Adam, sadly I think you're right not enough people care about politics, it's how we've gotten into this mess. The average American could name more American Idol contestants than Presidents. The Average American has no idea how the separation of powers works and prevents tyranny. The Average American has no idea who's their congressional representative, state representative or the name of their local sheriff.
I guess since most of America is asleep at the wheel we should all just shut up and watch the TV?
Quote:You don't have to change someone's mind for discussion to be warranted.
In fact, it is often by arguing with those who disagree with you that you learn ways to improve your own arguments. And that you see your own side from a new point of view.
I've changed my mind many times discussion politics with people. I've also had many people stop and say they've never thought of it from an angle I've argued and changed their mind. So the entire "no one cares, nothing changes" argument is a false narrative.
Quote:Hillary is heterosexual?
Questionable. I would venture to say she has more testosterone than Cruz and Paul.
Quote:You don't have to change someone's mind for discussion to be warranted.
In fact, it is often by arguing with those who disagree with you that you learn ways to improve your own arguments. And that you see your own side from a new point of view.
Much respect for understanding that, too many people think that a desire to change the other person's mind is a prerequisite to having a discussion about it.
I find that if you walk into with no expectations other than learning about an alternative viewpoint, things go a lot better and the discussion is generally more meaningful.
The problem with presidential candidates?
By the time they get to the point where they're running for the highest office in the land, they've sold their souls to one special interest or another for the sake of getting the financial backing required to wage a national campaign.
I know there are many here who say we need to get the money out of the electoral process, but it's gotten to the point where that's almost impossible. The only way to do it would be to publicly fund national elections giving each candidate the same amount of money to work with, and none of the parties would agree to that because elections are big business.
The way the current system is structured, most people who would make GREAT candidates for the office want nothing to do with it because they have to whore themselves out and expose their lives to the kind of public scrutiny that just isn't worth it.
Quote:Adam, sadly I think you're right not enough people care about politics, it's how we've gotten into this mess. The average American could name more American Idol contestants than Presidents. The Average American has no idea how the separation of powers works and prevents tyranny. The Average American has no idea who's their congressional representative, state representative or the name of their local sheriff.
I guess since most of America is asleep at the wheel we should all just shut up and watch the TV?
There's more to it than apathy.
Americans are less educated about their options today than they were even 2 or 3 decades ago. They don't know the history of this nation, and they don't understand their role. If they are voting, they're not doing any sort of research to determine what or who they should be voting for. They become sheep who are spoon fed snippets and sound bytes and they use that to make their determinations.
People don't take their rights seriously, and as a result, they're far too willing to sacrifice them.
Quote:There's more to it than apathy.
Americans are less educated about their options today than they were even 2 or 3 decades ago. They don't know the history of this nation, and they don't understand their role. If they are voting, they're not doing any sort of research to determine what or who they should be voting for. They become sheep who are spoon fed snippets and sound bytes and they use that to make their determinations.
People don't take their rights seriously, and as a result, they're far too willing to sacrifice them.
Every generation has said the same thing about the following generation. Everyone thinks their generation knew more, cared more, and was more worthy of the fruits of liberty than the people of "today".
Show me one generation who has ever said - "you know, these kids today are a lot more concerned and smarter than we were." I don't think you'll find one. It's just human nature to think "we" are more worthy than the "sheep" that exist today.
To listen to anyone over 50 it seems to have been all down hill since "the greatest generation".
Quote:Every generation has said the same thing about the following generation. Everyone thinks their generation knew more, cared more, and was more worthy of the fruits of liberty than the people of "today".
Show me one generation who has ever said - "you know, these kids today are a lot more concerned and smarter than we were." I don't think you'll find one. It's just human nature to think "we" are more worthy than the "sheep" that exist today.
To listen to anyone over 50 it seems to have been all down hill since "the greatest generation".
29 and I'll tell you it's all down hill. It's not an old man thing, it's a reality thing. Welfare dependence up, Work down, Government bigger = down hill.
Quote:Every generation has said the same thing about the following generation. Everyone thinks their generation knew more, cared more, and was more worthy of the fruits of liberty than the people of "today".
Show me one generation who has ever said - "you know, these kids today are a lot more concerned and smarter than we were." I don't think you'll find one. It's just human nature to think "we" are more worthy than the "sheep" that exist today.
To listen to anyone over 50 it seems to have been all down hill since "the greatest generation".
And if you listen to anyone under 30, you'd think they're the smartest generation ever to come along. Until you ask them a few questions that most Americans should know, like who the VP of the US is, or who the founding fathers were. Most can't answer the basic questions you'd be required to answer in a citizenship test.
I'm not over 50, so I hate to disappoint you, but this dumbing down of the American electorate has been a slow, progressive walk over the past several decades.
Quote:29 and I'll tell you it's all down hill. It's not an old man thing, it's a reality thing. Welfare dependence up, Work down, Government bigger = down hill.
You're just an old soul, I guess (lol).
My point is - do you know anyone who thinks differently? I don't think you want to tread too closely to TMD's "get off my porch" attitude. You lose credibility and people start expecting you to say dagnabit and whipersnaper.
Quote:The problem with presidential candidates?
By the time they get to the point where they're running for the highest office in the land, they've sold their souls to one special interest or another for the sake of getting the financial backing required to wage a national campaign.
