• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Debate Politics a good and fair representation of society overall?

Is Debate Politics a good and fair representation of society overall?

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 7.9%
  • No

    Votes: 58 92.1%

  • Total voters
    63
No, because conspiracy theorists, in the real world represent a tiny fraction of less than one percent. Also, libertarians...they can never get up to 1% for one of their presidential candidates.

That's because most libertarians are practical enough to vote for one of the two major parties.
 
Libertarians cannot even get 1% in the national vote for president every four years. But here, they are over represented by numbers that must be twenty times that. So in that regard, there is not way that DP is any sort of representative sample of opinion.

Voting and talking are two different things. Many libertarians vote Republican.
 
That's because most libertarians are practical enough to vote for one of the two major parties.

Exactly. Those people just havent realized voting for the major parties get them the same thing as voting libertarian and losing. Nothing.
 
Voting and talking are two different things. Many libertarians vote Republican.

And I guess some people who pretend to be vegetarians grab a burger from time to time also.




Which makes them not vegetarians.
 
Unfortunately, I have to agree with you.

My life experience is that most people on this planet are good people who would rather help other people than hurt them.

But there is a sizable minority that doesn't think that way and they make a lot of problems for the good people.

And I know the names of these people, Socialists, Communists, Nazis.
 
And I guess some people who pretend to be vegetarians grab a burger from time to time also.




Which makes them not vegetarians.

I can agree with that. Some libertarians on this site are not. Like Republicans they care more about winning than ideology.
 
Deprived of the ability to stop discussions by calling people racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, etc., left wingers are at a loss for how to proceed here. They seem to resent free speech from their political opponents quite a bit, so you get all sorts of false and irrational characterizations.

Conservatives and libertarians have learned to keep quiet in certain groups else they get their cars keyed or their tires slashed.

How downright Orwellian of you.

You support the suppression of free speech under the misapprehension you are somehow supporting it.
 
The majority of average society does not care that deeply, and is seemingly perfectly fine with hiding their collective heads in the sand and willfully ignoring issues that affect them directly. They are fine with letting others make critical decisions for them.

I believe that we here at DP are in the minority.

If any of you are a lot like me you have probably noticed that political discussion makes people uncomfortable. Most people bore the snot out of me when they talk about tv shows, puppy dogs, gym memberships, some delicious food they ate recently, the latest celebrity's embarrassing moment or about that new store that is opening soon.

I enjoy hostile debate much like my colleagues here at Debate Politics. That is why we are here. In real life it is nearly impossible to find someone to discuss these types of issues.

Every point of view appears to be properly represented since we are so diverse in political views. The only opinion not represented is the majority opinion. The majority opinion is: "That's fine. It doesn't bother me one way or another." People with that opinion may not complain but they do vote.
 
Is Debate Politics a good and fair representation of society overall?

Yes?
No?

I'm going to purposely leave out a "Maybe" option. For this question I think people should be able to make a choice one way or another.

In some ways it would seem so. We have the whole gamut of ideologies, genders, orientations, ethnicities, and so on. But, I would say 'no' for the simple reason that the vast majority of people here are here because they care deeply about social and/or political issues. Deeply enough to actually discuss them. The majority of average society does not care that deeply, and is seemingly perfectly fine with hiding their collective heads in the sand and willfully ignoring issues that affect them directly. They are fine with letting others make critical decisions for them.

I believe that we here at DP are in the minority.

I would say you are exactly right. Most Americans pay little to no attention to politics or the daily grind in Washington. They are too busy making a living or watching reality TV or some ball game. We live in a society that only half of us vote in a presidential election, where we have made things of easy to vote with all this early voting and yet we can only get in the low 50's as a percentage. So half of the population of the U.S. doesn't give a hoot. Or they just decided as my son told me, "It doesn't matter who wins, Washington is going to do what it wants anyway." So he gave up on the process a long, long time ago.

think about it, we had only 53.6% of the people vote in 2012, perhaps my son is right. Regardless of who wins, it will still be business as usual.
 
