Pages: 1 … 171 172 173 174 175 … 363

 

2019-08-01 16:12:05
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX

SuperJail Warden wrote:

It's particularly frustrating in the U.S. I don't know what is going on on the ground in the U.K. but I do know that Trump and the Republicans consistently get less total votes and American culture is moving to a place that is even making me feel old and behind. The American right barely wins on technicalities for opportunities to rule over a culture that hates them.
The "culture that hates them" should stop complaining and get off their backsides then.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-08-01 16:12:18)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-02 02:01:44
uziq
Member
+492|3451
pretty sure that coastal elites with their snooty progressive views aren't the ones sitting on their backsides and expecting hand-outs.
2019-08-02 02:46:08
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX
Holding parties with each other in posh hotels doesn't really sway the average voter though.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-02 03:24:44
uziq
Member
+492|3451
i mean, yeah, donald trump's cohort have sure never had parties in posh hotels together. it's not like trump owns hotels or anything.
2019-08-02 03:35:52
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX
Trump is connecting with the average moron, Hilary connected with her friends

Election 101: You do need people to vote for you.

In the US, the UK etc the average moron takes the big decisions.
Politicians ignore them at their peril.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-02 03:53:16
uziq
Member
+492|3451

Dilbert_X wrote:

Election 101: You do need people to vote for you.
u.s. 2016 election, popular vote.

donald trump: 62,984,828 (46.1%)
hillary clinton: 65,853,514 (48.2%)

???

In the US, the UK etc the average moron takes the big decisions.
in the last general election in the UK, the liberal democrats, for example, received 2.4 million votes (7.4% of the total vote). they only won 12 out of 650 seats (1.8%).

???

thanks for being a condescending twerp, though!

Last edited by uziq (2019-08-02 04:09:36)

2019-08-02 17:33:22
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5357|London, England

uziq wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Election 101: You do need people to vote for you.
u.s. 2016 election, popular vote.

donald trump: 62,984,828 (46.1%)
hillary clinton: 65,853,514 (48.2%)

???

In the US, the UK etc the average moron takes the big decisions.
in the last general election in the UK, the liberal democrats, for example, received 2.4 million votes (7.4% of the total vote). they only won 12 out of 650 seats (1.8%).

???

thanks for being a condescending twerp, though!
Popular vote doesn't matter. There are millions of Republican voters in blue states that don't bother voting because their vote doesn't matter.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2019-08-02 17:33:59
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5357|London, England

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

the overton window has been moving right in the US for the last 50 years.
Funny that both sides say the opposite thing.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2019-08-02 17:38:18
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Election 101: You do need people to vote for you.
u.s. 2016 election, popular vote.

donald trump: 62,984,828 (46.1%)
hillary clinton: 65,853,514 (48.2%)

???

In the US, the UK etc the average moron takes the big decisions.
in the last general election in the UK, the liberal democrats, for example, received 2.4 million votes (7.4% of the total vote). they only won 12 out of 650 seats (1.8%).

???
Its no use whining about the first past the post system, everyone knows it exists, its no use working on votes you already have in the bag.

thanks for being a condescending twerp, though!
I can't help it if you're intellectually lazy.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-02 21:17:02
uziq
Member
+492|3451

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Election 101: You do need people to vote for you.
u.s. 2016 election, popular vote.

donald trump: 62,984,828 (46.1%)
hillary clinton: 65,853,514 (48.2%)

???

In the US, the UK etc the average moron takes the big decisions.
in the last general election in the UK, the liberal democrats, for example, received 2.4 million votes (7.4% of the total vote). they only won 12 out of 650 seats (1.8%).

???

thanks for being a condescending twerp, though!
Popular vote doesn't matter. There are millions of Republican voters in blue states that don't bother voting because their vote doesn't matter.
i was contradicting 'to win elections, you need people to vote for you' moronism. evidently you need lots more than for people to vote for you. in fact, most election campaigning strategy is totally contrary to mustering the most votes -- as we all well know. so the characterisation of hillary as some disconnected person who only connects to a cabal of insiders and elites is a bit flimsy. she 'connected' to more voters than donald trump, no?

