Getting political

Pages

AuthorTopic: Getting political
Apprentice
Member # 6795
Profile #100
quote:
Originally written by Nick Ringer:

quote:
Originally written by Drew:

And who would determine the criteria for the right to vote, anyway?
Me.

No, me!

I say no-one gets to vote.

But then again, according to that, I shouldn't tell you whether you should vote or not...

... but they can't tell me not to tell you -

I am confusored. :(
Posts: 10 | Registered: Tuesday, February 14 2006 08:00
Agent
Member # 8030
Profile Homepage #101
I wouldn't be opposed to raising the voting age to twenty-one. Besides that, I don't believe anything should be changed. It's a bit hard to pick out the informed people from the brainwashed ones.

--------------------
Decca Records - "We don't like their sound. Groups of guitars are on the way out."
Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00
Guardian
Member # 5360
Profile #102
Nalyd wouldn't mind a test to determine your voting ability.

--------------------
Fear us, mortals, but never envy, for though we burn with power, our fuel is our sorrows.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Wednesday, January 5 2005 08:00
By Committee
Member # 4233
Profile #103
Great! Go ahead and strip our country of the few remaining ideals from the Declaration of Independence that linger. :)

Any sort of "test" to determine voter eligibility would only serve to disenfranchise an enormous part of the population along economic lines. Enough protections for their property interests already exist in the system (probably too many); they don't need any more.

The cure to this "problem" is more information, not the establishment of a restricted, elitist class of voters. Happily, information is more widely available today than its ever been.

[ Thursday, February 14, 2008 18:27: Message edited by: Drew ]
Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
Shaper
Member # 7420
Profile Homepage #104
Anyone that can read and is able to name the candidates should be allowed to vote. But Tullegolar, what about all the little children who would have their parents telling them who to vote for? I don't really have a problem with families getting extra votes. They have more to gain and lose from the government, plus they are raising future citizens, so I say let them have it.

--------------------
You lose.
Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
Profile #105
The real question is how do I get appointed to the electoral college. They are the only votes that matter anyhow.

--------------------
Synergy, et al - "I don't get it."

Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..."
Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
Profile #106
After 2000, everyone in the world learned that the US president is really elected by the handful of electoral college members, not the massive general election. But the details of how this system actually works are still not widely understood.

The elephant in the middle of the room, which the media managed to avoid mentioning throughout the 2000 fiasco, is the fact that membership in the electoral college is hereditary, being held by lineal descendents of George Washington's Freemason lodge.

Careful gerrymandering since the 19th century has also kept half of the House of Representatives, and nearly all of the US Senate, in the effective control of tiny groups of voters. We hear these people referred to as 'swing voters', but few people realize that 'swing voters' are in fact the tenants and domestic servants of a small number of establishment families.

The members of the Electoral College, to be precise.

--------------------
Listen carefully because some of your options may have changed.
Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00
Shaper
Member # 32
Profile #107
quote:
Originally written by Emperor Tullegolar:

Anyone that can read and is able to name the candidates should be allowed to vote. But Tullegolar, what about all the little children who would have their parents telling them who to vote for? I don't really have a problem with families getting extra votes. They have more to gain and lose from the government, plus they are raising future citizens, so I say let them have it.
Then you run the risk of people having children solely for the sake of political power...

--------------------
Lt. Sullust
Quaere verum
Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #108
It's not like people don't already have kids for stupider reasons. I don't have an exact figure for how many babies born last year were the result of unplanned pregnancies, but it's on the order of 50%.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Shaper
Member # 32
Profile #109
An unplanned pregnancy is completely different than having a child solely to increase your voting power...

--------------------
Lt. Sullust
Quaere verum
Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00
Shaper
Member # 7420
Profile Homepage #110
quote:
Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon:

The real question is how do I get appointed to the electoral college. They are the only votes that matter anyhow.
But then you wouldn't actually have a choice in the matter. The people in your state would be telling you who to vote for.

Children: I'm all about encouraging population growth.

--------------------
You lose.
Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00
Shaper
Member # 32
Profile #111
They are still free to choose who they want to vote for; however it is rare that this is actually exercised...

--------------------
Lt. Sullust
Quaere verum
Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #112
quote:
Originally written by Lt. Sullust:

An unplanned pregnancy is completely different than having a child solely to increase your voting power...
Completely different, yes, hence stupider reasons.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
For Carnage, Apply Within
Member # 95
Profile #113
Spending the amount of money necessary to raise a child just to get a single vote for your preferred party does not seem very efficient. You'd do better to spend it on advertizing.

--------------------
[http://forum.nethergate.net/index.php?showforum=30]The BoA Arena: Two collections of zeroes and ones enter. One collection of zeroes and ones leaves.
Posts: 567 | Registered: Friday, October 5 2001 07:00
Councilor
Member # 6600
Profile Homepage #114
And don't forget that there's a fairly good chance they could grow up to be rebellious...

Dikiyoba.

