Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[ibanezmonster]

The Republican Party is the party of innovation.

This country has a promising future.

[Karl Henning]

Through which broker can we plebs buy shares in the candidates, too?

[Todd]

Through which broker can we plebs buy shares in the candidates, too?

Good thing you asked.


In the spirit of fairness, you should consider the other side, too.  I do love this little blurb:

"Unlike our opponents, we don't take money from special interests, corporate lobbyists, and political action committees. What we have is supporters like you."

[Karl Henning]

I could never hope to outspend Jeb's Super PAC, and I know better than to break myself trying.  I understand that people with lots of money naturally feel that their vote should weigh more than that of the lazy unwashed, and I am past being enraged by that reflection.

[Todd]

I could never hope to outspend Jeb's Super PAC, and I know better than to break myself trying.

That's defeatism talking!  Take out a second mortgage, then a third, and give freely to Hillary and/or the DNC.  You will be richly rewarded, perhaps with a tour of the White House Groundskeeper's shed.

[Rinaldo]

That's why the only way to find truth is realize that everyone is full of it. 

Not at all. All you need is access to different sources and memory. There are respectable outlets, there are outlets with a clear bias and then there is Fox, the BS factory which should be held accountable for dividing America and pushing Republicans into the batshit crazy mode they've been in since Obama got elected.

The only way to find truth is to make an effort to look for it. We're living in an age where the amount of bullshit grew exponentially, but it's also way easier to see through it and hold news outlets accountable.

[Todd]

Not at all. All you need is access to different sources and memory. There are respectable outlets, there are outlets with a clear bias and then there is Fox, the BS factory which should be held accountable for dividing America and pushing Republicans into the batshit crazy mode they've been in since Obama got elected.

The First Amendment doth say: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


What do you mean by "held accountable", and how could what you suggest be legal, at least in the US?  Also, given Fox's actual viewership of only a few million, how can it have quite the sway you imply?

[Rinaldo]

What do you mean by "held accountable", and how could what you suggest be legal, at least in the US?

Oh, I've probably used the wrong word. I meant 'accountable' simply as in 'I'll remember the station bullshited me on a story and take that experience into further account'.

Also, given Fox's actual viewership of only a few million, how can it have quite the sway you imply?

That's the mystery. How could a fringe group like Tea Party sway the majority and in the end, chokehold the whole country?

[Karl Henning]

"Gee, that Government Shut-Down seemed like such a good idea at the time . . . ."

[Karl Henning]

That's defeatism talking!  Take out a second mortgage, then a third, and give freely to Hillary and/or the DNC.

Wonder if anyone has successfully mortgaged a clarinet . . . .

[Todd]

That's the mystery. How could a fringe group like Tea Party sway the majority and in the end, chokehold the whole country?

There is no real "Tea Party", of course, and "its" influence has been a bit exaggerated.  Some states have no significant "Tea Party" movement, and often state governments function without the type of ineffectiveness (at times) of the federal government - there is more to the USA than the US Federal Government.  A robust, even unruly, movement that purportedly opposes big government isn't necessarily a bad thing, either. 

"Gee, that Government Shut-Down seemed like such a good idea at the time . . . ."

There have been quite a good number of short-term shutdowns over the years, the most recent one being just one more example.  The 90s shutdown was even more entertaining.

[Karl Henning]

There is no real "Tea Party", of course, and "its" influence has been a bit exaggerated.

You're probably right.

[Ken B]

You're probably right.

Yes. I remember when she was elected to a federal office.

[Ken B]

People say the stupidest things about the Tea Party. One I heard a lot was that Michelle Bachman was a Tea Party favorite. Well they did several polls of self defined Tea Partiers and she finished dead last.
Frankly -- and we see it on display here -- most disdain directed at the Tea Party is class prejudice straight up.

[Ken B]

LOL

You have obviously been relying too heavily on biased news media if this is your impression of the US.  IMO, all news media are biased, none are objective. Anytime anyone or any news outlet claims to be objective they are lying.  If you cannot see the bias it only means you agree with it.

+1

[Karl Henning]

A robust, even unruly, movement that purportedly opposes big government isn't necessarily a bad thing, either.

Nor is a third-party candidate necessarily a bad thing.  (I agree with your point.)

-- most disdain directed at the Tea Party is class prejudice straight up.

Some of the opposition is not so much disdain directed at the Tea Party, as earnest weariness of the noun maverick.

[Ken B]

earnest weariness of the noun maverick.

Huh? What's James Garner got to do with this?

[Florestan]

Not at all. All you need is access to different sources and memory. There are respectable outlets, there are outlets with a clear bias and then there is Fox, the BS factory which should be held accountable for dividing America and pushing Republicans into the batshit crazy mode they've been in since Obama got elected.

That's the mystery. How could a fringe group like Tea Party sway the majority and in the end, chokehold the whole country?

Fox bad, Pravda good. 

[Rinaldo]

A robust, even unruly, movement that purportedly opposes big government isn't necessarily a bad thing, either.

No, it's not - as long as the movement doesn't consist of Koch funded Ayn Rand fanboys ranting about death panels and 'taking America back' from the least dipshit president the country had in ages.

[Todd]

No, it's not - as long as the movement doesn't consist of Koch funded Ayn Rand fanboys ranting about death panels and 'taking America back' from the least dipshit president the country had in ages.

There's value in the Kochs and Ayn Rand fans, too.  Robust democratic republics have room for all types.

The phrase "in ages" of course implies a very long time.  Who was the last president who qualifies as "least dipshit" or whatever other moderately flattering assessment you prefer?