Voting

[Magus86]

I didn't say gun control absolutely is not a political issue. I said it isn't necessarily one. I'm not debating gun control. I'm not debating anything. A debate is a conversation in which several people argue about a particular subject. Who the feck in here is arguing with me about gun control? Nobody??? Then it's not a fecking debate. This is what happened. Unknown said obama wants to take away guns. Then I stated what I thought about gun control. He misunderstood and tried to argue that people own guns for protection, after which I pointed out that I never said that wasn't the case... that's not a damn debate. It WOULD be a debate if I were arguing with him about gun control, but that's not the case.

Would you automatically call a conversation about abortion a "political debate" too? Just because, in certain contexts, something can be considered a political "issue," that doesn't mean that any conversation in which said "issue" is discussed is a political debate...

Let's see, what did you assume? You assumed I liked obama without researching when I didn't like any candidate, and then you assumed I liked the libertarian candidate because I said I would sooner vote for a libertarian. However, the fact remains that I wouldn't vote for anybody unless I knew enough or gave a poo. And now you're assuming that I'm trying to be "edgy," which is derived from the assumption that I give a flying feck what you people think of me in the first place.

To answer your question from earlier about why two sides of the same coin is bad, well let's see... First of all, I don't think either side really gives a poo about us. Secondly, they're almost exact opposites, as far as I can tell. Whatever democrats are for, republicans seem to automatically be against. It's impossible to pick one because they both suck in their own way. for instance, Democrats think abortion is okay, which I agree with, but a lot of them seem to also want to have gun control, which I don't agree with. The republicans, on the other hand, are mostly against gun control, but they're also against abortions. And it's like that with just about everything. I can't pick one, and neither side seems to be willing to compromise on anything. I think abortion should be legal, and we shouldn't have gun control, but what political party agrees with that?

[The Geologist]

Let's see, what did you assume? You assumed I liked obama without researching when I didn't like any candidate, and then you assumed I liked the libertarian candidate because I said I would sooner vote for a libertarian. However, the fact remains that I wouldn't vote for anybody unless I knew enough or gave a poo. And now you're assuming that I'm trying to be "edgy," which is derived from the assumption that I give a flying feck what you people think of me in the first place.

...wtf?   Do you just make stuff up, or is this actually reality for you?

Please, quote me on where I assumed you like Obama.  Where did I say you like Obama?  Good luck finding such a quote though, because I didn't.  Because you made such a stink over hating the two party system, and both parties...why the hell would I assume you like one of them?  Is it because I told you that you can have a role in changing something?

Oh, I'm sorry.  I didn't know you'd rather go for a certain political party without knowing jack about their candidate.  When you say you'd rather go libertarian, it makes me think you've actually got some reason to do so.  But apparently that is also nonsense, 'eh?  Can't be bothered to do any research, and didn't "hear" enough about them this time around, right?

And, ah...I think plenty of other people would agree you're trying to be "edgy".  Coming out and saying "screw that noise" is somehow not edgy?  Give me a break.  I wasn't even the first person to say that man; just agreeing with someone else who saw the BS.  You obviously wanted to be the non-conformist, and it's painfully obvious you do give a flying feck about what people think about you.  If you didn't, you wouldn't respond to every point addressed to you.

[Magus86]

Oops, my bad. I must have read something wrong earlier. You didn't assume I liked  obama, but you did assume I liked the libertarian candidate.

