Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

IG_urban wrote:
Yes there is. But that is still not what I am talking about.

You're talking about the relative significance of individual votes, and the presence of means by which democracy can be circumvented. What you fail to understand is that those means exist not because the system is broken, but because direct democracy is not necessarily desirable. There must be a mechanism by which the stupidity of the mob is controlled for.

This is relevant to the multimillion dollar polling industry because said industry is an indication of the significance of voting in spite of the various means by which direct democracy is kept from being realized.

IG_urban wrote:
I have had this debate with unbudging liberals and conservatives before. Voting is not a full and honest choice. Do I want a cheese grater taken to my elbow? Or a table saw to my thigh? I choose neither, which in it of itself, is a choice. You can disagree, but that is a fact.

That is indeed a full, honest choice. If you cannot be relied upon to understand what a choice is, then there is no hope for this conversation.

Ahtman wrote:

IG_urban wrote:Don't assume and project my understandings and beliefs, please.

I'm not really assuming anything. I'm going by what you say. If you are muddled in getting your point across don't get upset with me.

IG_urban wrote:I understand quite well how the system works.

You say that, but everything you have said up to this point says the opposite. You tell us how you would like it to work, but that is not the same thing as actually understanding how it works and how to work it. Start getting involved in a meaningful way and you'll understand the difference as well.

I'm not upset. I am just asking you to not make assumptions about certain things, which, in my point of view, you are. Yes, I tell you how I would like it to work. The changes that I would like to be made, are not possible, nothing I could do would change it, therefore, I don't even attempt trying. I have an education to work on. Which is why I don't care really at all. I stopped caring awhile ago.

Evidently you are lying to yourself, as posting in this thread indicates that you at least care for something tangentially associated with voting.

IG_urban wrote:I have had this debate with unbudging liberals and conservatives before. Voting is not a full and honest choice. Do I want a cheese grater taken to my elbow? Or a table saw to my thigh? I choose neither, which in it of itself, is a choice. You can disagree, but that is a fact.

You aren't choosing neither, you're choosing to let other people make that decision for you. You don't avoid the ramifications of an election by refusing to vote (unless you're avoiding jury duty, maybe).

Now, if you really don't care about the outcome, then you still have no reason to vote. It's just silly to think that not voting is some sort of blow to "the system".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:What you fail to understand is that those means exist not because the system is broken, but because direct democracy is not necessarily desirable. There must be a mechanism by which the stupidity of the mod is controlled for.

Oh come on, Frazzled isn't that bad.

dogma wrote:You're talking about the relative significance of individual votes, and the presence of means by which democracy can be circumvented. What you fail to understand is that those means exist not because the system is broken, but because direct democracy is not necessarily desirable. There must be a mechanism by which the stupidity of the mod is controlled for.
This is relevant to the multimillion dollar polling industry because said industry is an indication of the significance of voting in spite of the various means by which direct democracy is kept from being realized

What you fail to understand is that you continue to force your opinion on me. I think the system is broken. If you think it isn't, fine, go vote, be my guest, I don't care. I beleive that a lot of what you are saying is rhetoric put in place to to further complacency.

dogma wrote:That is indeed a full, honest choice. If you cannot be relied upon to understand what a choice is, then there is no hope for this conversation.

You are saying that voting is a full and honest choice? Well I disagree. Once again, don't assume my idiocy because I disagree with you. I have gotten into debates with you before and your seemingly unintended backdoor arrogance is not going to get me this time.

dogma wrote:Evidently you are lying to yourself, as posting in this thread indicates that you at least care for something tangentially associated with voting.

Evidently I am not. Casually debating a topic on a Warhammer message board and becoming a political activist are just the slightest bit different. Talking about how I really don't care about politics, and why, is also different.

Orkeosaurus wrote:

IG_urban wrote:I have had this debate with unbudging liberals and conservatives before. Voting is not a full and honest choice. Do I want a cheese grater taken to my elbow? Or a table saw to my thigh? I choose neither, which in it of itself, is a choice. You can disagree, but that is a fact.