If any of you are a lot like me you have probably noticed that political discussion makes people uncomfortable. Most people bore the snot out of me when they talk about tv shows, puppy dogs, gym memberships, some delicious food they ate recently, the latest celebrity's embarrassing moment or about that new store that is opening soon.

I enjoy hostile debate much like my colleagues here at Debate Politics. That is why we are here. In real life it is nearly impossible to find someone to discuss these types of issues.

Every point of view appears to be properly represented since we are so diverse in political views. The only opinion not represented is the majority opinion. The majority opinion is: "That's fine. It doesn't bother me one way or another." People with that opinion may not complain but they do vote.
I agree with every word of this, except 'hostile'.

I would replace 'hostile' with 'honest'. Tell me what you really think and believe. I can respect that even if I disagree, Don't troll for your own amusement.
 
I would say you are exactly right. Most Americans pay little to no attention to politics or the daily grind in Washington. They are too busy making a living or watching reality TV or some ball game. We live in a society that only half of us vote in a presidential election, where we have made things of easy to vote with all this early voting and yet we can only get in the low 50's as a percentage. So half of the population of the U.S. doesn't give a hoot. Or they just decided as my son told me, "It doesn't matter who wins, Washington is going to do what it wants anyway." So he gave up on the process a long, long time ago.

think about it, we had only 53.6% of the people vote in 2012, perhaps my son is right. Regardless of who wins, it will still be business as usual.

Yep. I have favorite shows. I like to watch ball games. I also am concerned about what our government does to me in my name. It doesn't have to be an "either/or" choice.
 
How downright Orwellian of you.

You support the suppression of free speech under the misapprehension you are somehow supporting it.

Pearls before swine and all that...
 
Yep. I have favorite shows. I like to watch ball games. I also am concerned about what our government does to me in my name. It doesn't have to be an "either/or" choice.

You're right it doesn't. But for some reason we have been on a downward slope since 1960 as far as voter participation goes. In 1960 63.1% of the population voted and it was in the 60's in both 1964 and 68. I don't have any figures before 1960 so I can't addressed those earlier years. We have been as low as 49.1% in 1996. 52.2% is the average from 1972 to present. In the 1960's, 60,64, and 68 the average was 62%.

I wonder, if without the early voting would we be down to around 45%. I don't know. But I wonder if it is the trust factor. Back when I grew up in the 50's and 60's the majority of Americans trusted their government, today the majority of Americans distrust their government. About the time we had that 10 point drop in voter participation is when we crossed over from trust to distrust.
 
I can agree with that. Some libertarians on this site are not. Like Republicans they care more about winning than ideology.

Yes. Many here who pretend to be libertarians are merely anti-government types who find aid and comfort from conservatives and people on the right so they embrace the Republican party as the opponent of big government democrats. That is their belief. They believe they are co-opting the GOP and will eventually dominate the party from within but what actually is happening is that the GOP is using them and will discard them like toilet tissue that has served its purpose once used.

The real money behind the GOP and the real structure that keeps it going will never embrace anything but corporate conservatism.
 
Not at all. Way too right leaning, far too many conspiracy theorists/anti-government nuts.
 
You're right it doesn't. But for some reason we have been on a downward slope since 1960 as far as voter participation goes. In 1960 63.1% of the population voted and it was in the 60's in both 1964 and 68. I don't have any figures before 1960 so I can't addressed those earlier years. We have been as low as 49.1% in 1996. 52.2% is the average from 1972 to present. In the 1960's, 60,64, and 68 the average was 62%.

I wonder, if without the early voting would we be down to around 45%. I don't know. But I wonder if it is the trust factor. Back when I grew up in the 50's and 60's the majority of Americans trusted their government, today the majority of Americans distrust their government. About the time we had that 10 point drop in voter participation is when we crossed over from trust to distrust.

I think it's apathy. But, why the apathy? Could be the trust, as you suggest. If so, and I think the connection could definitely be there, then people need to make the connection that they have the power to change the government and put trustworthy people back in it.

