery).
I mean I could go and show you how countless prisoners are in prison on bullshit charges (usually a parole/probation violation like smoking pot to deal with how incredibly messed up our country is to people who have paid their debt to society), or how every year people who were sentenced to die by our system are exonerated by pro bono lawyers who are ashamed of a system that can convict an innocent person of a crime they didn't commit. Or how our prisons are in such deplorable conditions it's often cruel and unusual just to have to serve time (so little rehabilitation it's pathetic),or that people without family have no money in prison. That many people report it being easier for them to find drugs inside than out (although more expensive inside), because our "guards" are often just state sanctioned thugs who see their job not as protecting inmates, but punishing them.
I mean it's a long and sordid list of the problems with the American Prison Industrial Complex, the idea that some lawsuit shows it's being addressed is absolutely moronic.
And I raise the question again: In your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government have done in this case?
Because if you want to prove that you understand political nuance, this is where you would do it. Because Prison systems, law enforcement, criminal law, it's all a very complicated system spanning multiple government organizations, multiple government bodies, and multiple laws that are both state and Federal. And this is true in basically every nation in the world that splits federal and state/provincial/territorial governments.
If this goes through the court system, is deemed to violate laws, and the prisoners win, then this shows what is being done is illegal (within civil law). So, from there, how would a Federal Democrat super majority in all three Federal branches get the Texas police, court and prison system to change their criminal laws, convict less people, arrest less people, and have less people kept in prison? How would they ensure that the laws that are in place are not violated by privately run prisons so that lawsuits are not required to fix the issues?
And no, those are not rhetorical questions, and no, I'm not expecting you to have a fully detailed legal essay for any of these. But if you feel like participating in political discussions, it would be nice to have more thought from you that extends past "things are broken and Democrats didn't fix it".
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Or you could snidely ignore the article posted about the class action lawsuit bringing that issue through the court system.
Honest question here, in your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government done in this case?
Okay, I feel like I need to explain why the rocketing of the prison population was a bipartisan effort, and why Democrats like Bill and Hillary Clinton (pretty prominent Democrats) embraced prison labor even in their own home (Gov Mansion) Bill had the power to stop it and didn't, Hillary didn't even think it something worth thinking about. Instead she pontificated on what intellectual shortcomings made these people work for practically nothing for her just for a chance to be outside the prison walls for however long they could (or volunteers as some may call them)
That's symbolic of the Democratic party when it comes to prison labor (modern American slavery).
I mean I could go and show you how countless prisoners are in prison on bullshit charges (usually a parole/probation violation like smoking pot to deal with how incredibly messed up our country is to people who have paid their debt to society), or how every year people who were sentenced to die by our system are exonerated by pro bono lawyers who are ashamed of a system that can convict an innocent person of a crime they didn't commit. Or how our prisons are in such deplorable conditions it's often cruel and unusual just to have to serve time (so little rehabilitation it's pathetic),or that people without family have no money in prison. That many people report it being easier for them to find drugs inside than out (although more expensive inside), because our "guards" are often just state sanctioned thugs who see their job not as protecting inmates, but punishing them.
I mean it's a long and sordid list of the problems with the American Prison Industrial Complex, the idea that some lawsuit shows it's being addressed is absolutely moronic.
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Please dispense with the holier-than-thou broad strokes condemning those who actually find cause to be alarmed by current events, it adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I wouldn't mind it so much if people were at all focused on how ineffectual our system is and why he's going to get away with it and what we need to do to stop it from happening in the future, but that's not what any of this is about.
It's just 100+ pages of "OMG TRUMP RUSSIA!!?!?!?"
Ummm, yeah, it's kind of a big deal. Our top elected official is waist-deep in a pretty serious scandal, and the implications are fucking awful. Just because you think it's not the biggest deal of them all doesn't mean other people can't feel differently. Idealistic pontificating about every last nook and cranny of corruption in the system is useless from a practical perspective, so people don't waste their time.
I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Like people keep making fun, but no one has even tried to show how we get enough Republicans to impeach Trump, or how/why he wouldn't just pardon anything that managed to actually make it through a show trial.
I don't get if you guys don't understand how the system works (maybe I'm missing something no one has mentioned yet) or are just still thinking something about this is going to plummet Trumps approval among Republicans enough to get ~13+ mystery senators to vote to impeach their party's president?
