But Could He Get Elected?

[AzogtheDefiler]

"The greatest of rulers is but a shadowy presence;
Next is the ruler who is loved and praised;
Next is the one who is feared;
Next is the one who is reviled.
...
(the greatest rulers) are cautious and honor words.
When their task is done and work complete,
Their people all say, "This is just how we are.""

-daodejing


Words of wisdom indeed, but in today's political climate, could an ideal ruler get elected? Is it what people want, or do we get the politicians we deserve?

I have one

Ben Shapiro - Wikipedia

 

[Confounding]

"improper"

Most definitions of "publicly funded elections" would disagree that my use was improper.

 

[Pogo]

Everyone does get one vote. Except for dead democrats.

Everybody gets one vote, but rich people also get incredible and disproportionate amounts of influence as individuals. It's not equal at all.

Agree, and that's because money can buy influence, therefore more money buys more influence.

It would be nice to be able to control that but that universe does not exist. The remedy therefore must be on the other end, the receiving end. The Unwashed need to learn critical thinking skills and not just roll over on cue for anything the blogosphere tries to sell them.

 

[Pogo]

"improper"

Most definitions of "publicly funded elections" would disagree that my use was improper.

What the hell is the hurdle in saying "publicly funded campaigns" if that is what you mean?

I don't get this deliberate playing loose with language. If words don't mean what they mean, then we have no function for them.

 

[Unkotare]

Everyone does get one vote. Except for dead democrats.

Everybody gets one vote, but rich people also get incredible and disproportionate amounts of influence as individuals. It's not equal at all.

So, take away all their things, drag them out into the streets for self-criticism sessions, then ship them off to re-education camps, right comrade?

 

[Confounding]

Everyone does get one vote. Except for dead democrats.

Everybody gets one vote, but rich people also get incredible and disproportionate amounts of influence as individuals. It's not equal at all.

So, take away all their things, drag them out into the streets for self-criticism sessions, then ship them off to re-education camps, right comrade?

You've taken this conversation to a silly place now. Safeguards should be put in place that make sure individuals have equal impact on politics.

 

[Confounding]

"improper"

Most definitions of "publicly funded elections" would disagree that my use was improper.

What the hell is the hurdle in saying "publicly funded campaigns" if that is what you mean?

I don't get this deliberate playing loose with language. If words don't mean what they mean, then we have no function for them.

I say it that way because that's what everybody else says when they're referring to what I'm talking about. If it was widely referred to as "publicly funded campaigns" I would say that instead.

 

[Pogo]

"improper"

Most definitions of "publicly funded elections" would disagree that my use was improper.

What the hell is the hurdle in saying "publicly funded campaigns" if that is what you mean?

I don't get this deliberate playing loose with language. If words don't mean what they mean, then we have no function for them.

I say it that way because that's what everybody else says when they're referring to what I'm talking about. If it was widely referred to as "publicly funded campaigns" I would say that instead.

Whelp -- as the teachers in grammar school used to say, if everybody jumped in the lake would you jump in too? Do you say "I could care less" when you mean the opposite?

Actually this drives us right back to what I'm talking about,.that we all need to THINK before acting.

 

[Pogo]

Everyone does get one vote. Except for dead democrats.

Everybody gets one vote, but rich people also get incredible and disproportionate amounts of influence as individuals. It's not equal at all.

So, take away all their things, drag them out into the streets for self-criticism sessions, then ship them off to re-education camps, right comrade?

You've taken this conversation to a silly place now. Safeguards should be put in place that make sure individuals have equal impact on politics.

And again, that would be nice but *HOW* do you do that?

 

[Confounding]

"improper"

Most definitions of "publicly funded elections" would disagree that my use was improper.

What the hell is the hurdle in saying "publicly funded campaigns" if that is what you mean?

I don't get this deliberate playing loose with language. If words don't mean what they mean, then we have no function for them.

I say it that way because that's what everybody else says when they're referring to what I'm talking about. If it was widely referred to as "publicly funded campaigns" I would say that instead.

Whelp -- as the teachers in grammar school used to say, if everybody jumped in the lake would you jump in too? Do you say "I could care less" when you mean the opposite?

Actually this drives us right back to what I'm talking about,.that we all need to THINK before acting.

For me it's just about effectively communicating. If everybody uses the wrong word for something I will communicate more effectively by using the wrong one too.

 

[Confounding]

Everyone does get one vote. Except for dead democrats.

Everybody gets one vote, but rich people also get incredible and disproportionate amounts of influence as individuals. It's not equal at all.

So, take away all their things, drag them out into the streets for self-criticism sessions, then ship them off to re-education camps, right comrade?

You've taken this conversation to a silly place now. Safeguards should be put in place that make sure individuals have equal impact on politics.

And again, that would be nice but *HOW* do you do that?

