A New EB Tavern

[cmacq]

Indirectly, I've had a few dealings with McCain's staff. Because of this, I can't say I have a favorable opinion of them or him. What I can say is if he knew a little more about the district and state he is supposed to be representing, his aids wouldn't be calling every time some little bull happens to pop up, seemingly out of nowhere.


General Appo, your Italian, right? What is the Italian law concerning citizenship?

[Horst Nordfink]

Small bulls pop up inexplicably in Arizona? How queer.

Having only seen a small amount about John McCain, I much prefer him to Hillary Clinton. At least he seems to be "about" something (however unpleasant and strange), Clinton seems to be just eager for holding the Presidency for the sake of holding the Presidency. Her only perceivable reasons for being President seem to be:

1. Her husband was President and he wasn't as shit as the current one.
2. "I really really want it!"

I dislike the very sight of her. The grinning witch.

[Dhampir]

Small bulls pop up inexplicably in Arizona? How queer.

Having only seen a small amount about John McCain, I much prefer him to Hillary Clinton. At least he seems to be "about" something (however unpleasant and strange), Clinton seems to be just eager for holding the Presidency for the sake of holding the Presidency. Her only perceivable reasons for being President seem to be:

1. Her husband was President and he wasn't as shit as the current one.
2. "I really really want it!"

I dislike the very sight of her. The grinning witch.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Ibrahim]

LOL ROFLE
ok ok I'm back.
count clintacula

[General Appo]

General Appo, your Italian, right? What is the Italian law concerning citizenship?

Italian? Where did you get that from? I´m actually from Sweden, where we have some (I believe) quite liberate laws concerning the granting of citizenship. I don´t have the means to find out about it right now, but I think it´s possible to attain a citizenship after living in Sweden for... maybe 20 years? Maybe 10, I don´t know. I think it´s after 3 years that you get to vote in the communal elections though, or something like that. You get more and more right as time goes on.

As for the American presidency, I (as I mentioned in the old tavern) despise all the candidates, plus the whole American system.
Firstly, the election campaigns are based on big freaking bribes. A big oil company gives a president candidate a shitload of money and in return the candidate favours that company if he/she gets elected as President. How is that not both bribery and abuse of power?
Second the whole electorate thing. How can a state with 500,000 people and one with 900,000 people get the same amount of electors? Are the people in the former state more worthy, is their opinion more important?
Thirdly the Disctrict of Columbia. 600,000 people in the capital of the nation that are completely cut of from both basic human rights and the nations laws and constitution. They have only a non-voting represent in the Congress, and nobody on the Senate.
Fourthly, the entire President thing is un-democratic. Firstly it brings to much focus on personality rather then actual political opinions, which should be what matters. It´s all to much "Hey, he looks reliable, let´s vote for him" instead of "Hey, his economic plan to get the economy on tracks really looks like it could work, let´s vote for him". Of course nearly all nations are partially guilty of this, but America even more. Secondly the whole veto thing. A bad President could block everything, everything what so ever. One man should not have that kind of power, especially not considering what kind of nutheads the Americans usually elect.
Fifthly the whole Supreme Court. That a bunch of people not in anyway elected by the people should have an incredibly powerful position for life is just ridiculous, especially considering what nutheads usually gets to sit in the Court.
I could go on and on, but I see no reason to. Finally, let me just say that if I were an American I would vote for Obama. Mainly becasue a strongly disagree with the Republican party on almost everything and becasue Clinton does indeed seem more interested in short-term good PR solutions then true possibly hurtful ones. I don´t want Obama as President for the mighties nation on earth, but I want him more then the other two.

Man this got big. Apologies.

[cmacq]

Sweden?

Right,
I think the reason that citizenship has long been a big deal in the US is because...

...depending on the flow, or often flood, of new comers, the economic worth of the individual is questioned. In turn, the worth of the individual is about the only freedom that real counts for anything; Economic Freedom or Freedom from Want. All other Freedoms are worthless without Freedom from Want and the number of citizens and non-citizens has a direct impact on this. As you may have noticed, most elites don't understand this concept, as most people live simply to serve or provide their every want or need.

[Dhampir]

Sweden?

Right,
I think the reason that citizenship has long been a big deal in the US is because...

...depending on the flow, or often flood, of new comers, the economic worth of the individual is questioned. In turn, the worth of the individual is about the only freedom that real counts for anything; Economic Freedom or Freedom from Want. All other Freedoms are worthless without Freedom from Want and the number of citizens and non-citizens has a direct impact on this. As you may have noticed, most elites don't understand this concept, as most people live simply to serve or provide their every want or need.

"Freedom from want"? Philosophically speaking, there is no such thing. For a government to attempt to achieve it is folly. For an individual to think it is possible is a delusion.

I clearly don't understand the concept, cmacq, and I'm far from an "elite". I payed my way through a 3rd rate university on loans and 60 hour work weeks and my parents combined make less than $50k a year.

Everything must be worked for. It will not fall into your lap for free. "Freedom from want" can only be approached by hard work by individuals.

[cmacq]

Sorry, I don't speak Philosophically.

This is not about work, rather its about worth.

But tell me if you can, why did you go to school? Maybe to increase your worth?

[Dhampir]

Sorry, I don't speak Philosophically.

"Freedom from want" can only exist in the philosophic sense.

