trump off the CO ballot

[arthwollipot]

There are issues with the way we pick elected representatives, but there are issues everywhere in the world where there are elections. I'm just glad we have elections to complain about. If things were as bad as you say they are, power wouldn't shift back and forth the way it does in America.

Oh come on. Yes, there are electoral issues all over the world. But in the scheme of modern developed nations (as opposed to dictatorships and failed states), America's issues are considerably worse. No, nobody wants to live in a dictatorship. But there are much better democracies than America.

And of course power shifts around. There's not only one dude with tons of money calling the shots. There are different pressures, different vested interests, different kickbacks for different grifts. If anything, the influence of money in American politics makes it more chaotic, not less.

[Meadmaker]

There are issues with the way we pick elected representatives, but there are issues everywhere in the world where there are elections. I'm just glad we have elections to complain about. If things were as bad as you say they are, power wouldn't shift back and forth the way it does in America.

Oh come on. Yes, there are electoral issues all over the world. But in the scheme of modern developed nations (as opposed to dictatorships and failed states), America's issues are considerably worse. No, nobody wants to live in a dictatorship. But there are much better democracies than America.

And of course power shifts around. There's not only one dude with tons of money calling the shots. There are different pressures, different vested interests, different kickbacks for different grifts. If anything, the influence of money in American politics makes it more chaotic, not less.

There certainly is a lot of money in American politics. No doubt about it. Those dudes buy lots of ads.

But I look at the issues that people say they care about, and I don't see "big money" issues at the top. Is it that wealthy people manipulated the voters to think that illegal immigration matters? Or abortion? Or student loans? Yes, Donald Trump used his money to buy his way into the presidency, but other billionaires have tried and failed to do the same thing. The reason Trump succeeded was that he had a message that people bought into. God only knows why, but they did.

Money, whether yours or donated, can give you a platform, but you cant buy votes. So, if the electorate is trending liberal, money can determine which liberal gets the nod, but you can't make them liberal or conservative if they aren't leaning that way. I see people who lost elections, or more often the supporters of people who lost elections, say that their favorite candidate lost because of the big money stacked up against them, but I don't see it. I see specific missteps, or specific positions that were unpopular, that did them in.

[President Bush]

Meadmaker, have you ever read Justice John Paul Stevens dissent to the SCOTUS ruling on Citizen's United?

I recommend it, though it is long it is quite interesting.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/08-205P.ZX

[arthwollipot]

Money, whether yours or donated, can give you a platform, but you cant buy votes.

Technically correct, which as we all know is the best kind of correct, but you cannot deny that advertising manipulates people - that's its purpose.

[Meadmaker]

Meadmaker, have you ever read Justice John Paul Stevens dissent to the SCOTUS ruling on Citizen's United?

I recommend it, though it is long it is quite interesting.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/08-205P.ZX

I'll give it a shot. I should be able to find some time in the next few days.

[Meadmaker]

Money, whether yours or donated, can give you a platform, but you cant buy votes.

Technically correct, which as we all know is the best kind of correct, but you cannot deny that advertising manipulates people - that's its purpose.

That's true, and the people doing it must feel like it works. I think it must work somewhat, but I honestly wonder how much. I think it's more important in small elections, where voters hardly ever know who they're voting for, anyway. When there's not much information to go on, a well placed ad can probably have more influence.

[stanky]

wishful thinking about money in electoral politics...

we already know that big donors (representing corporate interest) give to both sides. That should tell you something.
They don't really care who wins, assuming any radical 'outsider' has been adequately assassinated by the corporate media. Both sides always promise to root out the corruption (drain the swamp) and neither ever do.

Meanwhile, sweeping new powers of surveillance and incarceration have been given to government (by dems this time) with little media attention. Instead, we're fascinated with the bread and circus of Stormy Daniels vs Trump.

Watch Biden pretend to be powerful concerning Israel and our gift of bombs...him supposedly holding back...and now the press is turning on that gesture, siding with Israel again.
It's masturbation. The general flow remains intact.

and viciously unsustainable.

