People Who Don't Vote Are The Problem

[frigidweirdo]

THE PEOPLE should control govt or just some rich people should control govt for their own interests?

People should control government.

Your kind of thinking ushered in the most controlling and repressive governments of the 20th century. There are books you could read: "What Should Be Done" by Lenin would be a good place to start. Then read about the USSR and the spread of governments who controlled people in the name of the poor while seeking to check the rich. It's called history.

People? The plural of persons? People do control govt. THE PEOPLE don't control govt. This is where I have a problem.

My thinking? You're being ridiculous. You seem to skip from a govt which has democracy as its central core to far left "communism" which wasn't communism in any sense of the word. I don't see how anyone can make this jump.

I'm looking at governments like Switzerland, those in Scandinavia, those in Germanic countries. Those that get to the top of the list of places where govts treat their citizens properly, and make life really good to live in.

What do you know, for example, about the German system? Or are you rejecting it as a Communist wet dream without any knowledge?

 

[Meathead]

THE PEOPLE should control govt or just some rich people should control govt for their own interests?

People should control government.

Your kind of thinking ushered in the most controlling and repressive governments of the 20th century. There are books you could read: "What Should Be Done" by Lenin would be a good place to start. Then read about the USSR and the spread of governments who controlled people in the name of the poor while seeking to check the rich. It's called history.

People? The plural of persons? People do control govt. THE PEOPLE don't control govt. This is where I have a problem.

My thinking? You're being ridiculous. You seem to skip from a govt which has democracy as its central core to far left "communism" which wasn't communism in any sense of the word. I don't see how anyone can make this jump.

I'm looking at governments like Switzerland, those in Scandinavia, those in Germanic countries. Those that get to the top of the list of places where govts treat their citizens properly, and make life really good to live in.

What do you know, for example, about the German system? Or are you rejecting it as a Communist wet dream without any knowledge?

The people who conceived and instituted these governments did not due so because of paranoid obsession with the rich. Transparently, those which you conceive are far more akin to the oppressive governments which demanded wholesale redistribution of wealth. This thinking works far better on semiliterate and easily manipulated peons, or useful idiots as Lenin wrote. Again, read "What Is To Be Done".

Without perspective and knowledge, it is very easy and costly to fall into that trap.

 

[frigidweirdo]

THE PEOPLE should control govt or just some rich people should control govt for their own interests?

People should control government.

Your kind of thinking ushered in the most controlling and repressive governments of the 20th century. There are books you could read: "What Should Be Done" by Lenin would be a good place to start. Then read about the USSR and the spread of governments who controlled people in the name of the poor while seeking to check the rich. It's called history.

People? The plural of persons? People do control govt. THE PEOPLE don't control govt. This is where I have a problem.

My thinking? You're being ridiculous. You seem to skip from a govt which has democracy as its central core to far left "communism" which wasn't communism in any sense of the word. I don't see how anyone can make this jump.

I'm looking at governments like Switzerland, those in Scandinavia, those in Germanic countries. Those that get to the top of the list of places where govts treat their citizens properly, and make life really good to live in.

What do you know, for example, about the German system? Or are you rejecting it as a Communist wet dream without any knowledge?

The people who conceived and instituted these governments did not due so because of paranoid obsession with the rich. Transparently, those which you conceive are far more akin to the oppressive governments which demanded wholesale redistribution of wealth. This thinking works far better on semiliterate and easily manipulated peons, or useful idiots as Lenin wrote. Again, read "What Is To Be Done".

Without perspective and knowledge, it is very easy and costly to fall into that trap.

What? Do you want to answer my post or not?

 

[Papageorgio]

It works fine, those who care vote, those who don't, don't.

I like how you switched up the conversation after I showed the flaws of your his argument.

It works fine FOR WHO?

It works fine for those who want to control govt.
It works fine for those who get massive benefits out of govt being non-democratic.
It works fine for the defence industry.
It works fine for large corporation.

It doesn't work fine for the vast majority of the people.

It works fine for the advertising industry which see an extra $6 billion or so in a presidential year being spent of two political parties promoting themselves.

It's broken for most people. It's broken for most people who vote. They vote based on what they're told, not what the reality of life is. Anyone who has seen other countries and how their systems work in countries like Germany and others, will understand this. Ignorance is not an excuse for saying the system isn't broken.

At least you agree how Obama got elected, I don't think making people vote is going to improve anything. They are low low no information voters that are worse than those the Democrats complained about this election.

How does Germany vote on what they are not told?