But tell me if you can, why are you in school right now?

I'm not. I have graduated. I am auditing to keep my skills up.

I am applying to graduate schools because you can't do anything with a BA in History or a BA in English.

[cmacq]

Sorry again, I edited on you, before I saw your reply.
But I see your answer was anticipated.

[Ibrahim]

Dhampir's right you know..that said, one could still help the poor help themselves
but the US government's on something, and I must have it..
@general Appo: tragically, you're right. But the bribes are actually controlled (in theory ) no more than 2400 from any man. that said, I really agree on the fact that this is a personality contest, and something must be done about it. problem is that:
1-voter turnout is very low-hopelessly so (50-60 % going by VEP, 45-52% going by VAP). In sweden if I recall its around 80% and over, and Australia is even higher. that's because the 2 part systm to be honest limits choices (yes I know about the others, but they're hopeless)
2-most of those who don't vote think they don't matter. blatent BS.
3-I got to have whatever most of those who vote in primaries are having. they are typically party extremists (especially in the caucus' here)

also, I think you exaggerated the electoral process' inequalities. True, I admit that the way its done is messed up, but her's how it works:

1-there are, by default, 2 electors a state (based on senate representation.)
2-then there are a minimum of 1 reps per 300,000 poeple (smallest is around 500000= 2 reps). the toatal of reps+senators is the amount a state gets in an electoral college. Origionally, they were the only ones who voted (popular vote is from 1824 onwards). In other wordss, The USA was not origionally a democracy per se (the founding fathers were mostly against the idea of such a thing). and all this would be fine and good, if it were't for the freezing of the houses' number at 435 reps in the years 1925-1935 (this meant the if a state grew too slow, it loses reps). that's why there are inequalities. tht's also why a state like Ohio, which has 11 million poeple, is overepresented compared to say pennsylvania, or massachusetts has 10, while Washington state has 9, even though Washington has more poeple.well, this was too long as well, but here are my sloutions:
1-disband the party system: that should do it. less on popularity/ party BS, more on issues

[Dhampir]

Thirdly the Disctrict of Columbia. 600,000 people in the capital of the nation that are completely cut of from both basic human rights and the nations laws and constitution. They have only a non-voting represent in the Congress, and nobody on the Senate.

The city was not founded with the intention of any people becoming permanent residents. The intent was that it would be a seat of government removed from the mob, where representatives would go for their business and then go home. It would prevent both riots and protests from consuming the government and to force politicians to live "beyond the beltway", in modern parlance. Everyday workers were intended to live in nearby towns like Arlington.

I very much like the idea of forcing politicians to live "beyond the beltway". Any more than a 2 year term in the House and the politician goes native and resents the voters who want politicians to do their job.

[Dhampir]

Second the whole electorate thing. How can a state with 500,000 people and one with 900,000 people get the same amount of electors? Are the people in the former state more worthy, is their opinion more important?

In a country the size and scope of the US, if the popular vote were all that were counted campaigns would only speak to the coasts, where the highest concentration of population are.

With the electoral college, even an issue important to North Dakota has to be addressed by a Presidential candidate.

Without it, New York, Florida and California would control the agenda of the White House.

Edit- When the system was set up, the numbers in your example would be more like 900,000 (New York or Virginia individually) and 10,000 (any one else individually).

[russia almighty]

Dhampir, so many Europeans and countries in general with tiny populations don't understand that. We have the third highest population in the world; standard electoral systems aren't possible without pissing off a huge section of the population.

Notice, big states are still very important to the presidential race.

Though, I wish the electoral college worked, so if one candidate got the popular vote in a state, the electoral votes go to that candidate. It'd please everyone; popular vote becomes very important, and it forces candidates to go everywhere.

Though, I wish there still was speeches from the back of rail cars :(

[cmacq]

Hell,
I wished that whomever wins the popular vote in a given state, that candidate would only get two electorals. That might keep the B-tards on their toes?

[Horst Nordfink]

To quote Emma Goldman, "if voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal".

[cmacq]

A few words of chill to quell the savage…

...vote.

If it is to be, all things are designed to be known in their proper time. So, on the face of it was carved in icy chill, where there but for ill-will, awaits a cure only death’s bedside manner can afford. Here occurred, the image of a feast offered by a host of wild beasts, where tender roast was served to feed one royal boar. Above all else were seen two untamed horse, set to battle beside an ancient oak that kicked and bit till one fell dead and the other pronounced, their victory. Then to one side came three highborn horsemen, followed by a forth, that strove war ready to ride against the wind. And deep down below, five boats of skin sailed from a jagged coast, across a sea where delve those that crave the taste of flesh and marked both day and night to defend the door, to hell.

[Horst Nordfink]

Sorry?

[Dhampir]

Though, I wish the electoral college worked, so if one candidate got the popular vote in a state, the electoral votes go to that candidate. It'd please everyone; popular vote becomes very important, and it forces candidates to go everywhere.

There is a lot of room to reform the electoral system, but it is an excellent system which is insurance against big-state dominance. As is the primary system.

Though, I wish there still was speeches from the back of rail cars :(

I just want someone who can deliver a decent speech. Kennedy was the last one who could on a consistent basis. Although Reagan had a couple good ones--like the Pointe du Hoc speech--but never when it counted. Elections are more and more about personality in an environment where everyone is a halfwit once they start talking.