Gabriel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,019
- Reaction score
- 118
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
Just take away the government power that allows it to favor certain business and entangle itself in business and campaign finance won't matter.
So anonymous adds posted in the media can't be tracked .. ? The regulation on campaign finance should be stringent. The only thing at hand with politics should be the polices presented.. not who can put on the best show with flashing lights and fireworks most often.
So anonymous adds posted in the media can't be tracked .. ? The regulation on campaign finance should be stringent. The only thing at hand with politics should be the polices presented.. not who can put on the best show with flashing lights and fireworks most often.
If the government has basically nothing to do with business, then there would be no reason for companies to try to coax it to do what they want. The only reason that companies involve themselves in government is because government concerns itself so much with business.
Why can't I vote for whoever puts on the best show with flashing lights and fireworks most often?
We should also prohibit candidates from showing ads with their likenesses, since some people may vote for one candidate or another based upon his physical appearance and not the issues.
Also, we should prohibit candidates from using their names, since that can tell voters about that person's sex and possibly about their race and/or nationality. There's all kinds of people who vote based on those criteria and not on policies.
And that has what to do with what I posted?dear lord man... Well if libertarians get their way with the system it won't matter anyhow really would it? It's half way owned by corporations as it is ... might as well just dump the democracy in their hands.
What magical fantasy world allows a free economy to operate without government?
And that has what to do with what I posted?
heh.. thats the problem. Instead of voters being concerned with the policy they get entranced by the media coverage.. usually the one who gets the most coverage. It really is silly to argue that policy is secondary to the amount of media exposure a politician can buy. Why would you want people to be focused on whomever gets the most exposure in the media over what they are actually planning to do?
Capitalism? I'm not saying that the government should be completely out of it, they should still prosecute crimes, but the level that they involve themselves in business now lends itself to corruption.
Depends where you stand. You are referring to an ethereal realm of theory where economists cannot agree as to whether institutions in the economy serve the interests of the people, parties, politics itself, or merely the raw interests of businesses at the expense of the people.
The post I made was the continuation in your line of thinking. All but one or two presidents have been over six feet tall, therefore appearance obviously plays a huge role in the selection. In the famous Kennedy-Nixon debate, nobody knows or cares what either candidate said; all that mattered is that JFK looked young and full of energy, while Nixon looked like a cadaver.Well I understand it's complicated but I just presented a situation where you are right. The post you made was nothing but sarcasm anyhow.
Umm, face time alone is not going to do it for you. Meg Whitman is outspending Jerry Brown by orders of magnitude and the two of them are still neck and neck in the race.
The post I made was the continuation in your line of thinking. All but one or two presidents have been over six feet tall, therefore appearance obviously plays a huge role in the selection. In the famous Kennedy-Nixon debate, nobody knows or cares what either candidate said; all that mattered is that JFK looked young and full of energy, while Nixon looked like a cadaver.
:roll: I don't know why I even bother talking to you ...No all you did was make an extreme sarcastic example that is completely ridiculous.. However I countered with a completely acceptable outcome to libertarians anti regulation scheme.. where the corporations take over the rest of your democracy.
:roll: I don't know why I even bother talking to you ...
Try thinking before responding next time.Ironically I responded to your completely rediculous suggestion.
Well they should be neck and neck.. I mean money doesn't buy all the votes but it can buy ignorance. Anyone who actually thinks the tea party libertarians are an acceptable alternative based on the bull**** they say has been completely duped or are lacking in personal intellectual discourse. ... "hrm shiny"
Try thinking before responding next time.