Welcome to Open Carnage

A resource for Halo 1 modding and tech, with unique means of rewarding individual content creation and support. Have a wander to see why we're worth the time! EST. 2012

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Tucker933

Who are you voting for in the US 2016 Presidential Election?

126 posts in this topic

I would like to know what (US-)OC-members like to see in a new US president/ candidate. What politics are desired?

Especially from those who currently got no favorite or are not going to vote at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Members of Open Carnage never see off-site ads.

I would like to know what (US-)OC-members like to see in a new US president/ candidate. What politics are desired?

Especially from those who currently got no favorite or are not going to vote at all.

I'd like to see the public stop paying any attention to a scapegoat-figurehead and focus on the Senate and House elections where the people who are actually doing the governing get elected.

Remember 8th Grade History class? Division of the 3 Branches in Government? I can count the President's powers on one hand. He can approve or veto a law after Congress has passed one, he can ask congress to go to war, he can use an executive order (which he'll then get slammed for), he can appoint cabinet members and Supreme Court Justices (pending congress approval), and that's about it more or less.

Notice what most of those have in common? He needs Congress to do something first. So what happens when Congress isn't interested in doing anything to help him?

Congress is where laws get made and passed, Congress is where the country goes to war, Congress is our Government, and if I asked 100 people who the Senators in my state were I bet 95 of them would have no fucking clue. If I asked them who our Representatives were not a single fucking person of the 100 would know. I bet there's probably a few of those Reps who don't even realize they were elected, that's how obscure they are.

But everyone pays attention to the President, blames him for everything wrong in the country, and assumes it's all his fault that things are the way they are. Even though he can't do anything except agree or disagree with the  actual lawmakers, it must be his fault.

 

Because of this, Congress doesn't have to make people happy, they just have to make it look like the other party is in the wrong for everything that's fucking up. Because come election time, it doesn't matter what they did during their term, all the voting public looks at is if the candidate has a [D], or an [R] next to their name. They vote for the party they associate closest to, because they have no clue who the fuck the Senators or Representatives are.

They stick to the party, make the others look like shit, get reelected and continue to be bribed by public interest groups, PACs and other political organizations. (Teacher's Union, NRA, Planned Parenthood, Oil, etc.)

A Two-Party system is a fucking joke. They pick a few passionate things to disagree on while they all make millions and get nothing of value completed.

swamp, MrWonka and tarikja like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hamp makes a good point. He does that a lot. But assuming the congress and president are on good terms, say they're both mostly Republican, the president can ask them to make a law. Right? Plus, even if the powers are not official, there is a significant amount of influence inherited by the president.

I'm not looking for a specific candidate this time around, but I feel like it's time we had a right wing government for a while. It's all about balance. I remember once my favorite history and government teacher explaining how throughout U.S. presidential history, shit would start to suck if one party held office too long. No one president is going to be able to "fix" the country, and really it depends on what he's given to work with. Like the members of congress. This shit is too complex for me to be confident in choosing, in yet so many idiots do it all the time. I hate politics...too many variables to consider >.<


oVoXWXc.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think the US-president serves as the highest representative of the US-government on national level as well as international. He/She stands for the choices the government makes. An important position in consideration of the US importance.

Therefore I, a non US-citizen, is more interested in the representation of the US and their foreign policy since I got my own domestic politics to track, judge and change.

Btw: You not only vote for the president but also for the political party that stands behind him.

Speaking of domestic politics:

I'm not exactly familiar with US politics structure but it seems like the problem, if there is one, lies in the Congress, like you mentioned. But how would you change the Congress? Arrange elections for each seat? Hardly.

You said that the Two-Party system is flawed, although I agree with you, I wonder if the majority of US-citizens think the same.

Wouldn't there be a third party by now if a considerable part of the society disagrees with what the other two parties say? Or are they always believing in the argumentation of blaming the other party?

Nonetheless, a political party should stand for it's own principles and try to achieve them and not against those of others and prevent their goals. But I don't know how one could identify such anti-party actions.

In other news: Trump is Batman! Reminds me of this laywer who admitted to be Batman. I wonder what happened to him? :D

Tucker933 and WaeV like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Two-Party system is a fucking joke. They pick a few passionate things to disagree on while they all make millions and get nothing of value completed.

Vote Lawrence Lessig! He wants to be president just long enough to pass voting reforms, then he would resign.

 

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3049868/lawrence-lessigs-crazy-plan-to-run-for-president-fix-campaign-finance-and-resign

http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-law/run-lawrence-run

Skeezix the Cat likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Two-Party system is a fucking joke. They pick a few passionate things to disagree on while they all make millions and get nothing of value completed.

It wouldn't be as much of a problem if we at least had parties that were consistent and firm; but what we have are two centrist parties with slight leanings left and right, and they often pursue goals that aren't in line with what they're supposed to be.

 

For example, the Patriot Act - forfeit your privacy, for your own protection; it's what's best for us all. A leftist document through and through, yet pushed into law by the "right" wing. Another example is that it's common leftist habit to use personal feelings as points in a debate, yet the "right" wing is found doing it just as often using Christianity to somehow prove their opinions correct. (I'm a Christian, but what on earth does that have to do with politics? You can't use something you believe to prove anything else you believe. Not to mention that Jesus himself separated church and state in his teachings.)

 

The US left wing is at least worth being called left without using quotes, I'll give it that much. That's only due to the pendulum's continued swing left ever since the hippies, though, strengthening leftist mindsets in general society.

Edited by TCK
MrWonka likes this

Umh7x1l.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't there be a third party by now if a considerable part of the society disagrees with what the other two parties say? Or are they always believing in the argumentation of blaming the other party?

No. In fact George Washington sternly suggested that we avoid political parties altogether. But parties are an unfortunate side effect of "first past the post" voting.

 

Example: If Banana, Cherry, Durian, and Elderberry all band together then they can defeat Apple.

wXM7qSU.jpg

 

This is why people sometimes complain about the most prominent third party (the Green Party) "stealing" votes from Democrats and making it easier for Republicans to be elected.

 

For example, the Patriot Act - forfeit your privacy, for your own protection; it's what's best for us all. A leftist document through and through, yet pushed into law by the "right" wing.

FWIW, I think using a one-dimensional (left vs right) political spectrum is too narrow to really carry meaning. (As you point out in this very sentence!)

A two-dimensional chart is better, although still not perfect.

Top/Bottom = How much power does the government get? Top is authoritarian, bottom is libertarian.

Right/Left = How is the economy managed? Right is laissez-faire free markets, left is social welfare and wealth redistribution.

pEXcpXx.jpg

My political association has always been in the bottom half of this chart. I used to be more of a free-market capitalist libertarian, but over time my views have shifted economically left (I'm still 'down' in terms of government power).

 

USA 2016 Presidental Candidates on this chart:

compass%2B-%2Bpost.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here in Germany it is fairly common for political parties to create a coalition.

After an election one party alone usually doesn't have the entire 51%, so they must go in a coalition to reach the majority.

This usually happens with parties which have similar interests and normally not more than 2 parties.

For reference: There are currently 2 main parties, similar to the US, with around 30-40% each and about 3 to 4 smaller parties all above 5%. (As well as a lot of ~1% parties which usually aren't count)

These coalitions normally prohibit anti-party behavior since it would technically forbid the accusing party to form a coalition with the accused party after the next election.

Theoretically this works. Practical speaking it is slightly different and has some problems, too. E.g. when the two bigger parties form a coalition.

I don't want to go in detail, you can do that for yourself on Wikipedia, I just want to prove that a multi-party democracy as well as coalitions 'work'.

WaeV likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These coalitions normally prohibit anti-party behavior since it would technically forbid the accusing party to form a coalition with the accused party after the next election.

Theoretically this works. Practical speaking it is slightly different and has some problems, too. E.g. when the two bigger parties form a coalition.

I don't want to go in detail, you can do that for yourself on Wikipedia, I just want to prove that a multi-party democracy as well as coalitions 'work'.

Oh, I totally believe multi-party democracy can work. I'm glad Germany's party situation is better than the US's.

One solution is to fix our voting method. Ranked-choice voting is far superior to first-past-the-post, for example.

tarikja likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.