The Political Discussion Thread

[Annoyed]

Yeah the Patriot Act has been extended and amended ....... That was a case of bad legislation.

Even more reasons why such legislation is wrong.


https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2...s-nsa-targets/

and

http://mobile.itnews.com.au/News/401...worldwide.aspx


Why are democratic countries heading down this path?

In the case of the U.S., if you ask me, it is that the government is ignoring the Constitution, and the restrictions placed upon government by our founding fathers, and the population (voters) are not only letting it happen, but in many cases encouraging it.

The founding fathers of the US were (quite properly) fearful of government, even of the one that they were creating. They deliberately restricted its powers and at the same time maximized the power of the citizenry.
Consider the 10th amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

It is clear from that that the government was to be an extremely limited, with those limits defined by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

But that is inconvenient to those who would use the power of government to accomplish their goals. So over the past 100 years at least, the Constitution has been being ignored or outright violated by every branch of government, right on up to and including the US Supreme Court, the supposed guardians of the Constitution.

This is the root cause of the decline of freedom in the US, in my opinion.

[Falcon Horus]

Abstension is a vote. I went to the polls in both 2008 and 2012, but abstained from the Presidential race in both cases. (No candidate I supported running) And no doubt, before long he will want to dictate who you vote for.

Those who do not vote, have nothing to complain about. If they want change, than vote, otherwise shut up.

In the case of the U.S., if you ask me, it is that the government is ignoring the Constitution, and the restrictions placed upon government by our founding fathers, and the population (voters) are not only letting it happen, but in many cases encouraging it.

Good thing, you added the voters in brackets, otherwise back to point 1.

[Annoyed]

Originally Posted by Annoyed
Abstension is a vote. I went to the polls in both 2008 and 2012, but abstained from the Presidential race in both cases. (No candidate I supported running) And no doubt, before long he will want to dictate who you vote for.

Those who do not vote, have nothing to complain about. If they want change, than vote, otherwise shut up.

Do you consider me as not having voted in 2008 & 2012 Presidential races, then?
Let me explain the circumstances. I'm in NY state, a hopelessly Democratic state. Due to the nature of "winner take all" electoral college system, my vote in the presidential race is utterly pointless. NY's electoral votes haven't gone to a Republican candidate since Reagan's second run in 1984. So pulling the lever for either McCain or Romney would have made no difference in the results whatsoever. NY's votes would still have gone Democratic.

But I didn't support either McCain or Romney. Both of which are what I consider to be RINOS's; Republicans In Name Only.
If I had voted for either McCain or Romney, I would have been telling the Republicans at the national level that I supported those candidates. Under the circumstances, the best possible use of my vote was to express my dislike of the Republican nominees by not voting for them, in the hope that maybe next time, the RNC would select a candidate whom is closer to my views.

The idea floated by the current occupant of the White House would take that choice away from me. Yes, I know, the idea will likely go nowhere, it's a clear violation of the Constitution, but the constitutionality of something doesn't really mean a whole lot these days, particularly to the current occupant of the White House

[Falcon Horus]

Do you consider me as not having voted in 2008 & 2012 Presidential races, then?

You didn't vote but you seem to have a good reason to not vote.

I hope you find someone to vote for in the next elections. If you wish to know where they stand on marriage equality and LGBT stuff, HRC has so far listed all the republican candidates for that matter. Democrats have yet to be added.

I'm in NY state, a hopelessly Democratic state. Due to the nature of "winner take all" electoral college system, my vote in the presidential race is utterly pointless. NY's electoral votes haven't gone to a Republican candidate since Reagan's second run in 1984. So pulling the lever for either McCain or Romney would have made no difference in the results whatsoever. NY's votes would still have gone Democratic.

Ah... *remembers the hilariously confusing lesson our history teacher once had to go through to explain the American presidential elections to us* ... So much fun!

The idea floated by the current occupant of the White House would take that choice away from me. Yes, I know, the idea will likely go nowhere, it's a clear violation of the Constitution, but the constitutionality of something doesn't really mean a whole lot these days, particularly to the current occupant of the White House

I have no idea how you have to vote, but wouldn't it be possible to make your vote not count by doing it wrong. Like for example, over here (Belgium - voting is mandatory from the age of 18) we are able to not fill out our voting sheet and leave it blank (by which the vote automatically goes to the party with the most votes). Since we started voting by computer it is near impossible to screw the voting so it's deemed invalid (unless you're still living in a tiny village where you're still voting with pencil and paper in which case drawing a smiley on your voting sheet will automatically make it invalid).

[SoulReaver]

mandatory voting in a representative democracy

lol

[Brother Freyr]

I'd like Election Day to be a national holiday, with people wearing their "I voted" stickers as they go to barbecues with family and friends. (U.S. location, here). It doesn't mean mandatory voting, but at least a national holiday accords the event more importance than the current business-as-usual attitude.

[Annoyed]

You didn't vote but you seem to have a good reason to not vote.

I hope you find someone to vote for in the next elections. If you wish to know where they stand on marriage equality and LGBT stuff, HRC has so far listed all the republican candidates for that matter. Democrats have yet to be added.



Ah... *remembers the hilariously confusing lesson our history teacher once had to go through to explain the American presidential elections to us* ... So much fun!



I have no idea how you have to vote, but wouldn't it be possible to make your vote not count by doing it wrong. Like for example, over here (Belgium - voting is mandatory from the age of 18) we are able to not fill out our voting sheet and leave it blank (by which the vote automatically goes to the party with the most votes). Since we started voting by computer it is near impossible to screw the voting so it's deemed invalid (unless you're still living in a tiny village where you're still voting with pencil and paper in which case drawing a smiley on your voting sheet will automatically make it invalid).

