BF2S Forums Debating politics is a futile effort.

Those are all serious problems, but in the end I think it call comes down to voter indifference/ignorance which is propagated by the mainstream media.

Today, I heard a woman say "I'm voting for Hillary because it's about time we had a female President". You think the issues matter, but they really don't. It's almost sickening what stupid bullshit determines who is our next President. For example, Giuliani was the front-runner for a long time simply because of name recognition. It was probably his idiotic campaign strategy that ended his bid, but I can only hope it was because the electorate caught on to the fact that he is some sort of crypt demon.

I'm capable of critical thought and have the ability to differentiate real news from spin or propaganda, but I'm seriously having my doubts about others.

Last edited by Bagel_Bites (2008-02-04 11:35:42)

Do we even need a single person to be in charge anymore?

Even aside of the press and their antics, what bugs the hell out of me is that a good portion of American voters cast their votes according to inconsequential things like:

1) Looks; attractive, tall, short, dark, light, fat, thin, hair, etc..

2) Speech; regardless of their voting records and other proofs, what they say in their pandering speeches is what's taken as gosepl

3) Money; the best candidates probably aren't able to contribute or raise even half a million dollars towards their primary and general election..in the end, money almost always buys an office.

4) Religion/Sexual Orientation/Race; There are plenty of religious nutjobs who think Romney's religion is the only factor in booting him...when his ass-backwards and ever changing (read: pandering whore) politics are ignored.  Non-religious nutjobs will not vote for Obama or Clinton if they use "God" in their speeches when there's other factors 100x more important than that.

5) Peer pressure; I don't want to even guess how many irresponsible losers go to the polls to vote on who a friend told them to vote for.  I make a serious study of all ballot measures and candidate backgrounds and records before voting and my wife just asks me what to vote on and I tell her to do her own study or don't vote.  Be nice if at least half of voters studied out their votes instead of letting comercials, friends, co-workers, and their neighborhoods vote for them.


In our world there exists a common ethic in avoiding conflicts of interest.  While it's adhered to in some circles of influence, it doesn't apply in the most important areas...like political office.  Gaining unfair advantage to be elected should be dealt with like it is in the gaming world - perma-ban.

RAIMIUS wrote:

So true...

Looks, oratory skill, and media coverage are the deciding factors in most races, IMO.

when have these things NEVER been a part of politics?  Im wondering.  People here are speaking as if these are new phenomena.


A person is smart, people are morons.

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-02-04 16:18:11)

Locoloki wrote:

Do we even need a single person to be in charge anymore?

No single person makes up the Presidency.

Bagel_Bites wrote:

Now we've got news outlets such as CNN blowing the whole "Obama snubs Clinton during State of the Union" fiasco out of proportion. These are not issues. Voters should not be choosing their candidate based on this. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Remember, Bush got elected because people wanted to have a beer with him...they didn't care or even know if he was capable of running a country. History will repeat itself.

I agree that the media covers irrelevant facts. However, when a politician is hostile towards another candidate it may indicate something in his charter. There is already an unwillingness for politicians in Washington to compromise, or cooperate with each other. Not only might this be an example of partisan politics but it could provide insight into how this candidates attitude would be reflected towards other world leaders. Would he be snubbing Germany now because they won't send more troops to Afghanistan?,, etc..etc.

It was however exaggerated out of proportion.

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

So true...

Looks, oratory skill, and media coverage are the deciding factors in most races, IMO.

when have these things NEVER been a part of politics?  Im wondering.

Like the last eight years man..lol

IRONCHEF wrote:

A conspiracy I abide is that the media elects the leaders we have with both blatant and subtle propagation.  Polls?  i've never been included in ANY of the dozen or so national or state polls, yet we all believe they indicate an accurate cross section of public opinion...zogby polls being among the most accurate...then the media publishes those polls, gives air time to make sure we know who they wish to grand stand...or destroy...and since we are all mass-media eating sheep we follow suit.

Especially primary polls. It is simply not a matter of voting along party lines .

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

So true...

Looks, oratory skill, and media coverage are the deciding factors in most races, IMO.

when have these things NEVER been a part of politics?  Im wondering.  People here are speaking as if these are new phenomena.


A person is smart, people are morons.

Good point.  Perhaps I am romanticising the "good old days" a bit too much.

The media HAS dramatically increased its spin power in the past 120 years.  I find it pathetic that people still rely on one or two news sources for their info these days.

Last edited by RAIMIUS (2008-02-04 19:55:32)