I know there are many here who say we need to get the money out of the electoral process, but it's gotten to the point where that's almost impossible. The only way to do it would be to publicly fund national elections giving each candidate the same amount of money to work with, and none of the parties would agree to that because elections are big business.
The way the current system is structured, most people who would make GREAT candidates for the office want nothing to do with it because they have to whore themselves out and expose their lives to the kind of public scrutiny that just isn't worth it.
There is a movement to do just that. A 28th amendment to the constitution calling for publicly funded elections ad other restrictions on campaign finance. The state level is more receptive to the idea since most of them have not been fully bought yet. Two states have passed resolutions calling for an Article V convention
As improbable as it is, it's not impossible once the ball gets rolling and it's rocking a little bit.
Quote:And if you listen to anyone under 30, you'd think they're the smartest generation ever to come along. Until you ask them a few questions that most Americans should know, like who the VP of the US is, or who the founding fathers were. Most can't answer the basic questions you'd be required to answer in a citizenship test.
I'm not over 50, so I hate to disappoint you, but this dumbing down of the American electorate has been a slow, progressive walk over the past several decades.
Again - human nature. Your last line there is a classic. Probably said by everyone who has ever graduated high school.
Quote:Again - human nature. Your last line there is a classic. Probably said by everyone who has ever graduated high school.
It's human nature to be uninformed?
Quote:There is a movement to do just that. A 28th amendment to the constitution calling for publicly funded elections ad other restrictions on campaign finance. The state level is more receptive to the idea since most of them have not been fully bought yet. Two states have passed resolutions calling for an Article V convention
As improbable as it is, it's not impossible once the ball gets rolling and it's rocking a little bit.
Watch out what you wish for. I guess you love incumbents. Like they don't have plenty of built in advantages, primarily name recognition.
How is a newcomer to become known other than by spending money? Incumbents love the idea of restricting spending for their opponents. Helps make theirs a lifetime office, which it practically is now anyway.
And I guess free speech should be restricted. Can't wait until a commission (of politicians, no doubt) restricts even further my use of my own money to support whomever I wish. Why don't we just have a House of Lords and get it over with?
Same old same old - my guy is a concerned office seeker; your guy is a tool of the special interests who has been bought.
Quote:It's human nature to be uninformed?
It's human nature to think your generation is so much smarter than the ones that follow. Despite all the evidence to the contrary during various periods of history.
Quote:There is a movement to do just that. A 28th amendment to the constitution calling for publicly funded elections ad other restrictions on campaign finance. The state level is more receptive to the idea since most of them have not been fully bought yet. Two states have passed resolutions calling for an Article V convention
As improbable as it is, it's not impossible once the ball gets rolling and it's rocking a little bit.
You'll never see that happen for the reasons Adam mentioned above.
Quote:It's human nature to think your generation is so much smarter than the ones that follow. Despite all the evidence to the contrary during various periods of history.
Please show me "all the evidence to the contrary" then.
Quote:Please show me "all the evidence to the contrary" then.
I don't know what you are asking for but here is proof that you are acting like a fuddy duddy:
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://m.mentalfloss.com/article.php?id=52209'>http://m.mentalfloss.com/article.php?id=52209</a>
Quote:Watch out what you wish for. I guess you love incumbents. Like they don't have plenty of built in advantages, primarily name recognition.
How is a newcomer to become known other than by spending money? Incumbents love the idea of restricting spending for their opponents. Helps make theirs a lifetime office, which it practically is now anyway.
And I guess free speech should be restricted. Can't wait until a commission (of politicians, no doubt) restricts even further my use of my own money to support whomever I wish. Why don't we just have a House of Lords and get it over with?
Same old same old - my guy is a concerned office seeker; your guy is a tool of the special interests who has been bought.
A lot of people do not see it that way. They see it as money being the reason new people cannot get known and that coupled with the fact that to get the money needed to be known you must sell out. Those politicians are then just as corrupt as the current ones. It's a never ending cycle.
A newcomer can be known by their ideas and actions. Those should speak louder than tens of millions or more being thrown at trash ads.
Who is restricting free speech? Not allowing corporations or wealthy individuals to buy the politicians of there choice is not restricting speech. Citizens United is one of the worst rulings ever.
Elections should be about who has their people's interests in mind when making decision and their ideas for policies. It should not be about who has more money. Publicly funded elections will allow this to thrive.
Quote:A lot of people do not see it that way. They see it as money being the reason new people cannot get known and that coupled with the fact that to get the money needed to be known you must sell out. Those politicians are then just as corrupt as the current ones. It's a never ending cycle.
A newcomer can be known by their ideas and actions. Those should speak louder than tens of millions or more being thrown at trash ads.
Who is restricting free speech? Not allowing corporations or wealthy individuals to buy the politicians of there choice is not restricting speech. Citizens United is one of the worst rulings ever.
Elections should be about who has their people's interests in mind when making decision and their ideas for policies. It should not be about who has more money. Publicly funded elections will allow this to thrive.
"A newcomer can be known by their ideas and actions." And how do those ideas and action become known? It takes money.
Your last paragraph made me all warm inside - but if you want to win an election it takes money. What are you so afraid of? Are you saying you can be bought and you need to be protected from yourself? Are you saying that you don't mind paying taxes and having that money go to candidates you don't believe in? So every politician is bought? Including the ones you vote for? How do you account for the "free money" incumbents now get (i.e., free air time by doing something "official")?
What is it exactly that this money is buying anyway?