- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
Dr. Javelin said:
Well, of course. The presidential campaigns is kind of like a game for power. Rhetoric can be used as a tool to gain votes. I'm not surprised.
United States Presidential Election, 2012
- Thread starter ralphfan
- Start date
Well, of course. The presidential campaigns is kind of like a game for power. Rhetoric can be used as a tool to gain votes. I'm not surprised.
Dr. Javelin
Nathan Latsk
Yeah, exactly.Crazy Jane said:
Conservatives view NBC and such as horribly biased, liberals view FOX as horribly biased, yadda yadda yadda.
(Course, I'm like Shoe and I view FOX as biased as a conservative, so... My point still stands.)
I like CNN it's the only news outlet I can watch and not get angry at (unless they are covering something stupid like the death of a celebrity or Obama's thing on the Supreme Court with out pointing out that Conservatives have been saying the same thing for years now)Dr. Javelin said:
Dr. Javelin
Nathan Latsk
Same feelings on CNN, except they're slightly biased towards liberals. They also have conservative writers though, which makes it better.
Oh, and the royal wedding last year was irritating on CNN and how much coverage it got.
But that also happened on every news channel, so...
Oh, and the royal wedding last year was irritating on CNN and how much coverage it got.
But that also happened on every news channel, so...
I would like to see one of them be like "are you fucking serious right now do you understand how wrong that is" Also CNN does have a slight liberal bias primarily because it's easier to be biased towards liberals
(side note term limits are bullshit)
(side note term limits are bullshit)
- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
I don't watch news networks, really.
And I thought you said you didn't want to talk about it.
And I thought you said you didn't want to talk about it.
Scarecrow von Steuben
I'm very friendly.
Crazy Jane said:
Agreed.
A lot of the so-called "liberally biased" networks are just actually just biased toward the easiest way out, in that they don't have the guts to actually point out when either side says something stupid.
Red Barchetta said:
I'm really sorry to hear that. My condolences.
- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
Both ways, heavily biased networks have all crap and no legitimacy in them. I think they're wrapped up in their own world, so I don't think they will point out how wrong they are because they don't realize it.
I've noticed that the average American doesn't actually know what the President actually does they seem to think he can just wave a magic wand and create jobs well he can't in fact the only things he can do that will help people are Calling a special session of Congress and signing things nothing else
Not really he can't directly propose anything he can go "hey mr. Congressman you should propose this" and the Congressman goes "what's that you say don't do my job then blame you ok also all of your bill shall be filled with earmarks MWAHAHAHAHAHA"Sharks Territory said:
- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
Crazy Jane said:
If people think the president is a failure or something, they don't realize that he's working very hard in the job. What if you're the leader faced with the OPEC thing, environmental issues, Afghanistan, economic stagnation, etc.? Being a leader in this situation is much tougher than it looks.
Fun fact he controls exactly zero of those issues OPEC is controlled by the people that own the oil and are entitled to sell it at what ever price they want, The Economy is because of corporations moving to other nations where it's cheaper, the environment would take acts of congress that may or may not be enforced, The wars he can't just remove everyone at once, and the economy his pretty much everybodys fault but his and the judgesLa Marionette said:
- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
Perhaps the economy's failing is everybody's fault. And I agree that the president has probably no control over what OPEC does, but people still get angry at him.
Also, I think the economy is bad not simply because more corporations are moving overseas; I think it's a combination of factors, but correct me if I'm wrong.
Also, I think the economy is bad not simply because more corporations are moving overseas; I think it's a combination of factors, but correct me if I'm wrong.
- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
Well, yeah, I agree with that, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't do anything about it once it happens. The president can take measures to pass laws and stuff for relief and control. This is why I don't support laissez-faire policies because it doesn't work. However, getting these measures through and enforcing it takes effort.
He can't pass laws like I said earlier he goes "Hey Mr. Congressman you should propose this bill" and Mr. Congressman goes "Nah i'm in a safe district so it doesn't matter what happens" and then the President hangs his head in shame
- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
The president needs the right congress people, then. It's the power of Check and Balance. I think currently, he doesn't seem to have the right people.
Dr. Javelin
Nathan Latsk
I thought he had the power to introduce legislation.
That said, I do agree that Americans place too much trust in the president and think he runs the country. He wields considerable power, but he's not the Champion of American Society that the common citizen believes he is.
The whole point of America was to do away with overpowered leaders, because that always leads to corruption, dictatorship, and in post ancient times, totalitarianism.
That said, I do agree that Americans place too much trust in the president and think he runs the country. He wields considerable power, but he's not the Champion of American Society that the common citizen believes he is.
The whole point of America was to do away with overpowered leaders, because that always leads to corruption, dictatorship, and in post ancient times, totalitarianism.
- Pronouns
- she/her
- MarioWiki
- Mario
Well, during history, we had an era of laissez-faire economics. However, I think that laissez-faire does not work in an economy like this. We need a powerful government utilizing Keynesian economics to get a better country. People might disagree, but look what FDR did. He made government intervene more with Social Security, insured bank deposits, Wagner Act, etc. and many of those programs stayed and became an essential part of life.
Also, the concept of checks and balances prevents leaders from having too much power. In the U.S., we probably never had a time where the leader was overpowered and corrupt; and if there was a time, that was swiftly dealt with. Remember the idea that government is based on the trust between the leader and the people? That if the leader is oppressive, that means the government does not have a consent, and the people have a right to overthrow him. Checks and balances spread the power to the Senate, the Legislature, and the Judiciary.
However, we need a balance. If men were angels, then government is not needed. We need a strong leader, but not too strong.
Presidents' not being able to pass laws due to the Senate being mostly in the opposing party is quite common in history. Some proposals such as national Social Security and the Equal Rights Amendments would be great if they weren't stopped by conservative opposition, I believe.
Also, the concept of checks and balances prevents leaders from having too much power. In the U.S., we probably never had a time where the leader was overpowered and corrupt; and if there was a time, that was swiftly dealt with. Remember the idea that government is based on the trust between the leader and the people? That if the leader is oppressive, that means the government does not have a consent, and the people have a right to overthrow him. Checks and balances spread the power to the Senate, the Legislature, and the Judiciary.
However, we need a balance. If men were angels, then government is not needed. We need a strong leader, but not too strong.
Crazy Jane said:
Presidents' not being able to pass laws due to the Senate being mostly in the opposing party is quite common in history. Some proposals such as national Social Security and the Equal Rights Amendments would be great if they weren't stopped by conservative opposition, I believe.
Red Barchetta
Talk less, smile more.
Red Barchetta
Talk less, smile more.
Sorry for the double post, but thought I'd say this:
Tomorrow's Tuesday the 24th, which means there's 5 big contests tomorrow. Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware, Rhode Island, and Connecticut all vote tomorrow.
Gingrich has hinted that if he doesn't do well in Delaware (out of any of the 5 states, he's campaigned in Delaware the most), he'll more than likely drop out.
Tomorrow's Tuesday the 24th, which means there's 5 big contests tomorrow. Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware, Rhode Island, and Connecticut all vote tomorrow.
Gingrich has hinted that if he doesn't do well in Delaware (out of any of the 5 states, he's campaigned in Delaware the most), he'll more than likely drop out.
Dr. Javelin
Nathan Latsk
They're allowed after three days, actually.Red Barchetta said:
Oh, and I really hope that Romney doesn't just sweep these states because I'd much rather have Paul or Gingrich as the nominee.