 

[AKACL]

I've always said that other than the vote, the rich completely own our country and government. The only thing we have is our vote. But only 40% of the voting population voted on Tuesday. You can bet that every rich person in America voted on Tuesday. You can bet that all the Republicans that voted in 2012 and 2008 showed up to vote in the 2010 and 2014 midterms. Clearly. Look at how Republicans win every midterm with low turnout but lose the general elections. You can even count 2000 and 2004 because those years were close enough for Bush to steal. But that's another conversation. Point is, basically the richest Americans are all voting every 2 years and the masses only vote every 4 years in the general elections. The blacks. The under 30's. You only have yourselves to blame. I'm done caring about you if you don't even care enough to show up and vote every 2 years. You don't think it makes a difference? It makes all the difference in the world. Stupid fucking Americans.

"Don't vote, it just encourages the bastards." (P.J. O'Rourke)

 

[Stephanie]

The new meme for the Democrats:

It's because you people WHO didn't vote that CUASED us to lose all the POWER we had. waaaa

 

[frigidweirdo]

At least you agree how Obama got elected, I don't think making people vote is going to improve anything. They are low low no information voters that are worse than those the Democrats complained about this election.

How does Germany vote on what they are not told?

The German election has both PR and FPTP. In other words, the make up of parliament will be, more or less, as the PR vote is. Anyone who doesn't make 5% in PR is kicked out unless they win a FPTP seat. So the parties who do get in have a slightly higher percentage of seats than the votes they got.

CDU 34.1% of the PR vote. 40.5% of the seats
SPD 25.7% of the PR vote, 30.5% of the seats
Die Linke 8.6% of the PR vote, 10.2% of the seats
Gruene 8.4% of the PR vote, 10% of the seats
CSU 7.4% of the PR vote, 8.9% of the seats.

That's basically 4 parties (CDU and CSU are essentially the same party).

There's also a constituency vote, though no smaller parties this time around gained a seat when they still got under 5% of the PR vote. The last time it happened was in 2002 when the PDS got 40% of the vote and 2 seats. But the option is there anyway.

If you look at constituency votes the CDU got 3% more votes there than in PR. SPD 4% more. Die Linke got 8.2% constituency and 8.6% PR. Die Gruene got 7.3% constituency and 8.4% of the PR vote.

So what it suggests is that big parties thrive on FPTP constituency votes, people are more likely to vote for them there than in PR when they're more likely to choose a smaller party.

Hence Germany has a 4/5/6 party system (Two parties got just under 5% and no FPTP seats). It means people have more of a choice. The big parties can't just rely on being the big party as they do in the US.

What does this mean? It means you have the choice of lots of parties. Their platforms are different, so you don't like the CDU's platform but don't want SPD to get into power you can vote for another party, like FPD. This means political parties need to appeal to the voters. They can't control the media like the reps and dems do, they need to actually appeal. In the US the parties tell people what the election is about, what issues are important. In Germany the people tell the politicians what is important.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I've always said that other than the vote, the rich completely own our country and government. The only thing we have is our vote. But only 40% of the voting population voted on Tuesday. You can bet that every rich person in America voted on Tuesday. You can bet that all the Republicans that voted in 2012 and 2008 showed up to vote in the 2010 and 2014 midterms. Clearly. Look at how Republicans win every midterm with low turnout but lose the general elections. You can even count 2000 and 2004 because those years were close enough for Bush to steal. But that's another conversation. Point is, basically the richest Americans are all voting every 2 years and the masses only vote every 4 years in the general elections. The blacks. The under 30's. You only have yourselves to blame. I'm done caring about you if you don't even care enough to show up and vote every 2 years. You don't think it makes a difference? It makes all the difference in the world. Stupid fucking Americans.

"Don't vote, it just encourages the bastards." (P.J. O'Rourke)

Or the point being that voting rep or dem is the same as not voting. They hold on to power and do what they like either way.

 

[Theowl32]

Lol at liberals trying to find out "why it happened."

Democrats are such creepy liars.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Lol at liberals trying to find out "why it happened."

Democrats are such creepy liars.

Yeah, whoever learned anything from history?

 

[Iceweasel]

Frigid...

You don't even need all that here. We have other parties, there is no law that says you must vote Republican or Democrat.

