Request

[nslay]

If we were really a capitalist society, votes wouldn't be free and those who voted correctly would profit. We should be a Futarchy instead of a democracy. Naturally, this form of government only prefers expert voters and dumb voters wouldn't be able to afford to vote.

I'm just kidding of course :)

[while1]

Why so provocative?

To be frank and I may just be speaking for myself, but I think your past behavior before your long absence on these forum still lingers in the subconscious minds of members here.  I do remember you being quite provocative and trollish back then, so it's not unreasonable to guess that you might not have left such a pristine impression on some members here before you disappeared some years ago.  Don't take this the wrong way- I'm not saying that this applies to deadly, I'm just saying that I personally thought to myself when you reappeared on these forums "Is Ender going to act the same way he did before he disappeared?".

Reading your posts just now on how you've come to accept certain aspects about the world and people makes me think that perhaps you sincerely have changed.

EDITED:  Fixed to refer to the correct member with D starting username.

[Rule]

Ender has usually been considerate "when it matters", and I found the past trolling funny.  And he was responding to deadly, not dark_drake (who, coincidentally, is rarely provocative).

[while1]

I'm not referring to his Troll & Inc trolling.

[deadly7]

Why so provocative?

Who the hell finds that provocative? All I said was that your personal anecdote, while amusing, has little bearing on whether the person is knowledgeable for voting on politicians/issues in the 21st century. Don't get butthurt.

[Joe]

Ender has usually been considerate "when it matters", and I found the past trolling funny.  And he was responding to deadly, not dark_drake (who, coincidentally, is rarely provocative).

I thought you had good taste.

[Sidoh]

Ender has usually been considerate "when it matters", and I found the past trolling funny.

Heh, same here. At least in retrospect that's how I feel. :)

[while1]

The internet is serious business.

So, let's continue this political discussion... Romney's running mate pick... Good or Bad (You can decide for whom- I'm at least going to state my opinion in terms of Romney's campaign)? 

I think it's a good choice for Romney.  Romney has done a poor job at selling, defending, and countering Obama's attacks up to this point.  He's lacked in substance/ details/ specifics, and done just a poor job at keeping Obama at bay.  If anything, Ryan will at least rally the Republican base behind Romney, which is something Romney's been struggling with since day one, so he can now focus on wooing/ convincing moderates.  Ryan will at least be able to sell Romney to the base.  Granted, the big question is will they be able to ward off the barrage of demagoguery that will be coming from the left and convince moderates to vote for them... time will tell.

[Rule]

I don't understand why there is so much talk about exciting the "base".  Just not particularly being excited about Romney isn't going to stop them from voting for him, because their only other choice is voting Democrat, and that won't happen.

[Armin]

I don't have even a remote interest in this election. Nothing of significance is going to change. Also, unless something extreme happens between now and the election, I see Obama easily winning.

[while1]

I don't understand why there is so much talk about exciting the "base".  Just not particularly being excited about Romney isn't going to stop them from voting for him, because their only other choice is voting Democrat, and that won't happen.

Staying home is always an option.

I don't have even a remote interest in this election. Nothing of significance is going to change. Also, unless something extreme happens between now and the election, I see Obama easily winning.

I agree, my gut tells me that Obama is going to win re-election.

[Rule]

I don't understand why there is so much talk about exciting the "base".  Just not particularly being excited about Romney isn't going to stop them from voting for him, because their only other choice is voting Democrat, and that won't happen.

Staying home is always an option.

Yeah, but in this case the "base" seems to actually refer not to the average Republican voter, but to those with more extreme views, who would vote to keep a Democrat from winning, even without especially liking the Republican candidate. 

But that's just a wild guess.

[nslay]

I don't understand why there is so much talk about exciting the "base".  Just not particularly being excited about Romney isn't going to stop them from voting for him, because their only other choice is voting Democrat, and that won't happen.

I don't think he's trying to excite the base for reasons you mentioned, but the independents and democrats who were surprised by the individual mandate ruling. I mean, come on ... Ryan, Ryan's health plan, surprise individual mandate ruling? What do they all have in common? Romney is obviously trying to reach out to independents and democrats uncertain about the health care act. He was picked as a consequence of the ruling ... otherwise you could count on Romney distancing himself from the likes of anyone Tea party related.

I think it was a bad pick and it will haunt his campaign down the road. The Tea party is just a little too toxic.

[dark_drake]

I think Ryan will prove to be a huge mistake for Romney. Like Rule said, the GOP base would have went out and voted anyway because they don't want to see Obama re-elected. Romney should have gone for someone to convince the independent voters to vote for him. Then again, having a Wisconsinite on the ballot might help Romney there. Who knows? I'm in Texas. The guys with the R's next to their names are voted for in this neck of the woods. It's a wonderful place where people advocate limited government and then force anyone seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound (the transvaginal requirement didn't make it).

As an experiment, I wish a state or county or the entire country would remove the party affiliation from the ballot and randomize the order of candidates. At the very least, people would have to learn the names of the candidates they wanted to vote for beforehand. That, or we could have some interesting election results. I think democracy can work, but only if the population is educated and cares to know who their elected officials are. As it stands, it boils down to a few swing states and 30s attack ads.