View Full Version: And For Only $19.99

RPG-Directory > Rant Time > And For Only $19.99



Title: And For Only $19.99


December, Esq - September 4, 2008 06:38 AM (GMT)
Like what you see, kiddies? It's only going to get that much better from here.

The political slandering, I mean.

There's no point in arguing politics over the internet, though I see nothing wrong with stating one's opinions. Debate if you want, but don't attack. This isn't directed at anyone in particular, especially since I'm not actually angry.

I'm kind of amused. Because it will get worse. Maybe this'll be better in a discussion section--please, not debates; I hate debates--but I was here, so yeah.

Does this make sense?

As we draw closer to election time, the debates will get more and more heated both IRL and on the computer. I ask everyone--myself included--to be respectful of other's opinions.

I love Palin, but the other candidates suck. I won't rip apart anyone for not liking Palin, and in return I don't want anyone ripping me apart for not liking [insert candidate here]. Well, you can, but I'll just laugh at you. :lol:

Okay, that's all I had to say. Enjoy your day.

Lady Hikari - September 4, 2008 06:41 AM (GMT)
lol

Debates are fun. I'm better in RL then on a computer.

v.v Sadly, no one will get into one with me. It amuses me.

I don't like Palan, but she is a good speaker. Spent her time bashing Obama and Biden then actually trying to say what she is going to do. And the fact that she didn't know what the VP does.

That kinda made me wonder.

But she does have a pregnant daughter and a kid with a mental disorder. Props.

But I still love Obama. ^^

December, Esq - September 4, 2008 06:44 AM (GMT)
Actually, I thought that the thing that made Palin stand out was that she spent time talking about the things she accomplished already rather than making a whole bunch of promises that will never happen like every other politician out there does. She's a great speaker indeed; she made McCain sound fabulous and she could probably even make Obama sound like a good candidate if she wanted to. :lol:

And I hate debates. No one actually changes their minds and I just end up wasting time and energy. Time is a precious commodity. With time I could . . . inflate my car tires. XD Okay, I'm in a random mood. :pink:

Lady Hikari - September 4, 2008 06:47 AM (GMT)
The point in a great debate is to not make the other side agree or disagree with you. It's to make the people listening join your side. If you can pull in other people to agree with you in a great manor, then you're excellent at debating. ^^

Sadly, I'm too involved now with the difference between the two sides in the political stand point to debate correctly.

Palan and McCain really haven't come up with things that they said they can do. Even Obama himself has admitted that he cannot do everything he wants to do, he can just form the steps to do so and hopefully America will finish them.

That, to me, makes a great leader.

And I hated Hilary. Ug. She's good at speeches tho!

December, Esq - September 4, 2008 06:56 AM (GMT)
QUOTE
The point in a great debate is to not make the other side agree or disagree with you. It's to make the people listening join your side. If you can pull in other people to agree with you in a great manor, then you're excellent at debating. ^^

Oops yeah. That's what I meant. But people get so pissed off when other people don't agree with them that they can't even listen.

I really, really, really hate political parties because they're destroying our country, just as George Washington told us they would. Everyone votes based upon their party. I think if no one had a party and everyone just ran as they pleased, we would end up with a whole new state of affairs. Would it be better? Maybe. Maybe not. But I still think political parties suck.

Unfortunately, Obama hasn't said anything besides "change" and that's not really appealing to me. Good change, bad change, change economics, change history, change society, change my pants, change global warming, change the war? Who knows?

Everyone should watch this. It's nonpartisan and completely hilarious. (It's the video currently on the main page, Election 2008.)

Lady Hikari - September 4, 2008 07:01 AM (GMT)
Yeah, I'll agree with the whole change thing. It is annoying, but he did get into details when he accepted the nomination. I still love him. At first I was a bit skeptical, but ya know, once you start listening and reading, it makes it easier to understand and go with it.

And it's human nature for ppl to get pissed off at each other. I sure as hell ain't happy all the time. xD But after the fire goes out, there's nothing but a calm. That's the best time to get people to listen. That and when someone is desperate enough to want change. Even if Obama drives us all crazy with the word "change", it is change that we all want as Americans.

^^ And that is the beauty of America.

EDIT:

XD And that video was amazing.

Cal - September 4, 2008 01:48 PM (GMT)
The purpose of a debate is to share information, and hopefully encourage people to think. You can't force people to change their minds, but you can encourage them to think about their stances, whether or not they agree or disagree with you. It's an encouragement of information, that's all. If you make it more than that, that's when it fails. For example, Vet Sarah Palin! contains some excellent sources about Sarah Palin, her stances, and her previous experience.

I agree that the bipartisan system -- especially as it stands now, with moral values presented as issues -- is doing a great harm to the United States. However, if we have more than two candidates to vote for, it's almost certain that reaching a consensus will be rare. The French government has had this challenge for many decades; Sarkozy, for example, was elected with 31% of the vote. Is this a better situation? Maybe. Maybe not.

December, Esq - September 4, 2008 04:31 PM (GMT)
We do have lots of candidates to choose from. o_0 Republicans and Democrats are always the top spots, but there are plenty of other people running for president.

Lady Hikari - September 4, 2008 04:34 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (December, Esq @ Sep 4 2008, 04:31 PM)
We do have lots of candidates to choose from. o_0 Republicans and Democrats are always the top spots, but there are plenty of other people running for president.

Agreed, but this country is most Republicans and Democrats.

I heard stuff that Palan was trying to be Independent. That intrigued me.