Why is this so confusing to you? It's very simple, really. Let me explain one last time. Try not to read it so fast so it all gets in there, k? I don't have the time, energy, or desire to pay enough attention to politics to make an informed decision on who I should vote for, so I don't vote. I also know that both sides suck equally, and from what I HAVE HEARD(get that? what I have heard? Meaning, I haven't gone researching, but I have been exposed to some small amount of information, and if I had to make a decision, I would have nothing else to base it on, so I go by what I have) I like the libertarians. That doesn't mean that I'm gonna sit here and argue with you as to why they're better, since I really don't know and don't give a poo. And there would be no point in going out and researching, since even if they fit me perfectly, they'll never get elected anyway. Notice how I said "If I had to pick," not "I pick." A few years back, I spoke with a libertarian at my highschool, and they seemed to be the most reasonable at the time. Now unless either democrats or republicans have gone thru some drastic reformation since then, I'd still consider them the most reasonable. But that still doesn't mean I'm going to vote for them. And yes, it's possible to like a party but not the candidate, Geologist... If it wasn't, there would be no need for the primaries.

here's an example. Some friend of yours buys a mop. And then he tells you "omg, this mop is the poo." Then later someone asks you which mop is better. You don't need or want to buy a mop, but you're in a situation where you've been asked to pick. If you never heard anything good about the other mops, or you've heard more good things about one mop than the others, you'll probably tell the person 'well, based on what i've heard, this one is better.' that doesn't mean you're endorsing one over the other, and it doesn't mean that if you needed one, you wouldn't go out and research for yourself. it just means that you don't feckin know. And that's exactly the situation I'm in with this political BS. Why is it so difficult for you to understand?

No, saying screw that noise is not edgy. It was one of the fecking options. What is edgy about not wanting to be involved in something?? No, I didn't want to be the non-conformist, I wanted to answer the feckin question the author of this thread was asking... If I wanted to be non-conformist, I wouldn't have answered the question. And I dunno if you've noticed, but the same number of people said "screw that noise" and "yes, I am."

No, if I really cared about what you think of me, I'd change in an attempt to make myself seem more likable. What I care about is that your opinion of me is not tainted by false information or assumptions, not the result that your brain spits out after processing that information. Whether you realize it or not, there's a difference.

[The Geologist]

LMAO...haven't got the time or the energy to do a little research?  Spare me.  I know plenty about being busy and finishing the work day sapped of energy.  But apparently you have plenty of time to post about politics on here in the evenings.

Just think - you could have gotten many an answer by spending that time doing a little research.

[Magus86]

Yes, I could have, but why should I participate in a system that I think is broken in the first place? Or what if I come to the conclusion that no candidate is right for me, or if I find that the candidate that is right will never win? Then what? Then I guess I shouldn't vote, just like I didn't, because it would be pointless.

EDIT: Apparently now more people have answered "screw that noise," so I guess that means anybody who answered "yes, I am," is trying to be "edgy" because that choice is the new minority. Clearly the voters are trying to be non-conformist. HOORAY FOR LOGIC!!!! WEEEEEEE!!!

[iDante]

Many would say that it is not a right but the duty of the citizens of a democracy to vote.

Magus would you do us all a favor and commit a felony, then this will all end (you cannot vote by law if you are a felon).

[Magus86]

LOL, this isn't a real democracy, and no, I will not commit a felony.

"Let's get out and vote. Let's make our voices heard.
We've been given the right to choose between a douche and a turd.
It's democracy in action. Put your freedom to the test.
A big fat turd or a stupid douche, Which do you like best?"

[iDante]

Heh, south park ftw.

And for all intents and purposes, when it comes down to presidential elections the US is a real democracy. The popular vote (aside from 2000 election, but that was BS anyways) always decides the winner.

[Magus86]

When I said it wasn't a real democracy, I was referring to how laws get passed and things like that, not necessarily the presidential elections. And as far as the 2000 election is concerned, it doesn't matter how many times it's happened. What matters is the fact that it's possible for the person with the most actual votes to lose at all. That's why it's a broken system.

What I don't understand about it is that they need to count each individual vote to decide who gets which state, but if they have to count them all anyway, why not just leave it at that? What is the point of even having an electoral college? We have two sets of votes to be counted, but why? I don't get it...

Oh, and this is totally unrelated, but South Park is the only thing left on TV that's actually worth watching anymore.

