The Laughometer is at breaking point

This whole crazy politician phenomenon must be some combination of the alternative not being too good, ignorance of candidates, and too much reality TV.
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
I think someone should let him know we've moved.
Click to expand...
I am very happy that he no longer uses this forum. There is righteous goodness in that fact.

I also understand that there are members here who adore insane trolls. I just think it makes the forum a yucky place.
 
Meadmaker said:
One of the things I will never understand is the need of people to make a selection in every race on the ballot, even though they know absolutely nothing about the people on the ballot.

An awful lot of people went to vote in the Texas primary, and in addition to to the names of Trump, Cruz, etc, there was a race between a fellow named "Morrow", and a fellow named "Dickey", and a bunch of people decided that they liked the "Morrow" name better than the "Dickey" name.

While I am a huge fan of Democracy in general, it simply doesn't work for elections like this one. The premise of Democracy is that the electorate has at least some knowledge of the people they are voting for. Clearly, that is not always the case.
Click to expand...
Actually, the lack of knowledge of the candidates could be partially remedied by bringing the process up to date with the digital age. A simple computer site could give short statements from the candidates or even point you to their website while making your decision. These could actually be provided at the polling locations... and giving people a longer time to make their decision (like a voting week instead of a day), could improve the process even more.

Why shouldn't the government host and perhaps even advertise such a site? As it is, the information tends to be buried in the political strategies of the past.

Yeah, I know, we shouldn't connect it to the voting machines themselves for security reasons if provided at the actual polls... but that doesn't mean it can't be a resource. It should include at least those on the ballot, and all those seeking election if fewer than 5 or so registered for the position. It would make our process a heck of a lot more democratic, if you ask me.
 
Last edited:
Manopolus said:
Actually, the lack of knowledge of the candidates could be partially remedied by bringing the process up to date with the digital age. A simple computer site could give short statements from the candidates or even point you to their website while making your decision. These could actually be provided at the polling locations... and giving people a longer time to make their decision (like a voting week instead of a day), could improve the process even more.

Why shouldn't the government host and perhaps even advertise such a site? As it is, the information tends to be buried in the political strategies of the past.

Yeah, I know, we shouldn't connect it to the voting machines themselves for security reasons if provided at the actual polls... but that doesn't mean it can't be a resource. It should include at least those on the ballot, and all those seeking election if fewer than 5 or so registered for the position. It would make our process a heck of a lot more democratic, if you ask me.
Click to expand...

If voters had known that Morrow was in favor of big titties, he might have won by an even larger margin.

In these esoteric local races, the placement of your name on the ballot is crucial, and I assume that's done by random. Your actual name is important too, but it is probably best to have a name that's similar to that of a popular celebrity. For example, Al(vin) Greene won the Democratic Senate primary in South Carolina in 2010, almost certainly because he was mistaken for this Al Green.

If I changed my last name to Kennedy (not that I'm saying it isn't - but it isn't), I'm sure I could become an alderman lickety split.
 
Someone with a Twitter account really should remind him he has an account here, and that this used to be JREF. Point him to this thread as well. He seems like the type who would go out in a blaze of glory via ban-by-mods, which would then allow members here to express their opinions of him without fear of breaking the forum rules.

:D
 
foophil said:
Someone with a Twitter account really should remind him he has an account here, and that this used to be JREF. Point him to this thread as well. He seems like the type who would go out in a blaze of glory via ban-by-mods, which would then allow members here to express their opinions of him without fear of breaking the forum rules.

:D
Click to expand...

While I could go and refresh myself on the old threads I think I'll go off my poor memory, but I think he was far more focused on the politicians of his fantasies than going off in a way that might get the mods down on him.
 
ComfySlippers said:
For those unfamiliar with this cockwomble do a Forum Search.
He used to play here and waffle on about his idiotic conspiracy theories.
He's been interviewed on your tellies about his ...odd... obsession with JFK etc.
He's a rich chappy who occupies his time talking nonsense.

On that, thank you for letting me pay a brief visit to this weird area of the forum.
I've left bacon sandwiches under your pillows.
Click to expand...

I believe you meant "sucker" somewhere above......
could be wrong though.....
 
foophil said:
Someone with a Twitter account really should remind him he has an account here, and that this used to be JREF. Point him to this thread as well. He seems like the type who would go out in a blaze of glory via ban-by-mods, which would then allow members here to express their opinions of him without fear of breaking the forum rules.

:D
Click to expand...
I vote for not doing what you suggest. Very bad idea.
 
William Parcher said:
I am very happy that he no longer uses this forum. There is righteous goodness in that fact.

I also understand that there are members here who adore insane trolls. I just think it makes the forum a yucky place.
Click to expand...

Your problem is that it has been decided you can't tell who is a troll here. We have been told that very often so assumably it is an embedded belief at the top. Wish it wasn't.............
 
Just watched my DVR'd John Oliver, and Robert made the show. :rolleyes:

John highlighted two Texas Rebubs who have the party in fits.

