How United States politics really works...

[NoleSoup4U]

First off, you have 70%(35% on each side) that have their decision made no matter who is running and no matter what happened. A person in their party could have been found guilty for killing, cooking, and eating babies and they wouldn't care. The are voting for their party. Nothing you can say will dissuade them.

Then you have the middle ground. These are the 25% of the people who base their vote on the exiting party. If the economy is good, and they're okay with the policies, they will vote for the incumbent party. Otherwise they're voting for the other side.

Last, you have the 5% who listens to what the politicians say, they have their own thoughts, and they vote for who most closely embodies those thoughts. These people are roundly ridiculed because they didn't vote for one of the two main parties,and are informed that, "they have wasted their vote."

Regardless of who these people vote for, one of the two main parties wins, and doesn't change the policies of the government, no matter how hard they railed against the incumbent party.

 

[2facedboonefan]

Regardless of who these people vote for, one of the two main parties wins, and doesn't change the policies of the government, no matter how hard they railed against the incumbent party.

That's because the same very rich people more or less run things regardless of which party is in office. That's the part of America that really needs to change, and it starts with limiting campaign donations. I think we would all be surprised to see how many current "political" issues cease to be politicized once that happens.

 

[THE_DEVIL]

 

[SSG T]

How politics really work... special interests pay off enough people on both sides of the aisle to get things passed that support what they do.

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

Some brilliant observations by the detached OP.

Edit: For the record, I was being very sarcastic and I think the OP is an idiot. But he assures us that he pays attention and actually has his own thoughts on matters. Unlike approximately 95% of people, according to him. If everyone just agreed with him, maybe things would work out better for him.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Some brilliant observations by the detached OP.

Edit: For the record, I was being very sarcastic and I think the OP is an idiot. But he assures us that he pays attention and actually has his own thoughts on matters. Unlike approximately 95% of people, according to him. If everyone just agreed with him, maybe things would work out better for him.

Sounds like a party line person. Good luck with that. LOL!

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

Sounds like a party line person. Good luck with that. LOL!

What's it like having your own thoughts? Must be frustrating to not be appreciated for your brilliance.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

What's it like having your own thoughts? Must be frustrating to not be appreciated for your brilliance.

It can be frustrating as you watch people worship the folks that are screwing them over, and also screwing you over.

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

It can be frustrating as you watch people worship the folks that are screwing them over, and also screwing you over.

The thing that you're too stupid to understand is that you think you know what others are thinking ("worship the folks") and you don't. If you think they vote based on what politicians are saying in debates and in TV spots, you're wrong. It's not that simple.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

The thing that you're too stupid to understand is that you think you know what others are thinking ("worship the folks") and you don't.

Oh, it's pretty obvious at this point in history. How do you think the two same parties keep getting elected and nothing ever changes?

 

[hansenhawk]

bullcrap, Donald is going to make America great again.

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

Oh, it's pretty obvious at this point in history. How do you think the two same parties keep getting elected and nothing ever changes?

You think it was an accident that our government converged on two political parties? More of an inevitably. And the parties do change. And things do change, even if they aren't to your liking or as quickly as you'd like.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

You think it was an accident that our government converged on two political parties? More of an inevitably.

I don't think there's anything "accidental" about it. It's a whole lot easier to distract/control people with two parties.

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

I don't think there's anything "accidental" about it. It's a whole lot easier to distract/control people with two parties.

Oh. The mind control. That's why we only have two parties.

 

[Nat Algren]

Oh. The mind control. That's why we only have two parties.

One party. They're both the same.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Oh. The mind control. That's why we only have two parties.

I don't know how much "mind control" it is when you only let two parties participate. It seems pretty straight forward to me.

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

I don't know how much "mind control" it is when you only let two parties participate. It seems pretty straight forward to me.

What's stopping other parties from participating? In fact, other parties do participate.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

What's stopping other parties from participating? Certainly no law.

It's a combination of the law and voter ignorance. Remember when Ross Perot was allowed into the presidential debates? Well, after that "fiasco", that right was taken away from the league of women voters, and now it's a whole lot tougher for a third party to get involved.

 

[Nat Algren]

What's stopping other parties from participating? In fact, other parties do participate.

Actually, the duopoly places many hurdles in the path of 3rd parties to PREVENT access onto the ballots to insulate them from competition. 3rd parties must spend millions every election cycle just to get on the ballot. Petition signatures are always a bone of contention. The biggies don't have that problem. They write the laws.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

the globalist new world order picks and installs the prez and fools the people into thinking they voted for said puppet.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Actually, the duopoly places many hurdles in the path of 3rd parties to PREVENT access onto the ballots to insulate them from competition. 3rd parties must spend millions every election cycle just to get on the ballot. Petition signatures are always a bone of contention. The biggies don't have that problem. They write the laws.

and the globalist new world order {communist type party} owns the media, owns the tv airwaves, so all you see is two parties. {which are one} they make sure not to broadcast anything else.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

First off, you have 70%(35% on each side) that have their decision made no matter who is running and no matter what happened. A person in their party could have been found guilty for killing, cooking, and eating babies and they wouldn't care. The are voting for their party. Nothing you can say will dissuade them.