The vicious circle frustrates me. "I don't vote because it doesn't do any good." Well, it doesn't do any good because you don't vote, then when/if you do you don't educate yourself and you keep re-electing the same untrustworthy people.
 
I think it's apathy. But, why the apathy? Could be the trust, as you suggest. If so, and I think the connection could definitely be there, then people need to make the connection that they have the power to change the government and put trustworthy people back in it.

The vicious circle frustrates me. "I don't vote because it doesn't do any good." Well, it doesn't do any good because you don't vote, then when/if you do you don't educate yourself and you keep re-electing the same untrustworthy people.

My oldest daughter is like my son, she doesn't vote either. I also wonder if the apathy as you call it is our politicians now a days do not give us solutions to our problems or new ideas, they just throw mud at each other hoping some of it will stick. There are a lot of people who really do not see much differences between the two parties, as my son said, all talk and no action. Do I vote for devil A or devil B?

Personally as long as our two major parties owe their heart and soul to corporations, special interests, lobbyists, wall street and billionaires who support them, perhaps they are right. It really doesn't make much of a difference. Only which corporation, special interest, wall street firm etc will be taken care of.
 
Pearls before swine and all that...

Sorry,but you can't have them.

I just look too fabulous in them to ever think about parting with them..
 
Deprived of the ability to stop discussions by calling people racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, etc., left wingers are at a loss for how to proceed here.

One of DP's single greatest weaknesses is this: To a great extent you are allowed to belittle women, people of color, LGBTs, etc. But the minute you call someone out for their racism, sexism, or homophobia, you receive swift and severe consequences.

They seem to resent free speech from their political opponents quite a bit, so you get all sorts of false and irrational characterizations.

Conservatives and libertarians have learned to keep quiet in certain groups else they get their cars keyed or their tires slashed.

These kinds of persecution-complex comments that impede our ability to have rational discussions around here. Please cite for us, with references, a specific incident where one of us DP'ers who self-identifies as a liberal, socialist, or similar, caused physical harm to someone who self-identifies as a libertarian, conservative, or similar. HARSH COMMENTS DO NOT SATISFY THIS CRITERION. I am specifically asking for proof of instances of physical violence.
 
I would have to say no. This private site's rule set is different than real life speech rules, so we are not getting a clear picture. In real life people say whatever they want to one another so you can find out what they really think/feel.

Also... what kind of society are we talking about? People who log on here are from all over the world, not just the U.S.
 
I dunno. Dey's commies everywhar here. I can't hardly stand it. Look under every thread here an you'll find you a commie lurkin with those little gray Mao hats and Che t-shirts screamin 'bout incum inegality or some such tripe. Reminds me of a spanked onion and sex wiv yer sister.
 
I would have to say no. This private site's rule set is different than real life speech rules, so we are not getting a clear picture. In real life people say whatever they want to one another so you can find out what they really think/feel.

Also... what kind of society are we talking about? People who log on here are from all over the world, not just the U.S.


Good call NL.
needcowbell.jpg


 
One of DP's single greatest weaknesses is this: To a great extent you are allowed to belittle women, people of color, LGBTs, etc. But the minute you call someone out for their racism, sexism, or homophobia, you receive swift and severe consequences.

Eh? Push-back for their name-calling? How sad. They're used to getting off scott free; I know it must be a shock.



These kinds of persecution-complex comments that impede our ability to have rational discussions around here. Please cite for us, with references, a specific incident where one of us DP'ers who self-identifies as a liberal, socialist, or similar, caused physical harm to someone who self-identifies as a libertarian, conservative, or similar. HARSH COMMENTS DO NOT SATISFY THIS CRITERION. I am specifically asking for proof of instances of physical violence.

The only reason our tires haven't been slashed, or some such, by the usual suspects is that they don't know where they are. Do we really have to go through a laundry list of acts of leftist violence against the political opponents of the left? The stuff that happens on university campuses alone would take quite a while to review. Conservatives hire body guards just to go speak at those places.
 
Back
Top Bottom