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Or you could snidely ignore the article posted about the class action lawsuit bringing that issue through the court system.
Honest question here, in your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government done in this case?
Okay, I feel like I need to explain why the rocketing of the prison population was a bipartisan effort, and why Democrats like Bill and Hillary Clinton (pretty prominent Democrats) embraced prison labor even in their own home (Gov Mansion) Bill had the power to stop it and didn't, Hillary didn't even think it something worth thinking about. Instead she pontificated on what intellectual shortcomings made these people work for practically nothing for her just for a chance to be outside the prison walls for however long they could (or volunteers as some may call them)
That's symbolic of the Democratic party when it comes to prison labor (modern American slavery).
I mean I could go and show you how countless prisoners are in prison on bullshit charges (usually a parole/probation violation like smoking pot to deal with how incredibly messed up our country is to people who have paid their debt to society), or how every year people who were sentenced to die by our system are exonerated by pro bono lawyers who are ashamed of a system that can convict an innocent person of a crime they didn't commit. Or how our prisons are in such deplorable conditions it's often cruel and unusual just to have to serve time (so little rehabilitation it's pathetic),or that people without family have no money in prison. That many people report it being easier for them to find drugs inside than out (although more expensive inside), because our "guards" are often just state sanctioned thugs who see their job not as protecting inmates, but punishing them.
I mean it's a long and sordid list of the problems with the American Prison Industrial Complex, the idea that some lawsuit shows it's being addressed is absolutely moronic.
And I raise the question again: In your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government have done in this case?
Because if you want to prove that you understand political nuance, this is where you would do it. Because Prison systems, law enforcement, criminal law, it's all a very complicated system spanning multiple government organizations, multiple government bodies, and multiple laws that are both state and Federal. And this is true in basically every nation in the world that splits federal and state/provincial/territorial governments.
If this goes through the court system, is deemed to violate laws, and the prisoners win, then this shows what is being done is illegal (within civil law). So, from there, how would a Federal Democrat super majority in all three Federal branches get the Texas police, court and prison system to change their criminal laws, convict less people, arrest less people, and have less people kept in prison? How would they ensure that the laws that are in place are not violated by privately run prisons so that lawsuits are not required to fix the issues?
And no, those are not rhetorical questions, and no, I'm not expecting you to have a fully detailed legal essay for any of these. But if you feel like participating in political discussions, it would be nice to have more thought from you that extends past "things are broken and Democrats didn't fix it".
Who would you hold accountable if not the people you can vote for that write the laws, assign people to enforce regulations, etc?
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Or you could snidely ignore the article posted about the class action lawsuit bringing that issue through the court system.
Honest question here, in your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government done in this case?
Okay, I feel like I need to explain why the rocketing of the prison population was a bipartisan effort, and why Democrats like Bill and Hillary Clinton (pretty prominent Democrats) embraced prison labor even in their own home (Gov Mansion) Bill had the power to stop it and didn't, Hillary didn't even think it something worth thinking about. Instead she pontificated on what intellectual shortcomings made these people work for practically nothing for her just for a chance to be outside the prison walls for however long they could (or volunteers as some may call them)
That's symbolic of the Democratic party when it comes to prison labor (modern American slavery).
I mean I could go and show you how countless prisoners are in prison on bullshit charges (usually a parole/probation violation like smoking pot to deal with how incredibly messed up our country is to people who have paid their debt to society), or how every year people who were sentenced to die by our system are exonerated by pro bono lawyers who are ashamed of a system that can convict an innocent person of a crime they didn't commit. Or how our prisons are in such deplorable conditions it's often cruel and unusual just to have to serve time (so little rehabilitation it's pathetic),or that people without family have no money in prison. That many people report it being easier for them to find drugs inside than out (although more expensive inside), because our "guards" are often just state sanctioned thugs who see their job not as protecting inmates, but punishing them.
I mean it's a long and sordid list of the problems with the American Prison Industrial Complex, the idea that some lawsuit shows it's being addressed is absolutely moronic.
And I raise the question again: In your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government have done in this case?
Because if you want to prove that you understand political nuance, this is where you would do it. Because Prison systems, law enforcement, criminal law, it's all a very complicated system spanning multiple government organizations, multiple government bodies, and multiple laws that are both state and Federal. And this is true in basically every nation in the world that splits federal and state/provincial/territorial governments.