America First Party*	2002
American Conservative Party	2008
American Freedom Party	2010	American Third Position Party
American Populist Party	2009
America's Party	2008	America's Independent Party
Christian Liberty Party*	1996	American Heritage Party
Citizens Party of the United States	2004	New American Independent Party
Communist Party USA	1919	International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties
Freedom Socialist Party	1966
Independent American Party	1998
Justice Party	2011
Modern Whig Party	2008
National Socialist Movement	1974	World Union of National Socialists
Objectivist Party	2008
Party for Socialism and Liberation	2004
Peace and Freedom Party	1967
Pirate Party	2006	Pirate Party International (observer)
Prohibition Party	1869
Reform Party of the United States of America	1995	United We Stand America
Socialist Action	1983	Fourth International
Socialist Alternative	1986	Committee for a Workers' International
Socialist Equality Party	1966	Workers League	International Committee of the Fourth International
Socialist Party USA	1973
Socialist Workers Party	1938	Pathfinder tendency (unofficial)
United States Marijuana Party	2002
United States Pacifist Party	1983
Unity Party of America	2004
Workers World Party

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Papageorgio]

At least you agree how Obama got elected, I don't think making people vote is going to improve anything. They are low low no information voters that are worse than those the Democrats complained about this election.

How does Germany vote on what they are not told?

The German election has both PR and FPTP. In other words, the make up of parliament will be, more or less, as the PR vote is. Anyone who doesn't make 5% in PR is kicked out unless they win a FPTP seat. So the parties who do get in have a slightly higher percentage of seats than the votes they got.

CDU 34.1% of the PR vote. 40.5% of the seats
SPD 25.7% of the PR vote, 30.5% of the seats
Die Linke 8.6% of the PR vote, 10.2% of the seats
Gruene 8.4% of the PR vote, 10% of the seats
CSU 7.4% of the PR vote, 8.9% of the seats.

That's basically 4 parties (CDU and CSU are essentially the same party).

There's also a constituency vote, though no smaller parties this time around gained a seat when they still got under 5% of the PR vote. The last time it happened was in 2002 when the PDS got 40% of the vote and 2 seats. But the option is there anyway.

If you look at constituency votes the CDU got 3% more votes there than in PR. SPD 4% more. Die Linke got 2.9% constituency and 8.6% PR. Die Gruene got 1.9% constituency and 8.4% of the PR vote.

So what it suggests is that big parties thrive on FPTP constituency votes, people are more likely to vote for them there than in PR when they're more likely to choose a smaller party.

Hence Germany has a 4/5/6 party system (Two parties got just under 5% and no FPTP seats). It means people have more of a choice. The big parties can't just rely on being the big party as they do in the US.

What does this mean? It means you have the choice of lots of parties. Their platforms are different, so you don't like the CDU's platform but don't want SPD to get into power you can vote for another party, like FPD. This means political parties need to appeal to the voters. They can't control the media like the reps and dems do, they need to actually appeal. In the US the parties tell people what the election is about, what issues are important. In Germany the people tell the politicians what is important.

Initials? I am not going to look up a bunch of initials, if you are to lazy to use real words, your message is not worth decoding.

 

[Papageorgio]

Frigid...

You don't even need all that here. We have other parties, there is no law that says you must vote Republican or Democrat.

America First Party*	2002
American Conservative Party	2008
American Freedom Party	2010	American Third Position Party
American Populist Party	2009
America's Party	2008	America's Independent Party
Christian Liberty Party*	1996	American Heritage Party
Citizens Party of the United States	2004	New American Independent Party
Communist Party USA	1919	International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties
Freedom Socialist Party	1966
Independent American Party	1998
Justice Party	2011
Modern Whig Party	2008
National Socialist Movement	1974	World Union of National Socialists
Objectivist Party	2008
Party for Socialism and Liberation	2004
Peace and Freedom Party	1967
Pirate Party	2006	Pirate Party International (observer)
Prohibition Party	1869
Reform Party of the United States of America	1995	United We Stand America
Socialist Action	1983	Fourth International
Socialist Alternative	1986	Committee for a Workers' International
Socialist Equality Party	1966	Workers League	International Committee of the Fourth International
Socialist Party USA	1973
Socialist Workers Party	1938	Pathfinder tendency (unofficial)
United States Marijuana Party	2002
United States Pacifist Party	1983
Unity Party of America	2004
Workers World Party

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Yes, but do we have the FPS, DGR, the ABC, LMNOP, XYZZY? WTF?

 

[frigidweirdo]

At least you agree how Obama got elected, I don't think making people vote is going to improve anything. They are low low no information voters that are worse than those the Democrats complained about this election.

How does Germany vote on what they are not told?