Then you have the middle ground. These are the 25% of the people who base their vote on the exiting party. If the economy is good, and they're okay with the policies, they will vote for the incumbent party. Otherwise they're voting for the other side.

Last, you have the 5% who listens to what the politicians say, they have their own thoughts, and they vote for who most closely embodies those thoughts. These people are roundly ridiculed because they didn't vote for one of the two main parties,and are informed that, "they have wasted their vote."

Regardless of who these people vote for, one of the two main parties wins, and doesn't change the policies of the government, no matter how hard they railed against the incumbent party.

If the two main parties agree on one thing it's that there should only be two parties that have a chance.

Election rules are set up so parties that have large bases like the D's and R's have easy ballot access while anyone new has a steep uphill climb to get on the ballot.

 

[Herkmeister]

First off, you have 70%(35% on each side) that have their decision made no matter who is running and no matter what happened. A person in their party could have been found guilty for killing, cooking, and eating babies and they wouldn't care. The are voting for their party. Nothing you can say will dissuade them.

Then you have the middle ground. These are the 25% of the people who base their vote on the exiting party. If the economy is good, and they're okay with the policies, they will vote for the incumbent party. Otherwise they're voting for the other side.

Last, you have the 5% who listens to what the politicians say, they have their own thoughts, and they vote for who most closely embodies those thoughts. These people are roundly ridiculed because they didn't vote for one of the two main parties,and are informed that, "they have wasted their vote."

Regardless of who these people vote for, one of the two main parties wins, and doesn't change the policies of the government, no matter how hard they railed against the incumbent party.

Does age play a role in this?

 

[strummingram]

If the two main parties agree on one thing it's that there should only be two parties that have a chance.

Election rules are set up so parties that have large bases like the D's and R's have easy ballot access while anyone new has a steep uphill climb to get on the ballot.

What a beautiful, equal democracy we have.

 

[BABiscuit]

Last, you have the 5% who listens to what the politicians say, they have their own thoughts, and they vote for who most closely embodies those thoughts. These people are roundly ridiculed because they didn't vote for one of the two main parties,and are informed that, "they have wasted their vote."

Are you claiming nobody can listen to all candidates and decide the one that most closely matches their views is an R or a D?

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Are you claiming nobody can listen to all candidates and decide the one that most closely matches their views is an R or a D?

they can -but it will do no good

only the globalists new world order types get to decide which views suit us best

 

[herecomethehawkeyes]

These people are roundly ridiculed because they didn't vote for one of the two main parties,and are informed that, "they have wasted their vote."

During the last election, I was told by the elephants that I was voting for Obama because of my vote for Gary Johnson. I was told by the donkeys that I was voting for Mitt because of my vote for Gary Johnson.

All the while, those people keep voting for the same people and then bitch. I decided that during the last election, I was voting for who I thought was the best candidate, rather than "the lesser of two evils"

 

[anon_snp6dc585nnj4]

Thank you for delivering, I strictly read this thread looking for a response like this!

 

[KitingHigh]

Oh. The mind control. That's why we only have two parties.

Mind control is actually pretty easy. 90% of the population is Hard wired to be a follower of a big pack. Many of these a
Have it so strongly ingrained that they are offended by anyone who doesn't follow the pack. It's not their fault, but just a vestigial emotion left over from the days of cavemen. They are simply less evolved than free thinkers.

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

Mind control is actually pretty easy. 90% of the population is Hard wired to be a follower of a big pack. Many of these a
Have it so strongly ingrained that they are offended by anyone who doesn't follow the pack. It's not their fault, but just a vestigial emotion left over from the days of cavemen. They are simply less evolved than free thinkers.

But not you. You see right through it all. You're not like everyone else.

 

[strummingram]

During the last election, I was told by the elephants that I was voting for Obama because of my vote for Gary Johnson. I was told by the donkeys that I was voting for Mitt because of my vote for Gary Johnson.

All the while, those people keep voting for the same people and then bitch. I decided that during the last election, I was voting for who I thought was the best candidate, rather than "the lesser of two evils"

Thank you.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

That's because the same very rich people more or less run things regardless of which party is in office. That's the part of America that really needs to change, and it starts with limiting campaign donations. I think we would all be surprised to see how many current "political" issues cease to be politicized once that happens.

Also, much more transparency needs to be seen from groups such as the CFR and the Trilateral Commission. It's within the confines of those groups that many of the most important decisions are made.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Are you claiming nobody can listen to all candidates and decide the one that most closely matches their views is an R or a D?

