Print

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

[GlyphGryph]

Of course, the federal government is just as much of a tossup, what with how often they meddle for the worse. (Federal drug laws, federal surveillance, federal gay marriage ban, education bullshit)

There's a lot of states in the US that would probably be much better off without the feds shoving things down their throat.

[Helgoland]

Of course, the federal government is just as much of a tossup, what with how often they meddle for the worse. (Federal drug laws, federal surveillance, federal gay marriage ban, education bullshit)

Meh, democracy. Too sad the other systems don't work even half as well.

[GlyphGryph]

This is technically a discussion about federal power, not democracy. Not really related. You get the same debate even in non-democratic organizations and nations.

[Frumple]

The problems don't come from too much centralization; they come from too little. If the mightiest man in the world is elected by only about a fifteenth (is that about right?) of the global population, something's quite wrong.

Heehee, no, no. Obama was voted in by ~64 million people. Out of ~7 billion total world population. Which comes out to... .0091, or about nine tenths of a percent. Fifteenth, heehee. America's total population is only about 4% of the world's, or around a twenty-fifth. Obama was voted in by less than a forth of that. You overestimated a bit

[misko27]

This is technically a discussion about federal power, not democracy. Not really related. You get the same debate even in non-democratic organizations and nations.

Does it ever happen to anyone that no matter how many times you read a post, it still comes back in your new replies? This is my that. This comment is to get rid of it.
 
 

Of course, the federal government is just as much of a tossup, what with how often they meddle for the worse. (Federal drug laws, federal surveillance, federal gay marriage ban, education bullshit)

There's a lot of states in the US that would probably be much better off without the feds shoving things down their throat.

And there's many that would be far worse.

[Urist Imiknorris]

This is technically a discussion about federal power, not democracy. Not really related. You get the same debate even in non-democratic organizations and nations.

Does it ever happen to anyone that no matter how many times you read a post, it still comes back in your new replies? This is my that. This comment is to get rid of it.

It happens.

[Nadaka]

Things like what? environmental regulation necessary for human health? Workplace safety? Freedom of speech? Right to vote as minority? Right to prosecute spousal rape? These are the kinds of things that would go away in many states if the federal government wasn't able to infringe upon "states rights". It is the duty of the federal government to defend the people and their rights from enemies both foreign and domestic. It isn't perfect, and the federal drug and terrorism wars are massive black marks against it. But on the whole, the federal government does more good than harm for Americans.

[PyroDesu]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/rick-santorum-open-running-president-again-215701762--election.html

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Half of me hopes he does for the sheer hilarity that could ensue, the other half is horrified at the prospect that if he does he might somehow win. _{(Don't ask me how.)}

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Someone like him could never win. Santorum running guarantees a Democrat victory.

[Mephansteras]

Someone like him could never win. Santorum running guarantees a Democrat victory.

Well...him running in the primaries doesn't mean that. But him being the Republican Candidate certainly does. Provided the country doesn't take a drastic turn for the stupid in the next four years, anyway.

[mainiac]

Someone like him could never win. Santorum running guarantees a Democrat victory.

What's it like in your alternative universe where bad candidates never win elections?

[misko27]

Someone like him could never win. Santorum running guarantees a Democrat victory.

What's it like in your alternative universe where bad candidates never win elections?

It's following current demographic trends.
 
Of course, as Dan Savage so elegantly pointed out, don't joke. There could have been a terrorist attack, or a hurrican, or something unpredictable, that would put Rick Santorum in the white house. So, do, not, vote for him.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Someone like him could never win. Santorum running guarantees a Democrat victory.

What's it like in your alternative universe where bad candidates never win elections?

A bad candidate wining is one thing, but Santorum is a far-right nutjob who alienated the public during this election. The US is becoming steadily more liberal, and in four years Santorum will be even more unelectable. He's so off the mark that Romney, who actually was a lot more moderate than him, lost badly.

We're talking about a guy who publicly stated that Obama was trying to institute eugenic abortions and then called him a "government nigger" during a speech just a few weeks later. I think we're safe from President Santorum.

[mainiac]

He seems like a far right nutjob because he lost.  Can you name one presidential candidate since 1945 who never won the white house but didn't come across as hopelessly far from the political center?  Once someone's political ship is sunk his defenders vanish and the vultures come out.  When someone is a viable candidate then people close ranks around them and pointing out the obvious becomes a partisan issue.  If Santorum was given the same cheerleading squad as Bush then he'd be considered just as palatable as Bush.

Men far, far worse then Santorum have won democratic elections and lead their countries into ruin.  It happens.

[Kogan Loloklam]

Pretty sure you can find extremists for every political alignment. Pick my brain and you'll find at least a dozen radical views.

You want to do WHAT to that platypus?

Only if it consents.


(note: being facetious )

So... What you are saying is that you don't want a consenting one?

Hey, where's Perry?