[iDante]

The electoral college is a compromise between people who didn't trust the people to choose the correct president and the people who did (republic vs democracy). We've been covering this in APUSH lately, and yes it is a partially flawed system, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't vote.

Oh, and this is totally unrelated, but South Park is the only thing left on TV that's actually worth watching anymore.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart/The Colbert Report

[Mitak]

Bush's countenance & speeches were hilarious, at least. That's all he could do. :/ Every time I see his face on TV I can't help but laugh. Obama isn't even worth laughing at. Happy premature 2012, USA.

[UnknownSniper]

I just have to throw this out there, since South Park was brought into the thread.

You say it's the only thing worth watch, that further proves how mentally retarded you are. The show is based around some emo kids who got beat up in school making a cartoon to make fun of other kids in school. I don't see how that is good to watch, since most of the time it's just racist jokes that aren't funny...

You can learn more watch Barney, and at least Barney has things to laugh at.

Obama on Gun Control
Obama on Gun Control, new source Q/A

Knock yourself out with the original "debate" Mr. American. 

[The Geologist]

Edit: Scratch that, it's not worth it to carry this out any farther.   

[n00bface]

Yes, I could have, but why should I participate in a system that I think is broken in the first place? Or what if I come to the conclusion that no candidate is right for me, or if I find that the candidate that is right will never win? Then what? Then I guess I shouldn't vote, just like I didn't, because it would be pointless.

1) You evidently don't understand the system enough, based on what you've said in this thread, to declare it broken.
2) If no candidate is right for you, then you vote for the one whose ideas are closest to yours.  That way when he's put into power, moderate digression from his policies will be offered by different candidates in future elections.  Alternatively, you could vote for the candidate who is 'right'.  It's because of folks like you that these candidates are never successful: they have no chance, therefore it's best to abstain?

[LtKillroy]

Here's the thing, all these topics and arguements are old. That is what I don't like about politics, the same people saying the same things over and over again. If only 80% of people didn't vote party lines, then politics would actually be interesting. Instead we have character attacks and other stupid crap. I find the whole political system really sad really, few ever come up with original thoughts, and the ones that do dominate the conversation. I am not just talking about here, but everywhere. Reason I wish they didn't have political parties.

[UnknownSniper]

Probably be easier if the current president and vice president just chose from the presidential candidates, instead of having a country that's got people from all around the world do it. (Pretty obvious reasons)

[a-4-year-old]

Probably be easier if the current president and vice president just chose from the presidential candidates, instead of having a country that's got people from all around the world do it. (Pretty obvious reasons)

That is absolutely stupid.
If I was president I would elect whichever person I want (myself?) and a monkey which no sane person would ever elect (you?) so whoever I want to reign for forever would.

[UnknownSniper]

Probably be easier if the current president and vice president just chose from the presidential candidates, instead of having a country that's got people from all around the world do it. (Pretty obvious reasons)

That is absolutely stupid.
If I was president I would elect whichever person I want (myself?) and a monkey which no sane person would ever elect (you?) so whoever I want to reign for forever would.

You would also be categorized as a monkey, because nobody would choose you either, dickstain hunkasaurous-rex. Go flame elsewhere, apparently you know nothing about the government if you think people can't do anything if the wrong person was made president.
Yes, it is a stupid idea and obviously you can't tell sarcasm when you see it either.

[SadistAtHeart]

You would also be categorized as a monkey, because nobody would choose you either dickstain. Go flame elsewhere,

I'd like to open up my visit into this wonderful thread by pointing out the lovely irony in this post. Then, I'll just go ahead and say that if there's anymore posts like this from anyone, I'm locking this thread. Try to make this into one of those intelligent and calm debate threads that never seem to exist here.

[Vltava]

Probably be easier if the current president and vice president just chose from the presidential candidates, instead of having a country that's got people from all around the world do it. (Pretty obvious reasons)

LOL

good game USA