I can't help it if you're intellectually lazy.
says the one who has seriously been complaining about 'the stupidity of the masses' in the thread like he's a person on a soapbox in 1880, or some edgy teenager who has just got into nietzsche. says the person really talking about 'average morons' and voters, as if that category actually signifies anything -- especially in first past the post systems. if to win elections isn't about winning the bulk of voters but, rather, about convincing enough swing voters or gaining a few marginal seats, then how do you extrapolate this phantasmal 'average' voter that is so useful for your analysis? is it the upper-middle class commentariat in cheltenham, um'ing and ah'ing between torys and lib dems? or perhaps it's the farmers who spend half their lives only with sheepdogs or with their arms up sheep arses in radnorshire? where does one find this 'average moron' demographic who are key to winning elections? wasn't that the guy obama brought on stage, the plumber? does anyone have his number?

Last edited by uziq (2019-08-02 21:29:58)

2019-08-02 22:34:45
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX
I'm not the one griping "The American right barely wins on technicalities"
'The right' won the election, the US electoral system has been around for 200 years, its hardly a 'technicality'.

I'm not the one complaining that the Brexit vote "wasn't fair". Either the electorate is dumb and they were suckered into it or they took an informed decision to go with Brexit, take your pick, apparently you can't process either.

"Its so unfair" is the argument of a teenager.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-02 23:33:35
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3719
If the person with the least amount of votes won in any other country we would call it a unstable or broken democracy. The system we have now where small states have an out sized influence especially in the senate will lead to serious political problems eventually.

In the 2016 elections, Donald Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million. The Republicans also lost the popular vote in the senate (40,402,790 vs 51,496,682 ) but still had 52% of the senate under their control. Democrats need to win the popular vote in the house by 7% if they want to take power because we value land over population. The GOP has a lock on 1/3 of the Senate due to the midwestern states each having 2 senators even though their collective population is still below California's. Republicans have only won the popular vote in the U.S. once since 1992. Both of the republican presidents of the 21st century were elected by the political minority. All of the political chaos we have had the last 3 years is a result of a minority of people getting their way over the wishes of the majority of the country and it is not sustainable.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
2019-08-03 01:00:33
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX
American democracy sucks ass, but thats the system and unless you work with it there's no point complaining.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-03 03:22:35
uziq
Member
+492|3451

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm not the one griping "The American right barely wins on technicalities"
'The right' won the election, the US electoral system has been around for 200 years, its hardly a 'technicality'.

I'm not the one complaining that the Brexit vote "wasn't fair". Either the electorate is dumb and they were suckered into it or they took an informed decision to go with Brexit, take your pick, apparently you can't process either.

"Its so unfair" is the argument of a teenager.
i have never said it’s unfair? i said it’s a hugely complex issue that has been hijacked by the most literalist and far-right group and their own special interests, who are using ‘the people’s mandate’ (of +%4) to implement their own extremely hardline interpretation.

pointing out that the majority of the country - the majority of the conservatives, even - do not support no deal brexit is not a teenager crying ‘unfair!’ i’m fully open to the brexit outcome so long as it seems to have been arrived at through genuine negotiation and compromise and not just some ideological-extremist position. this seems reasonable to me, not adolescent.

again, sorry you want to inflict pain on ‘dumb people’ so much.
2019-08-03 04:38:31
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5357|London, England

SuperJail Warden wrote:

If the person with the least amount of votes won in any other country we would call it a unstable or broken democracy. The system we have now where small states have an out sized influence especially in the senate will lead to serious political problems eventually.

In the 2016 elections, Donald Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million. The Republicans also lost the popular vote in the senate (40,402,790 vs 51,496,682 ) but still had 52% of the senate under their control. Democrats need to win the popular vote in the house by 7% if they want to take power because we value land over population. The GOP has a lock on 1/3 of the Senate due to the midwestern states each having 2 senators even though their collective population is still below California's. Republicans have only won the popular vote in the U.S. once since 1992. Both of the republican presidents of the 21st century were elected by the political minority. All of the political chaos we have had the last 3 years is a result of a minority of people getting their way over the wishes of the majority of the country and it is not sustainable.
We don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic. Do you vote on every law personally? No, you elect a representative.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2019-08-03 04:48:28
uziq
Member
+492|3451

Dilbert_X wrote:

American democracy sucks ass, but thats the system and unless you work with it there's no point complaining.
more intellectual supremacy, there.

do you really read the shit you post and consider it ‘wisdom’? like yeah ‘put up and shut up’ is such a constructive approach. we’d still all be feudal peasants if people took your fatuous political philosophy seriously.

fyi critique - which leads to reform in the best case scenario - is a form of ‘working with it’, even (and especially) when those quarrelsome blacks and muslims make the complaints. i know this riles you to acknowledge.

Last edited by uziq (2019-08-03 05:33:03)

2019-08-03 06:04:53
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3719

Jay wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

If the person with the least amount of votes won in any other country we would call it a unstable or broken democracy. The system we have now where small states have an out sized influence especially in the senate will lead to serious political problems eventually.

In the 2016 elections, Donald Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million. The Republicans also lost the popular vote in the senate (40,402,790 vs 51,496,682 ) but still had 52% of the senate under their control. Democrats need to win the popular vote in the house by 7% if they want to take power because we value land over population. The GOP has a lock on 1/3 of the Senate due to the midwestern states each having 2 senators even though their collective population is still below California's. Republicans have only won the popular vote in the U.S. once since 1992. Both of the republican presidents of the 21st century were elected by the political minority. All of the political chaos we have had the last 3 years is a result of a minority of people getting their way over the wishes of the majority of the country and it is not sustainable.
We don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic. Do you vote on every law personally? No, you elect a representative.
We live in a democratic republic. We have elections to pick our representatives. The group with the smaller share of the votes are the ones who are getting repeatedly put into power due to how elections are structured. That's not how a healthy republic works. As I said before, if this happened in Russia, Iran, or Venezuela, we would be calling the democracy there broken and dysfunctional. But instead we get conservatives and others screaming about how this system is great and well designed while it all burns down.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
2019-08-03 06:52:22
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX
You don't have compulsory voting so you have no real idea of what the share of the vote really is.
The people who couldn't be bothered to vote could have swung the election either way, blame them for not voting.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-08-03 07:14:34)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-03 06:59:18
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm not the one griping "The American right barely wins on technicalities"
'The right' won the election, the US electoral system has been around for 200 years, its hardly a 'technicality'.

I'm not the one complaining that the Brexit vote "wasn't fair". Either the electorate is dumb and they were suckered into it or they took an informed decision to go with Brexit, take your pick, apparently you can't process either.

"Its so unfair" is the argument of a teenager.
i have never said it’s unfair? i said it’s a hugely complex issue that has been hijacked by the most literalist and far-right group and their own special interests, who are using ‘the people’s mandate’ (of +%4) to implement their own extremely hardline interpretation.

pointing out that the majority of the country - the majority of the conservatives, even - do not support no deal brexit is not a teenager crying ‘unfair!’ i’m fully open to the brexit outcome so long as it seems to have been arrived at through genuine negotiation and compromise and not just some ideological-extremist position. this seems reasonable to me, not adolescent.

again, sorry you want to inflict pain on ‘dumb people’ so much.
The country voted on it in a referendum - Do you want Brexit [Y/N], without knowing what form it would take, it doesn't get much more literal than that.
Anyone who didn't want to risk a no-deal Brexit should have voted no, maybe they did and they were outvoted.
There was a general election since, and now parliament is dealing with it.
Its all above board, you're just pissed its not going the way you think it should.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-03 08:01:07
uziq
Member
+492|3451
people voted for a brexit based on the premise it would free up huge amounts of public money. the main advertisement was ‘£350 million extra per week for the NHS’. it turns out that it will cost the UK economy £90 billion to leave in the most recent estimate.