You aren't choosing neither, you're choosing to let other people make that decision for you. You don't avoid the ramifications of an election by refusing to vote (unless you're avoiding jury duty, maybe).

Now, if you really don't care about the outcome, then you still have no reason to vote. It's just silly to think that not voting is some sort of blow to "the system".

The vote is going to be made by other people with or without my own vote. I am not intending to avoid the ramifications of an election by not voting. I just choose not to use my head movies and brain power to think about it or concern myself with it. I don't bitch about candidates, I don't complain about the economy (well to some degree I do, because I need a job, but I certainly don't go around blaming anybody), and I don't blame anybody else for anything (except Chris Gregiore, but even then, only in idle conversation with friends who agree with me, there is nothing I can do to stop her).

I don't think that by not voting that it is a "blow" to the system. I could care less. The less I am on the radar, the better, as far as I am concerned.

Orkeosaurus wrote:

dogma wrote:What you fail to understand is that those means exist not because the system is broken, but because direct democracy is not necessarily desirable. There must be a mechanism by which the stupidity of the mod is controlled for.

Oh come on, Frazzled isn't that bad.

Freudian slip? I meant mob, in case that wasn't clear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IG_urban wrote:
What you fail to understand is that you continue to force your opinion on me. I think the system is broken. If you think it isn't, fine, go vote, be my guest, I don't care. I beleive that a lot of what you are saying is rhetoric put in place to to further complacency.

Really? I haven't even made a qualitative comment. The extent of my commitment to this conversation is founded on the belief that you're rambling on with an understanding of politics and the state which is common to 'rebellious' high school kids. And, every time you say 'the system is broken' without illustrating why you believe that I am left no choice but to deepen my conviction.

IG_urban wrote:
You are saying that voting is a full and honest choice?

Its really quite simple, in the course of voting you are presented with multiple things to choose from, therefore it is a 'full' choice. You can choose whichever one you wish, and therefor the choice is honest. The fact that you don't like the choice has no bearing on the fact that it is a choice, and that it is an honest (uncoerced) choice. There really is no room for opinion here, its simply the nature of the matter.

IG_urban wrote:
Evidently I am not. Casually debating a topic on a Warhammer message board and becoming a political activist are just the slightest bit different. Talking about how I really don't care about politics, and why, is also different.

If you were really indifferent you would not even have opened the thread. You may be relatively unconcerned, but you are obviously not fully so.

dogma wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:

dogma wrote:What you fail to understand is that those means exist not because the system is broken, but because direct democracy is not necessarily desirable. There must be a mechanism by which the stupidity of the mod is controlled for.

Oh come on, Frazzled isn't that bad.

Freudian slip? I meant mob, in case that wasn't clear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IG_urban wrote:
What you fail to understand is that you continue to force your opinion on me. I think the system is broken. If you think it isn't, fine, go vote, be my guest, I don't care. I beleive that a lot of what you are saying is rhetoric put in place to to further complacency.

Really? I haven't even made a qualitative comment. The extent of my commitment to this conversation is founded on the belief that you're rambling on with an understanding of politics and the state which is common to 'rebellious' high school kids. And, every time you say 'the system is broken' without illustrating why you believe that I am left no choice but to deepen my conviction.

IG_urban wrote:
You are saying that voting is a full and honest choice?

Its really quite simple, in the course of voting you are presented with multiple things to choose from, therefore it is a 'full' choice. You can choose whichever one you wish, and therefor the choice is honest. The fact that you don't like the choice has no bearing on the fact that it is a choice, and that it is an honest (uncoerced) choice. There really is no room for opinion here, its simply the nature of the matter.

IG_urban wrote:
Evidently I am not. Casually debating a topic on a Warhammer message board and becoming a political activist are just the slightest bit different. Talking about how I really don't care about politics, and why, is also different.

If you were really indifferent you would not even have opened the thread. You may be relatively unconcerned, but you are obviously not fully so.

A rebellious highschool kid. Ok. More backdoor arrogance. I think we can both see that I am not conducting myself like a rebellious high school kid.


Maybe "a full, honest choice" were not the words I was looking for. What I meant to say was that I don't find it fair. If I do not like either choice, then I choose neither. Nobody has a gun to my head.


True, although I was curious to see what younger users had to say on here, I never really meant to reply, but I had to agree that "All I need to know is I vote for whoever the Dems trot out that electoral period, and I can feel good about myself." was a drone mentality, and then I let my argumentative side take over for a minute; to my peril, it seems. I would say that I do not care about politics, politicians, what goes on in DC, and what the President or the Congress is doing, but I do care somewhat about people. And if somebody says something I disagree with, I just may counter him. I don't think I have stated that anybody's opinion is wrong on here, I have just boldly stated what mine is, and that I believe it. You, however, seem intent on pointing out that because I am not an expert political analyst/fanatic, like many on here seem to be acting like, or because my opinion is counter to what you find to be fact, that my opinion is sub-adult, or uneducated.

IG_urban wrote:
A rebellious highschool kid. Ok. More backdoor arrogance. I think we can both see that I am not conducting myself like a rebellious high school kid.

Not rebellious, 'rebellious'. Self-proclaimed rebellion without substance.

Also, I had no idea that it was arrogant to state one's opinion with substantiation. I also had no idea that it was 'backdoor', that seemed quite up front to me.

IG_urban wrote:
Maybe "a full, honest choice" were not the words I was looking for. What I meant to say was that I don't find it fair. If I do not like either choice, then I choose neither. Nobody has a gun to my head.

Why isn't it fair? You chose something, even if that choice involved permitting others to choose for you.

IG_urban wrote:
You, however, seem intent on pointing out that because I am not an expert political analyst/fanatic, like many on here seem to be acting like, or because my opinion is counter to what you find to be fact, that my opinion is sub-adult, or uneducated.

Perhaps my opinion of what should be regarded as adult is too low.

I'm a rebellious high school kid.

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote:
A rebellious highschool kid. Ok. More backdoor arrogance. I think we can both see that I am not conducting myself like a rebellious high school kid.

Not rebellious, 'rebellious'. Self-proclaimed rebellion without substance.

Also, I had no idea that it was arrogant to state one's opinion with substantiation. I also had no idea that it was 'backdoor', that seemed quite up front to me.

IG_urban wrote:
Maybe "a full, honest choice" were not the words I was looking for. What I meant to say was that I don't find it fair. If I do not like either choice, then I choose neither. Nobody has a gun to my head.

Why isn't it fair? You chose something, even if that choice involved permitting others to choose for you.

IG_urban wrote:
You, however, seem intent on pointing out that because I am not an expert political analyst/fanatic, like many on here seem to be acting like, or because my opinion is counter to what you find to be fact, that my opinion is sub-adult, or uneducated.

Perhaps my opinion of what should be regarded as adult is too low.

I think you need to meditate on what the difference between ego and opinion is.

I doubt very much you know the meaning of either of those words. At the very least your usage here indicates that your grasp of them is shaky at best.

your retort is shaky at best.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
you are beginning to get personal.

Remember, as the immortal Bard once said: Never trust anyone under 30.

He also said "Get thee glass eyes, And like a scurvy politician seem To see the things thou dost not"

I think too many people focus only on the presidential campaign. Your local elections have more to do with you on a daily basis, but most people don't really pay attention to those, they are usually pretty close affairs. How many of you know who your local councilman is? My local councilman comes into my bar and drinks like a fish, i have some good stories about him. Wonder why there are no potholes in front of my bar.....I'll never tell.

Andrew1975 wrote:

Remember, as the immortal Bard once said: Never trust anyone under 30.

He also said "Get thee glass eyes, And like a scurvy politician seem To see the things thou dost not"

I think too many people focus only on the presidential campaign. Your local elections have more to do with you on a daily basis, but most people don't really pay attention to those, they are usually pretty close affairs. How many of you know who your local councilman is?

DINGDINGDING

Absolutely! Local has a far greater immediate impact and tends to have fewer participants. It isn't hard to make a change there. Still almost every study shows that people pay most attention to the one they, individually, have the least impact on.

I don;t remember where I heard it but there was a saying about all politicians are crooks and liars until you run for office. People complain about corruption but continually vote the same people in over and over.

IG_urban wrote:your retort is shaky at best.

Then please explain to us how ego and opinion are related in the context of this conversation.

IG_urban wrote:
you are beginning to get personal.

I'm attacking you understanding of something, not you.

anything I am going to say you are just going to come back with some arrogant retort. You do not not care who is right or who is wrong as long as you get the final word in, therefore everything you say, is ego driven. You do the same damn thing in every topic you reply to me in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
trying to be an internet smart ass all of the time really kind of takes away the "smart" part away from your points. some of the things you say are valid, at times, but your massive ego pollutes any opinions you may have.

That line of reasoning you've just used isn't coherent. One would presume that, if I were driven by ego alone, that I would care about who was proven correct.

In any case, my response to you would depend on the quality of your response to the initial question. I don't want to assume that you simply don't have an answer, because that would entail an inability on your part to admit that you're wrong; something that would destroy any possible irony meter given your lean on criticism from arrogance.

Democracy and Republics aren't mutually exclusive, but when you see the Republican ideas laid into the founding of this nation (an Electoral College, proportional representation, bicameral house and co-equal branches of government) were definitely never intended to be a Democracy. With the 17th Amendment the States themselves aren't represented in Washington. Senators were never supposed to bve elected by the people directly, but appointed by the state legislature.

Direct Elections for national seats like the President is incredibly dangerous. The idea of the elctoral college was to keep the tyranny of the masses down. The voting for the coolege should be that of Nebraska or Maine where the electors vote proportionally to the vote in their states.

IG, do you pay state and federal taxes? You're right on the radar.

Ahtman wrote:I don;t remember where I heard it but there was a saying about all politicians are crooks and liars until you run for office. People complain about corruption but continually vote the same people in over and over.

My dad has a saying he enjoys. The things that a person has to do to get into political office should disqualify them from the position

Stormrider wrote:IG, do you pay state and federal taxes? You're right on the radar.

I don't own a house, a car, or anything else that would have my name tied to it. I don't use credits cards or banks. My internet is in my room mate's name, I have been on a family plan for cell phone for almost 9 years, my student loans have cosigners even though I have to pay them, and anything else I pay is sales tax. Yes, there are taxes from work, but I never stated I was completely off the radar, I just said that the less I am on it, the better.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:That line of reasoning you've just used isn't coherent. One would presume that, if I were driven by ego alone, that I would care about who was proven correct.

In any case, my response to you would depend on the quality of your response to the initial question. I don't want to assume that you simply don't have an answer, because that would entail an inability on your part to admit that you're wrong; something that would destroy any possible irony meter given your lean on criticism from arrogance.

all I hear is ego and the sound of your hand fapping yourself while you fap to the sound of your own voice while you look at a picture of yourself looking at a picture of yourself on the wall.

IG_urban wrote:

Stormrider wrote:IG, do you pay state and federal taxes? You're right on the radar.

I don't own a house, a car, or anything else that would have my name tied to it. I don't use credits cards or banks. My internet is in my room mate's name, I have been on a family plan for cell phone for almost 9 years, my student loans have cosigners even though I have to pay them, and anything else I pay is sales tax. Yes, there are taxes from work, but I never stated I was completely off the radar, I just said that the less I am on it, the better.

You have a social security number, that means far, far more than being registered to vote.

IG_urban wrote: I don't own a house, a car, or anything else that would have my name tied to it. I don't use credits cards or banks. My internet is in my room mate's name, I have been on a family plan for cell phone for almost 9 years, my student loans have cosigners even though I have to pay them, and anything else I pay is sales tax. Yes, there are taxes from work, but I never stated I was completely off the radar, I just said that the less I am on it, the better.

Once you have an SSN you're 'on the grid', and you most certainly have an SSN given that you have student loans. You're simply deluding yourself by pretending that you have any choice in the matter; short of going 'mountain man'.

IG_urban wrote:
all I hear is ego and the sound of your hand fapping yourself while you fap to the sound of your own voice while you look at a picture of yourself looking at a picture of yourself on the wall.

At this point we aren't even discussing my ego, but the words you have chosen to use. If you can't mount a defense for your position, then you should consider modifying your position. Anything else is tantamount to putting your fingers in your ears and singing.

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote: I don't own a house, a car, or anything else that would have my name tied to it. I don't use credits cards or banks. My internet is in my room mate's name, I have been on a family plan for cell phone for almost 9 years, my student loans have cosigners even though I have to pay them, and anything else I pay is sales tax. Yes, there are taxes from work, but I never stated I was completely off the radar, I just said that the less I am on it, the better.

Once you have an SSN you're 'on the grid', and you most certainly have an SSN given that you have student loans. You're simply deluding yourself by pretending that you have any choice in the matter; short of going 'mountain man'.

IG_urban wrote:
all I hear is ego and the sound of your hand fapping yourself while you fap to the sound of your own voice while you look at a picture of yourself looking at a picture of yourself on the wall.

At this point we aren't even discussing my ego, but the words you have chosen to use. If you can't mount a defense for your position, then you should consider modifying your position. Anything else is tantamount to putting your fingers in your ears and singing.

Yes but by not using or having the things I stated above I have a smaller foot print than most.


It has nothing to do with mounting a defense on my position, it has everything to do with you using your ego as a defense against anything I may say or do.

rubiksnoob wrote:

Haddi wrote:
3. I think it's a good idea, just that the Electoral College here in the States is the most pants-on-head slowed election-deciding method I've seen. And I believe that the Collegiate can actually vote for any candidate, not the one the state chose, but they are fined. The vote is still counted I believe.

That is correct. They are fined but the vote still stands.

It is correct in some states (most don't even fine) but entirely misleading. The electors are nominated by their parties, the Democrat elector will be a Democrat who a major player in his party in his state. Same for Republicans, Libertarians and Greens. These are powerful political machines, the odds of a faithless elector just suddenly deciding to ignore the people and his own party is incredibly unlikely in the modern age. Look at the 2000 election, if ever an elector was going to cast a faithless vote it would have been then.

Seriously, the US has a lot of problems in it's political system, an antiquated formality in the voting process is not one of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stormrider wrote:Quick question: Were we established as a Democracy or a Republic?

You're both. A Republic is any government that doesn't have a monarch.

The term you're probably looking for is Representative Democracy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catyrpelius wrote:The US is a republic not a democracy...Dont they teach anything in school these days?

They certainly don't teach you the meaning of Republic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IG_urban wrote:I have had this debate with unbudging liberals and conservatives before. Voting is not a full and honest choice. Do I want a cheese grater taken to my elbow? Or a table saw to my thigh? I choose neither, which in it of itself, is a choice. You can disagree, but that is a fact.

But you are working on the assumption that no candidate, at any level, will ever be good. That's as simplistic as people who always vote for one party.

IG_urban wrote:
Yes but by not using or having the things I stated above I have a smaller foot print than most.

It doesn't really work that way. Your footprint, from an administrative standpoint, is you SSN. After that nothing really matters. Well, except your name, which thanks to the internet is nearly as good as your SSN.

IG_urban wrote:
It has nothing to do with mounting a defense on my position, it has everything to do with you using your ego as a defense against anything I may say or do.

Using my ego as a defense would involve talking myself up. I haven't done that, so I'm sort of at a loss as to why you have taken this line of criticism. It doesn't seem to have much basis.

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote:
Yes but by not using or having the things I stated above I have a smaller foot print than most.

It doesn't really work that way. Your footprint, from an administrative standpoint, is you SSN. After that nothing really matters. Well, except your name, which thanks to the internet is nearly as good as your SSN.

IG_urban wrote:
It has nothing to do with mounting a defense on my position, it has everything to do with you using your ego as a defense against anything I may say or do.

Using my ego as a defense would involve talking myself up. I haven't done that, so I'm sort of at a loss as to why you have taken this line of criticism. It doesn't seem to have much basis.

Purchasing records, purchasing trends, voting trends, etc, do make a bigger footprint. It's virtually the same thing Facebook does with your information, except on a governmental/national and even global scale.

No it would not necessarily mean you talking yourself up, see, this is why I question your perception on the differences between ego and opinion.

Voting is confidential, it's not kept anywhere. At most, the gov't has what party you're registered with (unless you're in a state that doesn't have this, both states I've lived in haven't required me to register with a party). Anything else is accessible if somebody has your social. Really, nothing else matters.

IG_urban wrote:
Purchasing records, purchasing trends, voting trends, etc, do make a bigger footprint. It's virtually the same thing Facebook does with your information, except on a governmental/national and even global scale.

And those are tied to your name, or SSN, which are the two things I mentioned as being definitive with respect to your 'footprint'.

IG_urban wrote:
My internet is in my room mate's name, I have been on a family plan for cell phone for almost 9 years, my student loans have cosigners even though I have to pay them...

I rather like how you appear to believe that your lease is not connected to your net service, your family name is not connected to your own name, and that your name and SSN are not on your student loans due to the presence of cosigners. You really need to revisit your understanding of modern life if you think you are at all 'off the grid'.

IG_urban wrote:
No it would not necessarily mean you talking yourself up, see, this is why I question your perception on the differences between ego and opinion.

Actually, that is what would be required in order for you to reach a conclusion that was based on anything more than your own subjective judgment.

Either way, you still haven't illustrated how ego and opinion are connected in the context of this conversation.

Thats just it, they are not, but you combine them as one.

Cash only negates your point, Vene. Dogma, I am aware that my family name is tied to me, I am aware of everything you mentioned, quit being an ass.

But when you compare me to the average American with two car payments, 2+ credit cards, multiple bank accounts, multiple social network sites with their full name and info, debit cards, library cards, private loans, mortgages, that own houses, cars, boats, recreational vehicles, not to mention multiple IDs that are RFID chipped, (yes I realize my cellphone contains one, as well), cell phones, that do their taxes, finances, and record keeping all online, and their now public medical records to boot...


feth yes, my footprint is a great deal smaller, and I am on the radar a lot less.

As far as voting being confidential...really? No information in America has been private since the Cold War.

IG_urban wrote:Dogma, I am aware that my family name is tied to me, I am aware of everything you mentioned, quit being an ass.

If you were aware of those thing, why did you see fit to act in the opposite manner?

IG_urban wrote:
But when you compare me to the average American with two car payments, 2+ credit cards, multiple bank accounts, multiple social network sites with their full name and info, debit cards, library cards, private loans, mortgages, that own houses, cars, boats, recreational vehicles, not to mention multiple IDs that are RFID chipped, (yes I realize my cellphone contains one, as well), cell phones, that do their taxes, finances, and record keeping all online, and their now public medical records to boot...

Just using the information presented in this thread you are, or were, on the rolls at a university that most likely accepts state funding. You have received student loans, and based on the fact that you mention private debt above they are probably public loans; and are likely backed, at least in part, by the state at this point. You have a cell phone. You have filed taxes. You are signed to a lease. You have used a bank as the state will not disburse loans without an account to deal with overage. You post to an internet forum in which you discuss where you live, how old you are, and your political leanings. You have internet access. All of these things mean that your footprint is just as large as that of any random individual, and is certainly more than sufficient for anyone who particularly wants to find you to do so. And isn't there a picture of you bouncing around this site?

Also, I'm fairly certain the US only puts RFID tags into passports.

IG_urban wrote:
As far as voting being confidential...really? No information in America has been private since the Cold War.

There is plenty of private information in America. Private does not mean inaccessible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IG_urban wrote:Thats just it, they are not, but you combine them as one.

That's not possible. An opinion is a subjective statement. The ego the self. One can argue that the ego gives rise to opinions, but it certainly cannot be the same thing as an opinion.