Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

...or they are factually correct but are hypocritical. Accuse a politician of the opposite party something that their own person does far more. I guarantee you one of the complaints will be about the national debt. Republicans run up the debt when they are in power and complain about it when the Dems do it. I don't like either running up the debt but its the hypocrisy of it all. 

My view is if you are not an honest actor, then I can't trust anything you say. Anything you say is suspect or has to be assumed untrue until proven true. I don't even like Biden. There are only two other Democrats in the primaries I considered a worse candidate (Bloomberg and Klobuchar). I'm not enthusiastic about his presidency but the alternative is not even worth considering. And trying this 'see Biden is bad' and when asked, "Okay, I agree, what is the alternative?" its crickets because socially you come off looking well....you already know. 

Socially in America if you are virulently pro Trump in areas that are not wholly red, you are looked at with caution. It is what it is. 

Anyway, its obvious the rule of law, morals, ethics, the constitution, the 'American' way', what ever that is, is secondary to outright fealty. The best thing about having Trump is he exposed exactly what kind of society conservatives want. Its basically an authoritarian society. Not much different than China or Russia. Its closer to North Korea than it is to New Zealand. 

I'm not saying if the Democrats got their way its shangri la. I fear elements of the fringe left  Life in America if they got their way isn't going to be idyllic either. But given the choice between the Scylla and Charybdis' of both parties the Democrats are far more preferable, even though I find the leadership incompetent and bought. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chocolat steve said:

The thing is Coss, its not that people are misinformed. They straight out lie. They know the truth and rely on you or I not knowing the facts. 

"Scylla and Charybdis'"  I had to look that up :)

Yes I know that these people lie. 

Like most folk,  I've spent my life trying to be honest and trustworthy, I'm now seeing that these traits are useless, that's why Trump was such a phenomenon, billions of people were thinking, either

A: Such cheat and liar will never last, otherwise what's the point of society and civilisation?

or

B: Golly I hope he keeps winning, so me and my mates can finally get some riches, for behaving like we do.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2021 at 9:33 PM, chocolat steve said:

ONLY in countries with rigged elections does the person with the most votes loses. If someone can name me any other country where that doesn't happen I'm all ears. 

Australia also, with preferential voting

Candidates are voted in preference, the lowest voter "votes" then go to who was marked as 2nd preference on their ballots.

So if there are three candidates, votes on the ballet for the last candidate (C) go to whoever they want, to keep this simple, lets say all 100% of "C" voters decided that "B" was their second choice.

A gets 45% of Vote -

B gets 35% of Vote

C gets 20% of vote - preference if last (which it is) go to candidate B 55%

Candidate B wins

Parties hand out how to vote cards, and have already suggested on these who you should give your second/third/fourth vote to. People generally follow the party suggestions very closely

 

In the Senate, you might have 100 candidates, so very small and unknown candidates all do deals to swap preferences, the fishing party, the money back for fourth place party, the libido party, the free marijuana  party, there are tons of these little parties,

 

HOWEVER

 

By doing smart deals, one of them can round up all the other preferences and end up with a seat in the senate, happens quite often

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get it as an anecdotal example of something I said didn't happen but the voters of C still get to choose the person they want. It sounds (and correct me if I'm wrong and I often am), their primary choice didn't win so they can then vote for their 2nd choice. The person who got the most votes initially may not win but after the 2nd round of voting he didn't get most of the votes, unless I understand it incorrectly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, chocolat steve said:

I get it as an anecdotal example of something I said didn't happen but the voters of C still get to choose the person they want. It sounds (and correct me if I'm wrong and I often am), their primary choice didn't win so they can then vote for their 2nd choice. The person who got the most votes initially may not win but after the 2nd round of voting he didn't get most of the votes, unless I understand it incorrectly. 

Yeah - I think you have it, in a way it's like how some of the elections in the USA go, if no one gets 50%, then there's a re vote with the top two

 

This approach is to have all those elections in one go

 

That said, the person with the most votes can, and often does loose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...