If this goes through the court system, is deemed to violate laws, and the prisoners win, then this shows what is being done is illegal (within civil law). So, from there, how would a Federal Democrat super majority in all three Federal branches get the Texas police, court and prison system to change their criminal laws, convict less people, arrest less people, and have less people kept in prison? How would they ensure that the laws that are in place are not violated by privately run prisons so that lawsuits are not required to fix the issues?
And no, those are not rhetorical questions, and no, I'm not expecting you to have a fully detailed legal essay for any of these. But if you feel like participating in political discussions, it would be nice to have more thought from you that extends past "things are broken and Democrats didn't fix it".
Things are broken and Democrats would rather focus on Russia than point out what Republicans aren't doing to fix it. You see it's not just that Democrats are bad and Republicans are worse, it's that Democrats don't think they need to be better.
But as a start, and poignant to this conversation, start talking about things like APIC, universal healthcare (not insurance), strengthening and making unions better (less racist for one), and other issues along those lines more than they talk about Russia and Trump.
But to the specific question of Republican states that refuse to act right, we do what we've done every other time (except we don't let it slip back, like in the case of segregated schools, many now more segregated than they were 30-40 years ago).
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Or you could snidely ignore the article posted about the class action lawsuit bringing that issue through the court system.
Honest question here, in your ideal sitting government, what would lawmakers in the federal government done in this case?
Okay, I feel like I need to explain why the rocketing of the prison population was a bipartisan effort, and why Democrats like Bill and Hillary Clinton (pretty prominent Democrats) embraced prison labor even in their own home (Gov Mansion) Bill had the power to stop it and didn't, Hillary didn't even think it something worth thinking about. Instead she pontificated on what intellectual shortcomings made these people work for practically nothing for her just for a chance to be outside the prison walls for however long they could (or volunteers as some may call them)
That's symbolic of the Democratic party when it comes to prison labor (modern American slavery).
I mean I could go and show you how countless prisoners are in prison on bullshit charges (usually a parole/probation violation like smoking pot to deal with how incredibly messed up our country is to people who have paid their debt to society), or how every year people who were sentenced to die by our system are exonerated by pro bono lawyers who are ashamed of a system that can convict an innocent person of a crime they didn't commit. Or how our prisons are in such deplorable conditions it's often cruel and unusual just to have to serve time (so little rehabilitation it's pathetic),or that people without family have no money in prison. That many people report it being easier for them to find drugs inside than out (although more expensive inside), because our "guards" are often just state sanctioned thugs who see their job not as protecting inmates, but punishing them.
I mean it's a long and sordid list of the problems with the American Prison Industrial Complex, the idea that some lawsuit shows it's being addressed is absolutely moronic.
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Please dispense with the holier-than-thou broad strokes condemning those who actually find cause to be alarmed by current events, it adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I wouldn't mind it so much if people were at all focused on how ineffectual our system is and why he's going to get away with it and what we need to do to stop it from happening in the future, but that's not what any of this is about.
It's just 100+ pages of "OMG TRUMP RUSSIA!!?!?!?"
Ummm, yeah, it's kind of a big deal. Our top elected official is waist-deep in a pretty serious scandal, and the implications are fucking awful. Just because you think it's not the biggest deal of them all doesn't mean other people can't feel differently. Idealistic pontificating about every last nook and cranny of corruption in the system is useless from a practical perspective, so people don't waste their time.
I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Like people keep making fun, but no one has even tried to show how we get enough Republicans to impeach Trump, or how/why he wouldn't just pardon anything that managed to actually make it through a show trial.
I don't get if you guys don't understand how the system works (maybe I'm missing something no one has mentioned yet) or are just still thinking something about this is going to plummet Trumps approval among Republicans enough to get ~13+ mystery senators to vote to impeach their party's president?
who pissed in your cheerios this morning?
I'm just genuinely upset that more people know about the stupid shit in that memo about Trump being pissed on than know women veterans suicide has been climbing significantly and is now around 2-5 times higher than civilians. It's not that it never gets a story written about it, it's just the exposure they get compared to something like Trump's golden showers.
That's not all on the media, plenty is on the people who click that crap to pay it's producers. I'm probably more dissapointed in politically engaged people than I am the politicians themselves.
I get it for them, they literally live off of being what they are, this also makes sense for the people either directly paid (consultants, media, and others in the political class), or even the people who benefit from the status quo (that many crowed was perfectly acceptable). What I don't get is why rank and file Democrats are still putting up with this utter fail that is the Democratic party.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
People's time and effort are finite, it is important to prioritize.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
People's time and effort are finite, it is important to prioritize.