The LGBT stuff is pretty far down on my radar; it's none of my business what two people do behind closed doors unless they want me to pay for it or the consequences of it or make it a public issue themselves. The big issues for me are economic, such as illegal immigration, anti-US trade policies, government handing money out like it grows on trees, the excess size, scope & cost of government and adherence to the Constitution. There aren't many candidates Republican or Democrat who have acceptable stances on these issues. So far, I'm hoping they run Scott Walker out of Wisconsin, because of his efforts to control government costs, but I rather doubt the RNC will anoint him as their chosen standard bearer. Anyone else on the radar at this time will get another abstention from me.

Up until recently, we had the good old fashioned reliable lever style voting machines. As a result of a bunch of morons in Florida who were too stupid to properly operate a plain paper punchcard ballot in 2000, we now have scannable forms you feed into a computer. You can leave a race blank without causing an error. I do not trust these things at all. I know all too well how easy it is to doctor computer data.

[Annoyed]

I'd like Election Day to be a national holiday, with people wearing their "I voted" stickers as they go to barbecues with family and friends. (U.S. location, here). It doesn't mean mandatory voting, but at least a national holiday accords the event more importance than the current business-as-usual attitude.

Well, if you mean "National holiday" as they stand today, I would oppose that because the only people who would actually get the day off would be government employees and banks, which depend upon the government to function. The average working stiff in private enterprise would still have to go to work, giving a decided advantage to pro-government voters.
If, on the other hand you mean a MANDATORY national holiday, where all businesses (aside from police/fire/emergency/etc.) would be forced to close and give their people the day off, I would go along with that.

Oh, and " barbecues with family and friends" ?? You must be in a southern US location. Barbeques in November aren't going to be too common in the northern states.

[Falcon Horus]

The LGBT stuff is pretty far down on my radar...

It isn't for me.

The big issues for me are economic, such as illegal immigration, anti-US trade policies, government handing money out like it grows on trees, the excess size, scope & cost of government and adherence to the Constitution. There aren't many candidates Republican or Democrat who have acceptable stances on these issues. So far, I'm hoping they run Scott Walker out of Wisconsin, because of his efforts to control government costs, but I rather doubt the RNC will anoint him as their chosen standard bearer. Anyone else on the radar at this time will get another abstention from me.

As far as us foreigners looking in are concerned, I think we think Jeb Bush might stand a good chance of running eventually but that's probably because he's the only one we know in connection to the rest of his family already having been in office before him.

For anyone interested, a page about the republican candidates should we decide to continue a fair debate.

***

Whenever we have to go out to vote - and we do that a lot, at least every 2 years depending on what we're voting for (European Elections, local elections, national elections) - it's always on a sunday.

[Brother Freyr]

As far as us foreigners looking in are concerned, I think we think Jeb Bush might stand a good chance of running eventually but that's probably because he's the only one we know in connection to the rest of his family already having been in office before him.

I might vomit on my ballot if it's Clinton v. Bush.

320 million people. Surely we can look beyond the same two families.

[SoulReaver]

Jeb Bush might stand a good chance

is he as intelligent as his older brother?

[Annoyed]

I might vomit on my ballot if it's Clinton v. Bush.

320 million people. Surely we can look beyond the same two families.

You speak with the wisdom of the Lords of Kobol.

[Coco Pops]

Here's an interesting piece from the NY Times......... I took special interest from the last paragraphs of the article. It's just like what is happening in Australia

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/op...pad-share&_r=1

[mad_gater]

Do you consider me as not having voted in 2008 & 2012 Presidential races, then?
Let me explain the circumstances. I'm in NY state, a hopelessly Democratic state. Due to the nature of "winner take all" electoral college system, my vote in the presidential race is utterly pointless. NY's electoral votes haven't gone to a Republican candidate since Reagan's second run in 1984. So pulling the lever for either McCain or Romney would have made no difference in the results whatsoever. NY's votes would still have gone Democratic.

But I didn't support either McCain or Romney. Both of which are what I consider to be RINOS's; Republicans In Name Only.
If I had voted for either McCain or Romney, I would have been telling the Republicans at the national level that I supported those candidates. Under the circumstances, the best possible use of my vote was to express my dislike of the Republican nominees by not voting for them, in the hope that maybe next time, the RNC would select a candidate whom is closer to my views.

The idea floated by the current occupant of the White House would take that choice away from me. Yes, I know, the idea will likely go nowhere, it's a clear violation of the Constitution, but the constitutionality of something doesn't really mean a whole lot these days, particularly to the current occupant of the White House

that would be because downstate (NYC, LI, basically everything east of the Hudson) is largely Democrat....and downstate is more population dense than the whole rest of the state.....this is why I think the portion of NYS west of the Hudson should break away and make its own state in the Union

[Annoyed]

Here's an interesting piece from the NY Times......... I took special interest from the last paragraphs of the article. It's just like what is happening in Australia

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/op...pad-share&_r=1

I'm not going to defend the Congressional budget proposals, they're absurd.

But the author of the article you cite has a worldview that I found disturbing.

What you’re left with is huge transfers of income from the poor and the working class, who would see severe benefit cuts, to the rich, who would see big tax cuts.

He is clearly of the view that wealth inherently belongs to the state, rather than those who created it.

That is not a viewpoint I can agree with.