Page 1061 of 1156

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:19 pm
by Xarlaxas
That's okay! Most Americans forget they don't live in a Democracy either. :P

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:36 pm
by Feud
Xarlaxas wrote:That's okay! Most Americans forget they don't live in a Democracy either. :P


That's a much more complex answer than just yes or no. ;) Some aspects are direct democracy, some are representative democracy, some are neither.

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:01 pm
by Ace Rimmer
Feud wrote:
Xarlaxas wrote:That's okay! Most Americans forget they don't live in a Democracy either. :P


That's a much more complex answer than just yes or no. ;) Some aspects are direct democracy, some are representative democracy, some are neither.

Who would want to? :wink:

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:02 pm
by Xarlaxas
Well, technically it's a Republic from what I understand, and the members of the electoral college aren't all elected directly either(?), and the popular vote for president is actually irrelevant, so the presidency isn't really decided by the people, even if they make it seem like it is!

Of course, Feud can probably explain the American system much better than I, being a political scientist and what-not. :P

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:36 am
by Feud
It's a bit more complicated like that. Come November, most Americans will having voting choices for at least four different levels of government, with some of those levels have multiple branches and some of those branches having multiple branches of their own. Many will also have direct democracy questions that are on the ballot as a result of voter initiatives or referendums which result in laws being made out side of the legislature or local government.

It wouldn't be unlikely for someone to be voting for President, Senator, Congressman, Governor, State Senate, State Legislature, County Board, Sheriff Mayor, and City Council, all of which occupy separate divisions of government. That's not including the various State offices (Attorney General, etc.), County offices, judges, school board, and any laws that are being put directly to the people to vote.

Also, some states require by law for electors in the electoral college to vote as they've been instructed to by the voters, but not all do.

It's a bit complicated. :)

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:28 am
by Xarlaxas
Oh aye, I know about what ends up on the ballots, I'll be getting an absentee ballot form in the post in time for the election after all! Don't forget hospital boards too! That happens in Florida at least.

I've even had mail arrive here in Scotland about why I should totally vote for the Republican sheriff rather than the Democratic one, because apparently law enforcement needs to be partisan. :P

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:54 pm
by shinygerbil

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:40 pm
by Cooper42
What I like about that page is the bit where it clearly states this is not hating on Romney for being rich (a big no-no for 'mercans. Because in the land of the free all you need is yourself (screw all thos epeople and publicly funded institutions and infrastructure that helped you) to make millions).

But clearly lays out that his business tactic: gobbling up smaller firms, shutting them down, losing jobs and creaming off the procedes is all kinds of "ew".

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:52 pm
by Ace Rimmer
Cooper42 wrote:But clearly lays out that his business tactic: gobbling up smaller firms, shutting them down, losing jobs and creaming off the procedes is all kinds of "ew".

Is there a single rich person that didn't do something dispicable to get to the top? :P

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:07 pm
by Xocrates
Ace Rimmer wrote:Is there a single rich person that didn't do something dispicable to get to the top? :P

Yes.

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:08 pm
by Ace Rimmer
Name/s?

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:15 pm
by zjoere
shinygerbil wrote:http://romneymakes.com/

what a guy


He's got nothing on Bill Gates though. Besides becoming president is something that requires a ridiculous amount of money if I'm not mistaken. Isn't it usually the candidate that spends the most money on the campaign that wins?

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:33 pm
by Xocrates
Ace Rimmer wrote:Name/s?

I didn't provide names to prevent people from moving the goalposts :P

Define rich and despicable and I'll provide names

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:42 pm
by Ace Rimmer
Alright, that's perfectly acceptable, and understandable; rich is a relative term.

Technically, every citizen of the U.S. that isn't homeless could qualify for 'rich' if we're talking world standards. Therefore, let's define the 'rich' as those who meet the following criteria:

1. Net worth of $1 million or more
2. Did not inheirt their fortune
3. Did not 'win' their fortune (e.g. lottery winner)

Edit: Got caught up in the rich part and forgot the despicable.

The Free Dictionary defines it as: worthy of being despised; contemptible; mean

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:59 pm
by zjoere
Bill Gates? He doesn't seem mean to me.

A lot of wealthy musicians could fit in as well.