Cal - September 4, 2008 04:39 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (December, Esq @ Sep 4 2008, 04:31 PM)
We do have lots of candidates to choose from. o_0 Republicans and Democrats are always the top spots, but there are plenty of other people running for president.

No, we don't. Not seriously. There have only been a tiny sliver of a handful of third-party candidates in US history. For example, Strom Thurmond in 1948 actually won four states; Ross Perot in 1992 won 18.8% of the popular vote. The 1992 election is notable because it meant that, as I said, no candidate had a clear majority; Bill Clinton was elected with 43% of the popular vote.

Even then, they weren't really viable candidates. A viable candidate is defined as one with a legitimate chance of winning the popular vote, and the US does not and will not have that as long as the bipartisan electoral system exists.

Just because I can write myself in when I vote in November doesn't mean there are lots of candidates to choose from. :)

December, Esq - September 4, 2008 04:42 PM (GMT)
There are lots of candidates to choose from; I never said they had a chance of winning, did I? :lol:

Sadiekins - September 4, 2008 04:59 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Cal @ Sep 4 2008, 04:39 PM)
... the US does not and will not have that as long as the bipartisan electoral system exists.

It is the distribution of seats and how we got votes that dictate the bipartisan system. In general that goes with our method of being a Democratic Republic (shock and awe we are not a true democracy).

Single Member District (or SMD) voting systems tend to lean towards larger parties but fewer there of. Systems like Germany that are based on a Proportional distribution give rise to several viable parties (5 parties hold seats in the Bundestag for instance). If we became proportional instead of winner-take-all outcomes would be very different. I challenge people to look at a representation of voting behavior via districts. States that are termed red tend to have a lot of blue too, and the opposite.

stars may collide - September 4, 2008 05:22 PM (GMT)
I'm with you here. Politics annoys me- my in laws HATE me because I disagree with the voting system and therefore just won't register to vote. I got into a heated conversation with them over it before, and they kept on bringing up the states when I kept on knocking it down. It was the most annoying thing in the entire world because, as someone mentioned in the thread regarding debating, I wasn't trying to change anyone's mind. I was simply trying to be understood. I really couldn't have made it any more clear to them, either!

What happened? I was practically dismissed about 20 minutes later-still trying to get them to get away from talking about the states- because of my age [and I swear it's because I'm a girl too] so all my good points went down the drain because I'm young. Talk about a cop out!

I want to fast foreword time just to prove to them that I'll feel the same way when I'm forty. All in all, they are a weaker family, however, and someone like me is probably pretty blasphemous. I'm a very head strong person and I'm a huge arguer [a blessing and a curse] and they tend to be all VERY hypocritical. I have some examples to share to show what I mean but I've hijacked Dec's thread as it is.

It's what scares me about tying the knot with my fiance [who, thankfully, is the general black sheep of his family! Thank God!]- you marry the man, you marry the family. Ahhh!




Ryl - September 4, 2008 06:23 PM (GMT)
Politics is one of those things that I actually am very interested in, but am loathe to talk about with people much, because it always ends up in an argument.

WildeThing - September 4, 2008 06:40 PM (GMT)
Bleh, I always get heated, and I sometimes dislike people simply because of the way they handle themselves and what they say during debates, but that's the joy of the internet and debates in general.

Bleh, I'm not making any sense lately.

Bleh.

Lady Hikari - September 4, 2008 09:02 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Ryl @ Sep 4 2008, 06:23 PM)
Politics is one of those things that I actually am very interested in, but am loathe to talk about with people much, because it always ends up in an argument.

Ryl, I'll talk Politics with ya! :D I enjoy talking about em too.

SmathNa - September 4, 2008 09:46 PM (GMT)
Oh, politics!

I love being the token Republican (and, honestly, I'm only nominally so--I'm registered as an independent and don't care for either party) in classes, though. It's ridiculously fun, since everyone continually defends the liberal orthodoxies.

But I see no need to contribute to the putrid morass that is interpolitics.

Seriously, political talk on the internet is one of the most useless activities in the world. I mean, using the internet for porn at least generates some enjoyment, and lets you loosen up for awhile. Online politics = porn without the fun, and it makes you more, not less, stressed.

I actually do like to talk politics--in real life, with people I respect and trust.

But online, the littlest things balloon into interweb cataclysm. Not touching that with a ten-foot sausage.

(You know, politics and sausages...)

Sadiekins - September 4, 2008 10:06 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (SmathNa @ Sep 4 2008, 09:46 PM)


But online, the littlest things balloon into interweb cataclysm.

This is so very true. Just look up on youtube "Red vs. Blue: Real Life vs. the Internet". I think it accurately shows with the use of halo how this can turn into.

It's why i have chosen to leave the thread that I was originally participating in. On the internet everyone is an expert. I'll just point out falsities and say good day. :D

SmathNa - September 4, 2008 10:16 PM (GMT)
Oh my God, how did I never see that before?

Possibly because I don't frequent YouTube.

It's HILARIOUS.

'Go to your local Middle School chess club and distribute crystal meth and guns...' sounds about right.

LOL.

Seriously, I'm LingOL.

Ryl - September 5, 2008 12:41 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Sadiekins @ Sep 4 2008, 05:06 PM)
QUOTE (SmathNa @ Sep 4 2008, 09:46 PM)


But online, the littlest things balloon into interweb cataclysm.

This is so very true. Just look up on youtube "Red vs. Blue: Real Life vs. the Internet". I think it accurately shows with the use of halo how this can turn into.

It's why i have chosen to leave the thread that I was originally participating in. On the internet everyone is an expert. I'll just point out falsities and say good day. :D

Oh man, I love that video =D




Hosted for free by InvisionFree