Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Grim Portent]

I guess the thing you're missing is that people are doing just that -- have been doing that, for literal decades now -- and it's not working. Great swathes of the american public are exposed to that information regularly. It's barely influencing them. As SG notes, there's a difference between having the data and actually caring to do something about it (even if that "something" is just acknowledging there's a problem), and just the data, no matter how troublesome, is only rarely enough to motivate the latter.

If the electorate don't respond to to the information when it's delivered to them in an already somewhat sensationalist fashion, then why would rephrasing the information be of any use?

Newspapers have been sensationalizing economic/pollution/societal issues for decades, I can't imagine that more sensationalism would help.

Hell, given how the US election system works I'm not sure that 55% of the population being activists of some sort would have any effect on policy if they weren't spread out in the right proportions.

[smjjames]

Hillary is announcing her 2016 candidacy on Sunday. About freaking time.

Maybe now other democrats will decide whether they have the courage to run? They no longer run the risk of offending Hillary if they start their candidacy before her.

[Grim Portent]

Hillary is announcing her 2016 candidacy on Sunday. About freaking time.

Maybe now other democrats will decide whether they have the courage to run? They no longer run the risk of offending Hillary if they start their candidacy before her.

Would they necessarily bother to stand against her?

She's one of their better candidates for securing the more mainstream vote, she's well known within the US, she has prior experience with the practices of the head office, she's got a pretty good amount of recognition in foreign countries, she hasn't had any major public gaffes that I'm aware of. She's a woman so that helps with the equality stance and will be enough to secure her some supporters on that alone.

She seems like the ideal candidate.

[Dutchling]

I wonder how long you guys can keep up the no white men spree.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[smjjames]

Hillary is announcing her 2016 candidacy on Sunday. About freaking time.

Maybe now other democrats will decide whether they have the courage to run? They no longer run the risk of offending Hillary if they start their candidacy before her.

Would they necessarily bother to stand against her?

She's one of their better candidates for securing the more mainstream vote, she's well known within the US, she has prior experience with the practices of the head office, she's got a pretty good amount of recognition in foreign countries, she hasn't had any major public gaffes that I'm aware of. She's a woman so that helps with the equality stance and will be enough to secure her some supporters on that alone.

She seems like the ideal candidate.

I was being sarcastic about the fact that it seems like she's the only Democrat running, or the only one who has really expressed intrest, besides Biden.

[Grim Portent]

Hillary is announcing her 2016 candidacy on Sunday. About freaking time.

Maybe now other democrats will decide whether they have the courage to run? They no longer run the risk of offending Hillary if they start their candidacy before her.

Would they necessarily bother to stand against her?

She's one of their better candidates for securing the more mainstream vote, she's well known within the US, she has prior experience with the practices of the head office, she's got a pretty good amount of recognition in foreign countries, she hasn't had any major public gaffes that I'm aware of. She's a woman so that helps with the equality stance and will be enough to secure her some supporters on that alone.

She seems like the ideal candidate.

I was being sarcastic about the fact that it seems like she's the only Democrat running, or the only one who has really expressed interest, besides Biden.

Aren't there only something like 2 other Democrat candidates right now with both of them being rather unknown? I know there's a quite a few openly considering it, but not really any who've taken the leap into actually running.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[Grim Portent]

Never forget Vermin Supreme.

Are we counting him? He's only running to satirize the general process after all.

And to offer free ponies of course.

[Frumple]

Candidate's a candidate. VS counts as much as anyone else running with no actual intent to get elected.

[SalmonGod]

I guess the thing you're missing is that people are doing just that -- have been doing that, for literal decades now -- and it's not working. Great swathes of the american public are exposed to that information regularly. It's barely influencing them. As SG notes, there's a difference between having the data and actually caring to do something about it (even if that "something" is just acknowledging there's a problem), and just the data, no matter how troublesome, is only rarely enough to motivate the latter.

If the electorate don't respond to to the information when it's delivered to them in an already somewhat sensationalist fashion, then why would rephrasing the information be of any use?

Newspapers have been sensationalizing economic/pollution/societal issues for decades, I can't imagine that more sensationalism would help.

Hell, given how the US election system works I'm not sure that 55% of the population being activists of some sort would have any effect on policy if they weren't spread out in the right proportions.

But they don't properly digest the idea that these aren't things that are just happening, they are things that are inflicted upon them by willful actions.

[Morrigi]

Hillary is announcing her 2016 candidacy on Sunday. About freaking time.

Maybe now other democrats will decide whether they have the courage to run? They no longer run the risk of offending Hillary if they start their candidacy before her.

Would they necessarily bother to stand against her?

She's one of their better candidates for securing the more mainstream vote, she's well known within the US, she has prior experience with the practices of the head office, she's got a pretty good amount of recognition in foreign countries, she hasn't had any major public gaffes that I'm aware of. She's a woman so that helps with the equality stance and will be enough to secure her some supporters on that alone.

She seems like the ideal candidate.

She's an authoritarian, corrupt warmonger.

[SirQuiamus]

She's an authoritarian, corrupt warmonger.

She has all the hallmarks of a viable candidate.

[Grim Portent]

Hillary is announcing her 2016 candidacy on Sunday. About freaking time.

Maybe now other democrats will decide whether they have the courage to run? They no longer run the risk of offending Hillary if they start their candidacy before her.

Would they necessarily bother to stand against her?

She's one of their better candidates for securing the more mainstream vote, she's well known within the US, she has prior experience with the practices of the head office, she's got a pretty good amount of recognition in foreign countries, she hasn't had any major public gaffes that I'm aware of. She's a woman so that helps with the equality stance and will be enough to secure her some supporters on that alone.

She seems like the ideal candidate.

She's an authoritarian, corrupt warmonger.

So par for the the course as US presidents go?

[PTTG??]

Hillary running is a joke. Nobody wants to continue the Bush-Clinton Dynasty any further.