What makes you think they actually match your views? Because of what they say? Or do you go by what they actually do?

 

[HawktimusPrime]

What's stopping other parties from participating? In fact, other parties do participate.

I fail to see why so many find this so hard to understand. The established parties hold sway over the media, the media coverage, and the money's behind the scenes, which is used for election cycles in general. They have majority control of it all, and they make sure that only their rules apply. Think of how many lies, agenda switches, and curious actions you see from members of the major parties.

You know this happens, and you know it mainly occurs because of the lack of options and the power and money to get them on a level playing field. So what's your question here?

Anything that happens because of politics is because of this mindset. The patriotic act, the Freedom act, CISA, wars, over taxation, unchecked currency control via private banks, that also just so happens to be the banks that cause the most wealth discrepancy, etc. It is all on the shoulders of the American people for not understanding how this all really works.

I think it's funny because of just how naive and truly uninformed most voters are.

 

[Jan Itor]

That's because the same very rich people more or less run things regardless of which party is in office. That's the part of America that really needs to change, and it starts with limiting campaign donations. I think we would all be surprised to see how many current "political" issues cease to be politicized once that happens.

You can limit campaign donations all you want. The Big Money/Central Banks are still going to rule the world, not just the U.S.

 

[Jan Itor]

The thing that you're too stupid to understand is that you think you know what others are thinking ("worship the folks") and you don't. If you think they vote based on what politicians are saying in debates and in TV spots, you're wrong. It's not that simple.

Instead of calling others stupid how about you tell us all how you think it shakes out?

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

Are you saying nobody votes based on what they hear the politicians say, or are you talking about a specific group that he talked about?

I think he thinks that people vote for Republicans and Democrats because they're too stupid to understand his ideal libertarian politics. I think he thinks that because I used to think that. I think we have two parties because of how Congress was set up by the Constitution. It was an inevitability. When ideas that weren't popular with the major parties become popular because of third party campaigns, those ideas are co-opted by one or both parties. Unfortunately for him (actually probably fortunately for him), pure libertarian/Chicago School/laissez-faire economics aren't popular with anyone.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I think he thinks that people vote for Republicans and Democrats because they're too stupid to understand his ideal libertarian politics. I think he thinks that because I used to think that. I think we have two parties because of how Congress was set up by the Constitution. It was an inevitability. When ideas that weren't popular with the major parties become popular because of third party campaigns, those ideas are co-opted by one or both parties. Unfortunately for him (actually probably fortunately for him), pure libertarian/Chicago School/laissez-faire economics aren't popular with anyone.

Where to even start with this garbage. First off, I don't belong to any party. I'll never belong to any party, Libertarian or otherwise. Second, I think most people who align themselves with one of the two major parties are ignorant because, at their base, there is no difference between these parties. You might have a few superficial differences, but if you're looking at those, you aren't understanding the big picture. Lastly, I still don't think you understand why there are only two major parties, even though I've seen it explained twice in this thread. People like you are the reason why nothing ever changes. The rich will forever use the government to bludgeon the poor.

 

[uniFIGHTuniFIGHT]

Where to even start with this garbage. First off, I don't belong to any party. I'll never belong to any party, Libertarian or otherwise. Second, I think most people who align themselves with one of the two major parties are ignorant because, at their base, there is no difference between these parties. You might have a few superficial differences, but if you're looking at those, you aren't understanding the big picture. Lastly, I still don't think you understand why there are only two major parties, even though I've seen it explained twice in this thread. People like you are the reason why nothing ever changes. The rich will forever use the government to bludgeon the poor.

What I said is exactly why there are two major parties. Our elections are winner-takes-all. Likewise, actual laws are passed only when a simple majority in Congress votes for them. Now, in the Senate, you need a larger majority on board to prevent a filibuster. Then there's the president. If all of them sign on, and a bill becomes law, it can be challenged in court (but it takes expensive legal resources to do so). There are other systems out there which have more than two parties but I don't think you'd be very fond of their governments either. We've converged on two parties because that's the only way anything would ever change in our system of government.

What's the big picture? That the rich will forever use the government to bludgeon the poor? What's the upshot? That the rich couldn't bludgeon the poor if not for our system of government?

 

[HawktimusPrime]

I think he thinks that people vote for Republicans and Democrats because they're too stupid to understand his ideal libertarian politics. I think he thinks that because I used to think that. I think we have two parties because of how Congress was set up by the Constitution. It was an inevitability. When ideas that weren't popular with the major parties become popular because of third party campaigns, those ideas are co-opted by one or both parties. Unfortunately for him (actually probably fortunately for him), pure libertarian/Chicago School/laissez-faire economics aren't popular with anyone.

So you're under the impression that libertarians have taken your rights away? Started wars, found ways to take your money via taxes, invade foreign countries, etc.