[stanky]

I don't see power shifting back and forth. In the play, there are minor issues that 'power' doesn't care about, so we're allowed to wrestle with that stuff, giving the appearance of a fair fight.

War, to me, is the most significant issue, along with climate and biosphere disruptions.
Both parties are one, in their inability to address it in any real way.
Obama is a good example. Beneath the media hype was a perfect republican. Same with his v.p. Drill, bomb, borrow...but allow abortion and weed.
Trump is perfect for the agenda. Doesn't care about anything except power and money, so he'll fit right in.

Climate to the rescue! Soon, the die-hard deniers will fold.
And none of this will matter.
The real boss exposes itself.

[Meadmaker]

They don't really care who wins, assuming any radical 'outsider' has been adequately assassinated by the corporate media.

And that's where I'm having issues. I don't think the outsiders are being assassinated by media. I think they are outsiders because their ideas aren't popular. If I look at "outsiders" who have been contenders in my lifetime, I see Bernie Sanders and Ross Perot. They each had, or still have, devoted followers, but people like me wouldn't vote for either of them. (If Bernie had gotten the Dem nomination, I find myself wondering whether I would have voted for him. I always thought of Trump as a buffoon, but I didn't actually hate him until the pandemic, and especially until he refused to acknowledge that he lost the election. That was unforgivable, in my opinion. I think I probably would have held my nose and voted for Bernie even in 2016. Today, I would vote for anyone who isn't Trump.)

Some might include Donald Trump as an outsider. In some sense he is. He did pretty well.

I just look around the world and I don't see anyplace where I think they've really got it together and we should be more like them. We're a bit nuts here, but that's part of our charm.

(ETA: I was referring to political systems only when talking about whether we should be more like others. It's not that I think ours is the best, but I don't know what makes any of yours, or elsewhare, any better. Those 50 countries that the study ranked ahead of us? I think, in all seriousness, it was mostly technicalities, like the electoral college and how that means not all votes are exactly equal, If those 50 are better then us, they aren't a lot better, and I supsect if I looked closely I could find ways where we were better than them, making an apples to apples comparison difficult.)

[stanky]

I'm annoyed at the new direction america has taken. That's why i rag at her...she's become a weapons dealer; a beast with slovenly ways; should know better...

the surveillance is creepy and dishonest. The prison population is appalling. Public transport, lacking. Corruption instead of transparency...hell, any democracy is better if it's not constantly involved in covert wars. Isn't it? Or is the whole 'war thing' kinda irrelevant? What about our gun-nuttery? Is that a point of pride? No other modern country has our relentless violence. Or homelessness. Or rotten health care. Europe has pretty much banned many of our foods and meds for being too shitty. Should we take pride in being free to feed our kids known carcinogens that sane nations reject?

Our racism and urban decay are a bit shocking to civilized people. It's like we hate some of our citizens, as a policy.
We aren't in good shape. We're fat. and drugged. (Comparatively) We're also dumb as posts. Our kids are lagging behind the school kids of better democracies. Even construction here is far behind the curve. Look at some German home builder sites, and a carpenter here is suddenly primitive. We don't have a handle on our environment. We still have disposable everything; sewage still goes into the ocean; and we're busy messing up other countries like Ecuador for their resources. What other democracies are doing all this shit? How many military bases does Norway have in other countries? Why doesn't Flint, MI have decent drinking water yet? Why did we spend all that money and kill all those people in (here, insert a list of countries we've trashed in my lifetime)? What other democracy does that?
And why don't we have any say in it? Why is so much power delegated to unelected actors? Why is Snowden in exile?
wtf.

really, i must inquire, MM...are you hallucinating? Being patriotic is charming and quaint...but here, it's like a relentless sales pitch. Other countries don't need to fly their freaking flag everywhere. Not a lot of rah rah rah, we're #1 talk in other nations. It's kinda gross and braggy and dumb. It wasn't always like this, you know.

We're Donald Trump now. Diet Coke and McDonald's; aging porn stars; Florida's re-write of history; Clarence Thomas's wife and Mike Lindell's pillow. Let that sink in.