The German election has both PR and FPTP. In other words, the make up of parliament will be, more or less, as the PR vote is. Anyone who doesn't make 5% in PR is kicked out unless they win a FPTP seat. So the parties who do get in have a slightly higher percentage of seats than the votes they got.

CDU 34.1% of the PR vote. 40.5% of the seats
SPD 25.7% of the PR vote, 30.5% of the seats
Die Linke 8.6% of the PR vote, 10.2% of the seats
Gruene 8.4% of the PR vote, 10% of the seats
CSU 7.4% of the PR vote, 8.9% of the seats.

That's basically 4 parties (CDU and CSU are essentially the same party).

There's also a constituency vote, though no smaller parties this time around gained a seat when they still got under 5% of the PR vote. The last time it happened was in 2002 when the PDS got 40% of the vote and 2 seats. But the option is there anyway.

If you look at constituency votes the CDU got 3% more votes there than in PR. SPD 4% more. Die Linke got 2.9% constituency and 8.6% PR. Die Gruene got 1.9% constituency and 8.4% of the PR vote.

So what it suggests is that big parties thrive on FPTP constituency votes, people are more likely to vote for them there than in PR when they're more likely to choose a smaller party.

Hence Germany has a 4/5/6 party system (Two parties got just under 5% and no FPTP seats). It means people have more of a choice. The big parties can't just rely on being the big party as they do in the US.

What does this mean? It means you have the choice of lots of parties. Their platforms are different, so you don't like the CDU's platform but don't want SPD to get into power you can vote for another party, like FPD. This means political parties need to appeal to the voters. They can't control the media like the reps and dems do, they need to actually appeal. In the US the parties tell people what the election is about, what issues are important. In Germany the people tell the politicians what is important.

Initials? I am not going to look up a bunch of initials, if you are to lazy to use real words, your message is not worth decoding.

That has to be the laziest post ever. The initials don't matter ffs. Look at the MESSAGE I'M TELLING YOU. You took one look, see a CDU and SPD and then you turn off. What, is that the limit to your intellectual capacity?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Frigid...

You don't even need all that here. We have other parties, there is no law that says you must vote Republican or Democrat.

Yes, I know, I posted this the other day.

The point is, that people don't vote other parties. Why? I made it clear. FPTP favors people voting big parties. It makes people feel they don't have a choice.
The point being that the main two parties get much more % of the vote from FPTP constituency votes than they get from PR votes.
Smaller parties see an increase. The greens saw a 1.1% increase on the same day from one type of vote to the other. And that's when people know there isn't going to be that much difference.

 

[Redfish]

Frigid...

You don't even need all that here. We have other parties, there is no law that says you must vote Republican or Democrat.

Yes, I know, I posted this the other day.

The point is, that people don't vote other parties. Why? I made it clear. FPTP favors people voting big parties. It makes people feel they don't have a choice.
The point being that the main two parties get much more % of the vote from FPTP constituency votes than they get from PR votes.
Smaller parties see an increase. The greens saw a 1.1% increase on the same day from one type of vote to the other. And that's when people know there isn't going to be that much difference.

the reality is that when you vote 3rd party, you end up helping the worst of the major party candidates. Thats how Perot voters elected Clinton and how Wallace voters elected Nixon.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes, but do we have the FPS, DGR, the ABC, LMNOP, XYZZY? WTF?

I think we have a lot of candidates for TPP, The Pity Party.

 

[frigidweirdo]

the reality is that when you vote 3rd party, you end up helping the worst of the major party candidates. Thats how Perot voters elected Clinton and how Wallace voters elected Nixon.

Potentially. In the US at least. In Germany and other countries you don;'t. Why? Because they have a system that allows people to say what they want to say, and vote for who they want to vote for without having to be tactical. It takes the power away from the politicians.

Now, the ONLY way to change the US system is to vote for a 3rd party. It doesn't matter if you get the worst of the main two candidates, you're still getting a candidate from the main two parties. Nothing will change regardless of whether it's a monkey, a chimp, a dem or a rep in that seat.

 

[Iceweasel]

Now, the ONLY way to change the US system is to vote for a 3rd party. It doesn't matter if you get the worst of the main two candidates, you're still getting a candidate from the main two parties. Nothing will change regardless of whether it's a monkey, a chimp, a dem or a rep in that seat.

By all means, vote third party. Pass it along to your friends.

 

[frigidweirdo]

By all means, vote third party. Pass it along to your friends.

Imagine if 20 million did.