--------------------
Episode 4: Spiderweb Reloaded
Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #115
quote:
Originally written by Student of Trinity:

The elephant in the middle of the room, which the media managed to avoid mentioning throughout the 2000 fiasco, is the fact that membership in the electoral college is hereditary, being held by lineal descendents of George Washington's Freemason lodge.
Is this true? I haven't encountered this elephant before, and I can't find it anywhere in the wikipedia article on the US electoral college. I thought electors were appointed by winning parties on a per-election basis.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
"Slartucker is going to have a cow when he hears about this," Synergy said.
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #116
quote:
Originally written by Restoration Action Figure:

Is this true? I haven't encountered this elephant before, and I can't find it anywhere in the wikipedia article on the US electoral college. I thought electors were appointed by winning parties on a per-election basis.
It's SoT. He's being silly. You've either been reading far too much Robert Anton Wilson or not nearly enough.

[ Friday, February 15, 2008 20:13: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Warrior
Member # 3946
Profile Homepage #117
I'm a conservative. Can you see why I'm depressed this election?

Our only strong candidate swindled his way into being the front runner and plays the dirtiest politics on either side of the aisle. He also took all of Guilliani's liberal winner-takes-all states (what could be less democratic than unequal representation in select parts of the country that specifically benefit one candidate?)

McCain has stubbornly opposed almost every bill Bush has proposed, not because they were good or bad ideas, but because he lost the primary to him and did it out of spite. McCain also passed legislation to make it difficult for poor candidates to run because they needed private funding(Dirty move 1, and might I say how impressively Huckabee handled this), he slandered his main competition(Romney) in Florida with total farces right before the election with no chance for Romney to defend himself(Dirty move 2). He also pulled the West Virginia "vote for Huckabee" move (Dirty move 3).

If McCain gets elected, then the Republican party (which I've already stopped affiliating myself with) is as good as destroyed. If McCain gets into office, he'll just do whatever he feels like doing. Any and all promises he made for when he gets into office will only be kept if it benefits him. McCain is not a conservative or a republican. He's a McCainian.

Hmm, sorry about the rant. I don't know if you want to call it a bash, or just my hating dirty politics. Maybe I should rephrase that, all politics are dirty, but McCain eats the stuff like a fat kid eats ice cream.

Anyway, I'm not even sure there was ever a good candidate for me, but I'd say that since the economy is one of my bigger issues, I'd have voted for Romney.

[ Sunday, February 17, 2008 12:36: Message edited by: Gale ]
Posts: 167 | Registered: Saturday, January 31 2004 08:00
BANNED
Member # 13806
Profile #118
I respect the courageous position you maintain I agree wholeheartedly. Conservatives seek to preserve tradition, and what's more anathemic to the American way than blind, heartless money-grubbing? If only we could return to the traditional values of our slave-holding ancestors. Hamilton was right: We should have a monarchy. (I can scarcely imagine how glorious a dynasty in this country would be.)
Posts: 134 | Registered: Sunday, February 3 2008 08:00
For Carnage, Apply Within
Member # 95
Profile #119
Gale has it exactly right. McCain's lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union is only an 82.3. That's a B-minus! In this time of war, can we really afford a B-minus president?

--------------------
[http://forum.nethergate.net/index.php?showforum=30]The BoA Arena: Two collections of zeroes and ones enter. One collection of zeroes and ones leaves.
Posts: 567 | Registered: Friday, October 5 2001 07:00
Law Bringer
Member # 6489
Profile Homepage #120
quote:
Originally written by Sarachim:

Gale has it exactly right. McCain's lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union is only an 82.3. That's a B-minus! In this time of war, can we really afford a B-minus president?
We're already saddled with an F. Why not? :P

[ Sunday, February 17, 2008 17:22: Message edited by: Tyranicus ]

--------------------
"Dumbledore returns from the dead and declares it to be hammertime, Harry proceeds to break it down, Voldemort is unable to touch this." —Dintiradan
Spiderweb Chat Room
Avernum RPSummariesOoCRoster
Shadow Vale - My site, home of the Spiderweb Chat Database, BoA Scenario Database, & the A1 Quest List, among other things.
Posts: 1556 | Registered: Sunday, November 20 2005 08:00
Shock Trooper
Member # 3716
Profile #121
I don't care if it's obama or if its hillary. Anyone but Bush!!!

--------------------
"Inspiration comes from hard work" -Charles Baudelaire.
Posts: 292 | Registered: Sunday, November 23 2003 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 335
Profile Homepage #122
You do realize that Bush can't run, right?

—Alorael, who almost thinks that's a shame. Surely, surely he couldn't win a bid for the presidency in 2008. Surely America is better than that.
Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
Profile #123
They re-elect Bush after the first 4 years. There are no limits to stupidity. I think if Bush hadn't lost the Congress he might have tried to get the constitutional amendment for term limits removed. There still isn't anything against him declaring martial law except the soldiers hate him too for Iraq.
Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00
Shaper
Member # 7420
Profile Homepage #124
We don't have enough troops left in the homeland for martial law.

--------------------
You lose.
Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00

Pages