(was this mentioned up thread and I missed it?)
 
No, I just caught it last night myself. I was like "John Oliver is skewering a weirdo I've talked to!"
 
Jim_MDP said:
Just watched my DVR'd John Oliver, and Robert made the show. :rolleyes:

John highlighted two Texas Rebubs who have the party in fits.

(was this mentioned up thread and I missed it?)
Click to expand...


Youtubey for those not in Americaland:

 
Last edited:
As a European, how the hell does this happen?

Is this some kind of protest-vote?

I mean, we have weird politicians. but they always bring something to the table. This guy would be fired from any job involving contact with the general public.
I lean conservative and not in a million years would I cast a vote for this sex-obsessed buffoon.

Seriously, did people just check the Republican name at the top of the list? What?
 
Eddie Dane said:
As a European, how the hell does this happen?

Is this some kind of protest-vote?

I mean, we have weird politicians. but they always bring something to the table. This guy would be fired from any job involving contact with the general public.
I lean conservative and not in a million years would I cast a vote for this sex-obsessed buffoon.

Seriously, did people just check the Republican name at the top of the list? What?
Click to expand...


“Vimes had once discussed the Ephebian idea of ‘democracy’ with Carrot, and had been rather interested in the idea that everyone had a vote until he found out that while he, Vimes, would have a vote, there was no way in the rules that anyone could prevent Nobby Nobbs from having one as well. Vimes could see the flaw there straight away.”

-Pterry :(
 
Eddie Dane said:
As a European, how the hell does this happen?

Is this some kind of protest-vote?
Click to expand...

From some other thread somewhere (not here) I saw that some of these primaries and things can have a couple of dozen positions up for grabs (I thin kit might have been Chicago?).

Now there's not many people who can be arsed to find out about all the people standing, or even what some of those positions actually involve, but I expect most people voting feel a need to mark off someone for each one. And that someone may as well be the guy at the top of the list (if he's from the right party, which doesn't apply in this case). And Morrow was at the top of the list (of two).
 
William Parcher said:
It would be a misplaced fear. Our next President is going to be the first female POTUS and that's pretty amazing following the first black POTUS.
Click to expand...

Bernie's point, and Trump's as well, is that, beyond the novelty of being a chick, she's just more of the same.

So much so, in fact, some Republicans are building a case to vote for her because Trump is to her left on many important issues, like property rights, and others, like actually supporting Obamacare, he's a push and thus it is a null issue for consideration.
 
Last edited:
What a surprise that the GOP establishment, by seeking to exploit the crazies and bigots, would end up validating their views and self-validation to the point that the crazies and bigots would expect to have influence over and play important roles in the GOP in return! Didn't the c & b realize that they were just supposed to keep quite and vote for the official GOP candidates, not come to actually believe the pandering nonsense that was being thrown to them like raw meat to a hyena? What a surprise!

This must be especially galling to the GOP establishment given all their prior efforts (by use of language and sly denial) to maintain plausible deniability that they were provoking racist thought, groundless conspiracy theories, complete distrust of government, ignorance, and a reduction of political discussion to Jr High school yard personal insults. Only to now see people such as Morrow and Trump who claim to represent the true GOP and are willing (IMHO) to more openly state these previously between-the-lines political positions.

There are a lot of proverbs and sayings along the lines of what happens if one "allows the camels nose into the tent" or "lies down with dogs and gets up with..." The GOP should have paid a lot more attention to these warnings long ago, probably starting with their implementation of "the Southern Strategy."
 
Giordano said:
What a surprise that the GOP establishment, by seeking to exploit the crazies and bigots, would end up validating their views and self-validation to the point that the crazies and bigots would expect to have influence over and play important roles in the GOP in return! Didn't the c & b realize that they were just supposed to keep quite and vote for the official GOP candidates, not come to actually believe the pandering nonsense that was being thrown to them like raw meat to a hyena? What a surprise!

This must be especially galling to the GOP establishment given all their prior efforts (by use of language and sly denial) to maintain plausible deniability that they were provoking racist thought, groundless conspiracy theories, complete distrust of government, ignorance, and a reduction of political discussion to Jr High school yard personal insults. Only to now see people such as Morrow and Trump who claim to represent the true GOP and are willing (IMHO) to more openly state these previously between-the-lines political positions.

There are a lot of proverbs and sayings along the lines of what happens if one "allows the camels nose into the tent" or "lies down with dogs and gets up with..." The GOP should have paid a lot more attention to these warnings long ago, probably starting with their implementation of "the Southern Strategy."
Click to expand...

I disagree about Trump, and in the case of Morrow, your analysis is just plain ridiculous. Morrow was most likely elected because his name came first on the ballot. Very, very few people have any inkling about who the candidates for local offices are or what they think.

Trump, on the other hand, was I think caused by the overreach of progressives in trying to micromanage our speech and our thoughts. I believe you'll end up being very surprised at how much crossover support Trump has from Democrats and from the very minorities you seem to think he disparages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom