Are there ANY positive campaign ads? - Page 2

phil_ · 08-17-2012, 09:58 AM

Well, Amake, politics in America is much like football in America (by which, I mean American football). It doesn't matter who's on your team or whether they win games; as long as it's your team, you're going to root for them. Once you choose a team, you can't change your team, or else you were never a true fan to begin with. Lastly, team affiliation is largely inherited from one's parents. The only difference is that there are more teams to choose from in football.

In such a scenario, "the other team has the ~~ball~~ presidency" is sufficient reason to vote for your team to win.

Tev · 08-17-2012, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thadius

An easy way to deal with ads:

Pushing the power button on your TV remote.

I haven't seen a political ad all season. I own a DVR.

EDIT: I don't count seeing an ad dissected for its claims on shows like The Daily Show or traditional news outlets as that is not really the format/scope the ad was intended for.

Jagos · 08-17-2012, 11:00 AM

You do realize that this is a result if Citizens United, right?

POS Industries · 08-17-2012, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sifright

aha... No.

You don't have left politicians running around in America or if you do they are independents have 0 chance of getting any where near power.

Some how I doubt very much you personally would lose and have your 'wallet stolen' by a leftist politician you know unless you happen to be on a personal income that allows you to live like a king. In which case I've no reason to care that you will be losing out a little given all the people starving in the gutters because wealth accumulation is all that matters.

Well, in Aero's defense, I'm pretty sure the wallet stealing is analogous to the Republicans and the snake oil salesman who promises to do what you want but then just takes your money and does nothing is closer to how the Democrats usually perform, which are the "right" and "left" that we have in American politics, respectively.

Yes yes, I know, our definitions of "right wing" and "left wing" are quaint and laughable to you, but it's what we're stuck with for the time being.

Aerozord · 08-18-2012, 02:55 AM

that is correct, but to be more exact I mean those that CALL themselves that. If you were to abstract the terms and apply democrat and republican to those that actually follow their principles, instead of the names of two organizations that select people to run, you'd realize we haven't had an actual republican or democratic president in a long time.

POS Industries · 08-18-2012, 04:43 AM

Which is the result of having the entrenched two party system that we have. There are third parties such as the Libertarian or Constitution parties that are much more dedicated to the ideas of limited government and strict constitutional constructionism that that Republicans claim to be about (instead of the rampant government expansion and spending that they always end up doing when in power) and the Green and Socialist parties seem much more interested in upholding the values that the Democrats typically fail to live up to at every opportunity.

But since the only people who are in a position to pass comprehensive campaign finance reform are the people directly benefiting from the status quo, it's incredibly difficult to give the two major parties anything resembling a threat.

Aerozord · 08-20-2012, 02:35 AM

personally third parties aren't good picks either, just for more legit reasons. Namely that they tend to go too far in one direction or another. Green party doesn't look at just how severe the economic problems would be if alot of their policies were implimented. Socialists, well I think we need to secure worker rights, help educational advancement, and provide basic needs for survival (food, medicine, ect) but over all let the market go through its cycles. Most of our issues with, say, welfare isn't that its too much or too little its that its horribly implemented.

If Democrats were what they are supposed to be I'd say they are what I think we need. For a nation of our size (geographically and population) we need a more centralized government, not to mention our infrastructure is horribly outdated. We need regulation and oversight, but not actual control.

Sadly I think we are already past the point of return. We can stop things from degrading but I doubt we can remove some of the systemic problems we have in our system unless things get so bad we have another revolution.

But hey in 100 years the very idea of geopolitical governing bodies might be outdated so who knows.

08-17-2012, 09:58 AM	#11
phil_ Just sleeping Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: At home, probably in bed. Posts: 6,482	Most of this applies to religion, too. Well, Amake, politics in America is much like football in America (by which, I mean American football). It doesn't matter who's on your team or whether they win games; as long as it's your team, you're going to root for them. Once you choose a team, you can't change your team, or else you were never a true fan to begin with. Lastly, team affiliation is largely inherited from one's parents. The only difference is that there are more teams to choose from in football. In such a scenario, "the other team has the ~~ball~~ presidency" is sufficient reason to vote for your team to win. __________________ Be T-Rexcellent to each other, tako.

08-17-2012, 11:00 AM	#13
Jagos FRONT KICK OF DOOM! Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Howdy pardner... Posts: 6,399	You do realize that this is a result if Citizens United, right? __________________ Copyright musings World ramblings Scifi stories

08-18-2012, 02:55 AM	#15
Aerozord So we are clear Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Former murder capital of the world Posts: 13,824	that is correct, but to be more exact I mean those that CALL themselves that. If you were to abstract the terms and apply democrat and republican to those that actually follow their principles, instead of the names of two organizations that select people to run, you'd realize we haven't had an actual republican or democratic president in a long time. __________________ "don't hate me for being a heterosexual white guy disparaging slacktivism, hate me for all those murders I've done."

08-18-2012, 04:43 AM	#16
POS Industries Argus Agony Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Gotta go fishing! Posts: 10,483	Which is the result of having the entrenched two party system that we have. There are third parties such as the Libertarian or Constitution parties that are much more dedicated to the ideas of limited government and strict constitutional constructionism that that Republicans claim to be about (instead of the rampant government expansion and spending that they always end up doing when in power) and the Green and Socialist parties seem much more interested in upholding the values that the Democrats typically fail to live up to at every opportunity. But since the only people who are in a position to pass comprehensive campaign finance reform are the people directly benefiting from the status quo, it's incredibly difficult to give the two major parties anything resembling a threat. __________________ Either you're dead or my watch has stopped.

08-20-2012, 02:35 AM	#17
Aerozord So we are clear Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Former murder capital of the world Posts: 13,824	personally third parties aren't good picks either, just for more legit reasons. Namely that they tend to go too far in one direction or another. Green party doesn't look at just how severe the economic problems would be if alot of their policies were implimented. Socialists, well I think we need to secure worker rights, help educational advancement, and provide basic needs for survival (food, medicine, ect) but over all let the market go through its cycles. Most of our issues with, say, welfare isn't that its too much or too little its that its horribly implemented. If Democrats were what they are supposed to be I'd say they are what I think we need. For a nation of our size (geographically and population) we need a more centralized government, not to mention our infrastructure is horribly outdated. We need regulation and oversight, but not actual control. Sadly I think we are already past the point of return. We can stop things from degrading but I doubt we can remove some of the systemic problems we have in our system unless things get so bad we have another revolution. But hey in 100 years the very idea of geopolitical governing bodies might be outdated so who knows. __________________ "don't hate me for being a heterosexual white guy disparaging slacktivism, hate me for all those murders I've done."