Yes it is. It is also important to recognize that your priorities will not necessarily be the same as your neighbor, or someone you have a discussion with, and to respect that.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
Not a savior, just trying to remind people they are focusing on something that will only end with disappointment instead of things we might actually be able to do something about (and are actually causing massive suffering and death).
On July 13 2017 05:49 GreenHorizons wrote: This thread is just absolute trash lately.
I was going to respond to people saying they were "volunteers", but obviously people have no god damn clue what's going on and are just going to ignorantly and snidely get their lol's.
It's really sad.
Please dispense with the holier-than-thou broad strokes condemning those who actually find cause to be alarmed by current events, it adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I wouldn't mind it so much if people were at all focused on how ineffectual our system is and why he's going to get away with it and what we need to do to stop it from happening in the future, but that's not what any of this is about.
It's just 100+ pages of "OMG TRUMP RUSSIA!!?!?!?"
Ummm, yeah, it's kind of a big deal. Our top elected official is waist-deep in a pretty serious scandal, and the implications are fucking awful. Just because you think it's not the biggest deal of them all doesn't mean other people can't feel differently. Idealistic pontificating about every last nook and cranny of corruption in the system is useless from a practical perspective, so people don't waste their time.
How many Americans think about changing your election process to open the door to more political parties? You have only two parties which are more or less the same.
One thing I've learned throughout this thread is that there is no actual barriers in the rules or process of the election system that bars other parties from participating.
It's entirely a social and cultural view of politics that sustains the two party system. Voters don't want to consider anything except Democrats or Republicans, and serious political contenders either stand alone as independents, or bring themselves into the parties to have a "serious" run.
Even on a State level, everything is Democrat or Republican, despite no requirement (from what I know) for State governments to affiliate with Federal.
Yes but the problem is more complicated then that.
The real fault is First Past The Post (FPTP). Winning is all the matters, coming second does nothing.
So assuming the following hypothetical situation.
Left group 1: 20% Left group 2: 25% Center group 18% Right group 1: 5% Right group 2: 32%
Right group 2 wins the election and their candidate becomes Senator/President whatever No one else's vote matter
If Left group 1 and 2 work together as 1 party they would have 45% (assuming no one leaves for another party) and they win instead.
FPTP systems devolve into a 2 party system because winning is all that matters and you need the largest possible coalition of voters to beat the other side.
If an independent were to rise in votes their ideals would get snatched up by whatever party is closer to their ideology to allow that party to capture his votes. Because splitting votes between the 2 means that neither wins. This is also why there are so many lies. Politicians want X but need to promise Y to win voters because voters who want X are not numerous enough to get you elected.
In a proportional system where coming 2nd isn't worthless you get a lot more nuance in choice because candidates can afford to cater to a more niche voter bloc.
I hate to keep bringing up "b-b-but in Canada" but...
1) Canada has a FPTP system.
2) We have 4 parties that have been near-constants in Federal Parliament for the last several decades, with a 5th party slowly sneaking in. Only two of those parties ever held power, one that is a single Province representative, but on the whole we've had enough minority governments that those smaller parties have had influence.
3) Here in BC, our Province has been a two party government for the most part, but one of our major political parties gained their prominence as another one collapsed in the 90's, and currently we (will) have a minority government with a 3rd party tipping the majority count.
There are other two party governments around the world, but none seem to be as entrenched as long as the US' political parties have been. When is the last time that 3rd parties (plural) have been at least 10% of any sitting US government?
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
Not a savior, just trying to remind people they are focusing on something that will only end with disappointment instead of things we might actually be able to do something about (and are actually causing massive suffering and death).
Well let me remind you that you can bring awareness to one issue, without decrying any and all other issues and attacking the people who give those issues credence.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
People's time and effort are finite, it is important to prioritize.
Yes it is. It is also important to recognize that your priorities will not necessarily be the same as your neighbor, or someone you have a discussion with, and to respect that.
On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that.
Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else.
We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities.
There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses.
If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!!
Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't.
I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
People's time and effort are finite, it is important to prioritize.
Yes it is. It is also important to recognize that your priorities will not necessarily be the same as your neighbor, or someone you have a discussion with, and to respect that.
EPT