can you stop being so fucking stupid and making out that no deal brexit, with all of its implications and damage to industry and business, was what was presented in the referendum 3 years ago? you are talking arrant nonsense. brexit was presented as ‘take back control and enrich our own country, not those far away’. that no deal is now the most likely outcome represents the utter failure, the worst case scenario, at the end of three years of failed negotiations by our entrusted political elites. the people did not vote for no deal brexit. a small majority voted to leave based on mendacious and exaggerated claims, a propaganda campaign.

stop twisting recent events into your own ridiculous narrative. ‘all above board’. the electoral commission have investigated the leave campaign’s funding sources and social media/big data strategy. the main campaign organiser has officially been held as being in contempt of parliament. all above board. lol FFS i’ve been living in this country you dumb fuck.

Last edited by uziq (2019-08-03 08:03:10)

2019-08-03 18:06:48
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX
We've done this all in the other thread, people voted not knowing the consequences, people are stupid and ignorant and still believe fringe politicians, such is life, its no use complaining after the event.

Now its up to parliament to deal with, bad luck.

As for me at this point Brexit has probably cost the _X family about GBP250,000 and looks set to cost a whole lot more, so I do have an interest and have been following it.

Anyway, hope it all works out best of luck.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-03 22:44:29
uziq
Member
+492|3451
literal moron. oh wow quarter of a mill! big players.
2019-08-04 00:08:00
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6105|eXtreme to the maX
Ah, insults and no intelligent argument, you sound like Nigel Farage now, well done.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2019-08-04 02:22:42
Larssen
Member
+99|1887
I don't think the cost/benefit argument and the NHS 350 mil bus played such a huge part in people's thought process when they voted for Brexit. 30-40 years of lambasting the EU in the tabloids and popular newspapers while underscoring the 'huge difference' between the island Englishman and those continentals (esp. the French & Germans) gave much of the general public the impression that the UK and EU are incompatible. Much of the political class believed this to be true as well, concluding that the EU didn't or couldn't serve UK interests. Over time this manifested in the UK often halting or resisting any sort of meaningful development of the institutions in Brussels, again feeding the incompatibility narrative. Add the anti-migration / multiculturalism movement of the 2000s and the refugee crisis that started in 2015 to the mix, both of which blamed on the EU, and people consciously voted to leave.

While the margins may have changed now that more has become clear of what Brexit actually entails, it's also clear that many of those who turned out en masse to vote for leave would do so again given the choice. I also believe no deal is a lot more popular than we'd like to believe. While any kind of Brexit is a terrible future (especially no deal), a second referendum with stay as the outcome would equally underscore and deepen the political divide & crisis in the UK. In both scenario's I don't see anything other than a worsening of the current situation and it will take years for it to get better. You should watch the guardian's 'Anywhere but Westminster' series - it provides pretty good (and depressing) insight into the parts of the country that made Brexit happen.



Personally I'm sad to see what happened and to see the UK leave, waking up to the referendum result was an absolute shock. I spent some time in the EU and was always hugely impressed by the intelligence and insights of our UK colleagues. While some of the policies pursued were idiotic and I'm happy to see that part leaving (for which I blame the political class), the individual contributions of UK delegates etc. were often truly indispensable to the success of various policies and EU projects. The UK leaving is a terrible thing for the quality of the EU institutions. The worst part is that all the pain is yet to come. I'm not too eager to find out how deep the impact will truly be (to both the UK & the EU).

Last edited by Larssen (2019-08-04 02:33:53)

2019-08-04 03:07:41
uziq
Member
+492|3451

Dilbert_X wrote:

You don't have compulsory voting so you have no real idea of what the share of the vote really is.
The people who couldn't be bothered to vote could have swung the election either way, blame them for not voting.
the electoral system isn’t broken, the problem is people aren’t forced to vote! you are a real fucking genius.

 

Pages: 1 … 171 172 173 174 175 … 363

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard