SwampD Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Can you think of a better place to go? If so, please tell the rest of us so we can start making plans. That's the point. If he is so disgusted then your co-worker needs to either go back to Romania or STFU and stop complaining.
grinreaper Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Those of you that are interested in politics and want to contribute or gain knowledge should visit the PPP board over in the Buffalo Bills forums. There are a few dumbasses but many knowledgeable people. It's a rowdy good time. I go by a different screen name there.
LastPommerFan Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 I can say with certainty that my biggest personal loss as a result of my absence is missing the opportunity to partake in this thread.
shrader Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Those of you that are interested in politics and want to contribute or gain knowledge should visit the PPP board over in the Buffalo Bills forums. There are a few dumbasses but many knowledgeable people. It's a rowdy good time. I go by a different screen name there. I have never seen worse advice in my entire life.
SwampD Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 I have never seen worse advice in my entire life. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
LastPommerFan Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 I have never seen worse advice in my entire life. It puts a nice complete circle on the complaint about TSW in the opening post...kind of poetic.
nobody Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 It puts a nice complete circle on the complaint about TSW in the opening post...kind of poetic. TSW PPP is open to every type of thought and opinion - just as long as you don't actually post it there. That's the point. If he is so disgusted then your co-worker needs to either go back to Romania or STFU and stop complaining. The true spirit of freedom of speech. ;)
SwampD Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 The true spirit of freedom of speech. ;) :lol: I just hate alarmist speech. ...(except when talking Sabres).
darksabre Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 officially off the rails. It was only a matter of time.
FogBat Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 That's the point. If he is so disgusted then your co-worker needs to either go back to Romania or STFU and stop complaining. Given the reply that you posted, I can't resist the thought that you might be suffering from Regieruffitis (affliction of the status quo). :unsure: Factually speaking, though, that was the only time I saw him. The company I work for has over 5000 trucks, which means that when I run into someone, it may be the only time that it happens. FWIW, I happened to ask where he was from because of his peculiar accent, and that's when he told me and then spoke his mind.
K-9 Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Given the reply that you posted, I can't resist the thought that you might be suffering from Regieruffitis (affliction of the status quo). :unsure: Factually speaking, though, that was the only time I saw him. The company I work for has over 5000 trucks, which means that when I run into someone, it may be the only time that it happens. FWIW, I happened to ask where he was from because of his peculiar accent, and that's when he told me and then spoke his mind. Well, there's no sense in running into someone with a truck more than once. GO SABRES!!!
nobody Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Well, there's no sense in running into someone with a truck more than once. GO SABRES!!! He would have backed up but those big rigs are tricky.
5th line wingnutt Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 The idea that money in politics rules is mostly wrong. A party, or a candidate needs some minimum amount of money to get the message out. More than the minimum is subject to the law of diminishing returns, it helps but is unlikely to be decisive. No amount of money forces anyone to vote for any candidate. As for the absolute amount of money? I am not impressed. President Obama spent something like $1,000,000,000 trying to convince 300,000,000 people to vote for him. That is about $3.33 each. About an egg McMuffins worth.
nobody Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 As for the absolute amount of money? I am not impressed. President Obama spent something like $1,000,000,000 trying to convince 300,000,000 people to vote for him. That is about $3.33 each. About an egg McMuffins worth. If you get a good deal on volumn discount - a chicken in every pot.
Weave Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 The idea that money in politics rules is mostly wrong. A party, or a candidate needs some minimum amount of money to get the message out. More than the minimum is subject to the law of diminishing returns, it helps but is unlikely to be decisive. No amount of money forces anyone to vote for any candidate. As for the absolute amount of money? I am not impressed. President Obama spent something like $1,000,000,000 trying to convince 300,000,000 people to vote for him. That is about $3.33 each. About an egg McMuffins worth. Seriously? Money may not force anyone to vote for a specific individual but money most assuredly does determine who the candidates are that you get to pick from. Even at the local level the ability to raise money is priority #1 when a party determines which candidates they choose to put forth. ETA- And if you still don't think money is the biggest factor I give you exhibit A, Mitt Romney. The dude is crucified by the hard core of his party, those that are most motivated to vote in a primary, yet he is the leading Republican in the primaries. Why? Campaign dollars.
5th line wingnutt Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Seriously? Money may not force anyone to vote for a specific individual but money most assuredly does determine who the candidates are that you get to pick from. Even at the local level the ability to raise money is priority #1 when a party determines which candidates they choose to put forth. ETA- And if you still don't think money is the biggest factor I give you exhibit A, Mitt Romney. The dude is crucified by the hard core of his party, those that are most motivated to vote in a primary, yet he is the leading Republican in the primaries. Why? Campaign dollars. Was not concerned about intra-party squabbles, only general elections. ETA?
Weave Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Was not concerned about intra-party squabbles, only general elections. ETA? Edited To Add Intra party politics determine general elections.
5th line wingnutt Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Edited To Add Intra party politics determine general elections. How often?
radiomike Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Seriously? Money may not force anyone to vote for a specific individual but money most assuredly does determine who the candidates are that you get to pick from. Even at the local level the ability to raise money is priority #1 when a party determines which candidates they choose to put forth. ETA- And if you still don't think money is the biggest factor I give you exhibit A, Mitt Romney. The dude is crucified by the hard core of his party, those that are most motivated to vote in a primary, yet he is the leading Republican in the primaries. Why? Campaign dollars. Money will always, always be the determining factor in elections because A. You need money to run and B. Advertisements sway voters. The problem remains however that we the people have no one to blame but ourselves. This society runs on the 24 hour news cycle, where sound bites and and headlines shape the majority of people's political opinions. If people actually took the time to develop an original and well developed political stance then money should not be as important. But the majority don't, and will vote for the candidate who has spoon fed them the most half truths and catchy sound bites. Pretty depressing, but that's just how we are.
Weave Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 How often? Every time. I'm guessing you aren't getting where I was going with this. I'll recap to reinforce context. You The idea that money in politics rules is mostly wrong........ Me Money may not force anyone to vote for a specific individual but money most assuredly does determine who the candidates are that you get to pick from. Even at the local level the ability to raise money is priority #1 when a party determines which candidates they choose to put forth. You Was not concerned about intra-party squabbles, only general elections. I suppose at that point I could/should have just requoted money most assuredly does determine who the candidates are that you get to pick from. And in that context, intra party politics does most assuredly determine who you get to vote for in general elections. Therefore money does rule politics. And it rules with an iron fist.
5th line wingnutt Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Money will always, always be the determining factor in elections because A. You need money to run and B. Advertisements sway voters. The problem remains however that we the people have no one to blame but ourselves. This society runs on the 24 hour news cycle, where sound bites and and headlines shape the majority of people's political opinions. If people actually took the time to develop an original and well developed political stance then money should not be as important. But the majority don't, and will vote for the candidate who has spoon fed them the most half truths and catchy sound bites. Pretty depressing, but that's just how we are. Elections have at least two candidates. Does the one with the most money always win?
Weave Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Money will always, always be the determining factor in elections because A. You need money to run and B. Advertisements sway voters. The problem remains however that we the people have no one to blame but ourselves. This society runs on the 24 hour news cycle, where sound bites and and headlines shape the majority of people's political opinions. If people actually took the time to develop an original and well developed political stance then money should not be as important. But the majority don't, and will vote for the candidate who has spoon fed them the most half truths and catchy sound bites. Pretty depressing, but that's just how we are. I sympathize with your thought here but reality is most folks just don't have the time and energy to involve themselves enough to become informed and resort to voting according to the party they most closely relate to. I'm pretty sure one of our newer members expressed it much more eloquently than I could. I don't remember which thread it was in but his post went something like; typical middle class worker goes to work early in AM, comes home around 5, drives kids to extracurricular activity, eats dinner, helps kids with homework, has an hour or two to unwind before hitting the sack. Add in house work and other commitments and the idea that the typical middle class worker has the time to get informed about most major issues just isn't realistic. Party line voting results. Elections have at least two candidates. Does the one with the most money always win? It isn't about absolute money winning. It is about fundraising ability determining who your choices are. Your choices are ALWAYS the ones that are able to raise vast amounts of money.
5th line wingnutt Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Every time. Really? I stood for election once. My candidancy was not based on money.
Weave Posted January 30, 2012 Report Posted January 30, 2012 Really? I stood for election once. My candidancy was not based on money. I'd ask how you did but you certainly could answer however you cared and I'd have no way of knowing the accuracy of your answer. Do you disagree with my assertion that the two major parties use the ability to raise campaign funds as a significant part of thier criteria when selecting candidates?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.