You can't completely, but do you think it's impossible to mitigate the problem a lot compared to what we have now?

 

[Pogo]

"improper"

Most definitions of "publicly funded elections" would disagree that my use was improper.

What the hell is the hurdle in saying "publicly funded campaigns" if that is what you mean?

I don't get this deliberate playing loose with language. If words don't mean what they mean, then we have no function for them.

I say it that way because that's what everybody else says when they're referring to what I'm talking about. If it was widely referred to as "publicly funded campaigns" I would say that instead.

Whelp -- as the teachers in grammar school used to say, if everybody jumped in the lake would you jump in too? Do you say "I could care less" when you mean the opposite?

Actually this drives us right back to what I'm talking about,.that we all need to THINK before acting.

For me it's just about effectively communicating. If everybody uses the wrong word for something I will communicate more effectively by using the wrong one too.

But then you're both wrong. Are you from New Orleans?

 

[Confounding]

But then you're both wrong.

It doesn't matter because the idea can still be communicated effectively, and more so actually. That's the important part I think.

 

[Pogo]

Everyone does get one vote. Except for dead democrats.

Everybody gets one vote, but rich people also get incredible and disproportionate amounts of influence as individuals. It's not equal at all.

So, take away all their things, drag them out into the streets for self-criticism sessions, then ship them off to re-education camps, right comrade?

You've taken this conversation to a silly place now. Safeguards should be put in place that make sure individuals have equal impact on politics.

And again, that would be nice but *HOW* do you do that?

You can't completely, but do you think it's impossible to mitigate the problem a lot compared to what we have now?

I don't see how you do that. For all we know you and I are bots some campaign bought to post here. Or, humans some campaign bought to post here. How could that be controlled?

How much such influence was bought in 2016 by inane fake-news blogs and sites claiming three million Amish mobilized to vote for Rump and Hillary was replaced by a hologram? Somebody somewhere paid for that.

 

[Pogo]

But then you're both wrong.

It doesn't matter because the idea can still be communicated effectively, and more so actually. That's the important part I think.

Go ahead and make the case that deliberately posting the wrong term is something productive, if you can.

Seems to me the more intelligent thing to do is simply say what you mean in the first place, which guarantees it's free from misinterpretation. I can't come up with a reason one would deliberately invite misinterpretation.

 

[Confounding]

How could that be controlled?

It couldn't, but if we make it harder for individuals to fund politicians they will less often be poisoned by outside influences. How many young politicians have gone to D.C with good intentions only to be bought out by big money? If some rich asshole has no easy way of funding a particular candidate then his influence over that candidate has kinda diminished don't you think?

 

[there4eyeM]

"The greatest of rulers is but a shadowy presence;
Next is the ruler who is loved and praised;
Next is the one who is feared;
Next is the one who is reviled.
...
(the greatest rulers) are cautious and honor words.
When their task is done and work complete,
Their people all say, "This is just how we are.""

-daodejing


Words of wisdom indeed, but in today's political climate, could an ideal ruler get elected? Is it what people want, or do we get the politicians we deserve?

The people would have to be ideal themselves to have the appetite for such a "ruler" (ruler having obtained an inherently negative nuance in English).

 

[Confounding]

Go ahead and make the case that deliberately posting the wrong term is something productive, if you can.

Seems to me the more intelligent thing to do is simply say what you mean in the first place, which guarantees it's free from misinterpretation. I can't come up with a reason one would deliberately invite misinterpretation.

Sometimes I even mispronounce words in spoken communication because it's easier than being that guy.

You know, you.

 

[Pogo]

How could that be controlled?

It couldn't, but if we make it harder for individuals to fund politicians they will less often be poisoned by outside influences. How many young politicians have gone to D.C with good intentions only to be bought out by big money? If some rich asshole has no easy way of funding a particular candidate then his influence over that candidate has kinda diminished don't you think?

I've personally thought for years that Congresscritters (for one) ought to receive no salary at all, just free room and board and comp meals. They should be isolated in their dorm and prohibited from contact with anybody outside who isn't a constituent. Let 'em find out what the term 'public service' actually means and see if they make a career out of it then.

We have way too many political vermin who think public service means Celebrity. In a more perfect union we shouldn't even know what the hell these people look like.

 

[Issa]

"The greatest of rulers is but a shadowy presence;
Next is the ruler who is loved and praised;
Next is the one who is feared;
Next is the one who is reviled.
...
(the greatest rulers) are cautious and honor words.
When their task is done and work complete,
Their people all say, "This is just how we are.""

-daodejing


Words of wisdom indeed, but in today's political climate, could an ideal ruler get elected? Is it what people want, or do we get the politicians we deserve?

As long as the uses the electoral college all of what you said is not important. The US needs to revisit its constitution qnd update it to suit the 21st century.