Print

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

[Sirus]

...am I the only one who sees that MSH prayed that Santorum would get the nomination precisely because of that?

That was the reason I brought up Bachmann and Palin. Because they're equally nutso and would stand an equally poor chance of actually winning.

[Helgoland]

the altar of God, Guns, and Gays

We need someone to draw this. With a gay christian cowboy gunslinger posing on it, please.

...am I the only one who sees that MSH prayed that Santorum would get the nomination precisely because of that?

We should start a fund and get liberals to fund the most die-hard conservatives out there - that money woulld be saved later on, when the election is decided from day one.

[mainiac]

Just because a candidate looks crazy to you doesn't mean they are not viable.   A lot of people wont think the candidate is crazy because they are conservatives.  Many others don't follow politics in the same way and will not consider the crazy an open and shut case.  Over the course of a year long campaign they will stop caring about the craziness credentials and start caring about the stuff in the campaign.  So a crazy candidate might poll badly a year in advance but the handicap will be all but gone by election day.  And giving them money just lets them close the gap faster.

In a Senate race craziness is more a of liability.  Candidates get less time in the spotlight so one legitimately horrendous comment can sink them as they don't get a chance to recover.  But Presidential races are much more high profile.

So please, please, please do not support crazy republicans.  Their nomination does not ensure democratic victory.  Their nomination makes democratic victory marginally more likely but makes the election of a crazy candidate possible.

[Mephansteras]

It's pretty saddening that parties pick candidates who could get elected, rather than candidates who should get elected. Can we have a meritocracy? Please?

Democracy is the least meritocratic form of government except for all other forms of government that have ever been tried.

Well, technically an Intelligent, Benevolent dictatorship/monarchy/whatever can be much better about having a meritocratic form of government if the successor is chosen based on merit and not blood/politics. Problem is that the chain always breaks down after 2 or 3 decent leaders and you get the usual problems that a dictatorship of any type has with a bad leader.

Democracy is only better because while it has lower highs, it has much higher lows.

[RedKing]

I'm in favor of bringing back an elective monarchy, Holy Roman Emperor-style. Only make sure the electors aren't total fuckwits or political animals. Maybe an elector that is an outstanding figure in different realms (a hard sciences elector, an arts elector, an economics elector, a religion elector, a foreign policy elector, etc.)

Then of course, the problem becomes making sure the elector positions don't become totally corrupted. *sigh*

[Owlbread]

I'm in favor of bringing back an elective monarchy, Holy Roman Emperor-style. Only make sure the electors aren't total fuckwits or political animals. Maybe an elector that is an outstanding figure in different realms (a hard sciences elector, an arts elector, an economics elector, a religion elector, a foreign policy elector, etc.)

Then of course, the problem becomes making sure the elector positions don't become totally corrupted. *sigh*

But who would elect the monarch? If it's the people it's basically just the same as having an electable president.

[Descan]

I think seperation of powers is on to something there.

Make sure the people electing the electors (Oh god I can see where this is going. Fuck it, I'm gonna finish the thought!) Make sure they have no vested interests in the position. You wouldn't have the CEOs of Goldman Sachs elect the Finance Minister, right?

[Owlbread]

I think seperation of powers is on to something there.

Make sure the people electing the electors (Oh god I can see where this is going. Fuck it, I'm gonna finish the thought!) Make sure they have no vested interests in the position. You wouldn't have the CEOs of Goldman Sachs elect the Finance Minister, right?

But how on earth can you determine who has the vested interests and who doesn't in an efficient way? Democracy isn't perfect but, as people have said, it has the fewest disadvantages and difficulties when compared to the alternatives.

[Descan]

Keep in mind, I'm in favour of elections-for-life, coupled with a relatively-easy overthrowing mechanic. With that, you don't neeeed it to be efficient. You can spend 5 years figuring out who to put in power for the next 30.

[Helgoland]

I'm in favor of bringing back an elective monarchy, Holy Roman Emperor-style. Only make sure the electors aren't total fuckwits or political animals. Maybe an elector that is an outstanding figure in different realms (a hard sciences elector, an arts elector, an economics elector, a religion elector, a foreign policy elector, etc.)

Then of course, the problem becomes making sure the elector positions don't become totally corrupted. *sigh*

I thought about something similar a few months back - I believe it would be a good idea if we gave the universities direct political powers; maybe a senate in the Roman style with its members being professors and other academics from around the country. It would (to some degree) make sure that fundies had no chance of gaining influence.

But how on earth can you determine who has the vested interests and who doesn't in an efficient way?

You can't. Let's face it, people: Rousseau sucks

[Owlbread]

I don't really like the whole "let's leave it up to the 'geniuses' in universities to elect our governments" stuff. There are people well outside universities and similar institutions who are better placed to elect our leaders.

[Nadaka]

This is why we need to create an immortal hyper intelligent perfectly moral AI to be our absolute leader. What could possibly go wrong?

[kaijyuu]

This is why we need to create an immortal hyper intelligent perfectly moral AI to be our absolute leader. What could possibly go wrong?

The Computer is your friend!

[Dutchling]

This is why we need to create an immortal hyper intelligent perfectly moral AI to be our absolute leader. What could possibly go wrong?

The Computer is your friend!

>>FRIENDSHIP.EXE
>>FILE NOT FOUND!

[Helgoland]

I don't really like the whole "let's leave it up to the 'geniuses' in universities to elect our governments" stuff. There are people well outside universities and similar institutions who are better placed to elect our leaders.

The problem's not that there's too few good people, but that we don't know which ones are good. There certainly are good people outside of universities, but more of them inside.
And that's also the reason why university people should not be supreme leaders: The advantage is not that each of them is perfect, but that the collective is good. Hence, the senate.