Thread: Democracy is always right?

Just wondering CPR. Is this in any referance to the Pennsylvania primary? Since I know you are, let's say a compassionate Obama supporter and loathe Hillary.

I think a mix of democracy, republicanism, and socialism might be the best. Where the government tends to the people, and the people decide the government through voting, but we do need elected officials, because let's face it. No one would want to do all that voting and decision making every single day, would make the government stagnant. Where the government controls parts of the economy, to ensure that it benefits everyone and not just the corporate capitalists.

On a side note:
Maoist victory in Nepal spells end for 240-year-old monarchy | World news | guardian.co.uk
The communists won through democracy, and they're willing to work with the other parties to form a coalition.
Communism and democracy mixed together?! lol

Nah, something local happened at school that I don't agree with and it hurts me probably the most since I'm supposed to be this person's "right-hand-person" since I'm the second in command in terms of authority...

it makes me wish the election was rigged. argggggggggggggh...

btw, in reference to the hillary vs obama. Omg, Hillary should just give up. Seriously, there's no need to continuously spend more cash and draw out this election even further. She already ruined all opportunity of her becoming Obama's VP. XD

People are stupid, rash, ignorant, bigoted, and scared. I could make the decision and not think twice about it. However I'd be more worried about my own opinions and faults in making the decision rather than the outcome of the decision itself.

Originally Posted by coolpuprocks

How does a person who was a VP... who NEARLY QUIT the board around January, whose speech was practically "I'm sorry I fucked up this year, but please vote for me anyway," win the position of President? I don't get it. >_<;;

Whut?

So nay to representative democracy?

Originally Posted by coolpuprocks

btw, in reference to the hillary vs obama. Omg, Hillary should just give up. Seriously, there's no need to continuously spend more cash and draw out this election even further. She already ruined all opportunity of her becoming Obama's VP. XD

Lol? Obama spent about $11 million in Pennsylvania compared to Hillary's $5 million. Obama failed on that one, she got almost every county in Pennsylvania.
Obama got his crushed in Pennsylvania by 10 points. Double digits. He hasn't made much inroads with the female, older, or blue-collar voters. Hell, he's given his opponets so much cannon fodder with his pastor, American flag pin, bitter small towns, wife's patriotism, etc.

Not to mention, he hasn't won a single big state. Not California, not New York, Not New Jersey, Not Texas (he won the caucus, I know, but you can't really call it a win since he lost the primary a few hours before).

Plus, if you included Michigan and Florida voters, she has the popular vote. Without Michigan and Florida, Obama has the popular vote.

Though I do admit, both of their policies are pretty similar, and Obama could make a either a great president or VP. Same with Hillary.

Democracy = Soft Dictatorship

Its based on your ability to lie and sway people to vote for you for a term, then do little thing ,but not all that you promise to and then lie again in the beginning of the next term and continue doing little thing you promised them. In order to fool the majority eyes.

Fooling majorities is the name of the game. You dun even need to complete all that you promised to do, cause majorities will always forgot the promise..till the next term and on and on and on. How beautiful is that. ^^ Sweet democracy.

Democracy works. Problem is we have a flawed democracy. Your choices are dictated/limited not by who you like and agree with, but who has the money/power/influence to run.

I'm sure you can all think of people you know in real life that would make far better candidates for Pres than Obama, Hillary, Bush, etc...

And of course theres all the people who would make great President's... but would rather die than run. xD

Maoist victory in Nepal spells end for 240-year-old monarchy | World news | guardian.co.uk
The communists won through democracy, and they're willing to work with the other parties to form a coalition.
Communism and democracy mixed together?! lol

Heh, considering the ahh, candidates/voting system involved... there was quite literally no way for the Chinese to lose - and considering the Chinese were the ones counting the votes -and- announcing who won its just insult to injury to call that democratic in any sense of the word.

Originally Posted by StealDragon

Whut?

meh.. forget it. It's very complicated to explain...

Originally Posted by Hanul

Lol? Obama spent about $11 million in Pennsylvania compared to Hillary's $5 million. Obama failed on that one, she got almost every county in Pennsylvania.
Obama got his crushed in Pennsylvania by 10 points. Double digits. He hasn't made much inroads with the female, older, or blue-collar voters. Hell, he's given his opponets so much cannon fodder with his pastor, American flag pin, bitter small towns, wife's patriotism, etc.

Not to mention, he hasn't won a single big state. Not California, not New York, Not New Jersey, Not Texas (he won the caucus, I know, but you can't really call it a win since he lost the primary a few hours before).

Plus, if you included Michigan and Florida voters, she has the popular vote. Without Michigan and Florida, Obama has the popular vote.

Though I do admit, both of their policies are pretty similar, and Obama could make a either a great president or VP. Same with Hillary.

Yay for a useless victory in Florida. I believe I remember hearing how Florida doesn't get counted cause they pushed their primaries too early.

It doesn't matter if you win the big states or not. That's just useless bragging rights trying to increase your campaign moral. As long as the margin of victory isn't that great and you still rank in delegates, that's good. Fact is, whoever makes it to the magic 2,025 first wins. So far, Obama has a good lead on Hillary. (300 more vs needing 500 more).

Obama >>>>>>>>>> Hillary.

Idk if Hillary would ever settle for working as VP. Problem is, you gotta like each other and idk if they like each other at all...

Originally Posted by martyr3810

Heh, considering the ahh, candidates/voting system involved... there was quite literally no way for the Chinese to lose - and considering the Chinese were the ones counting the votes -and- announcing who won its just insult to injury to call that democratic in any sense of the word.

The maoists aren't Chinese, they're not on friendly terms with the PRC because they think the PRC isn't communist enough (it isn't obviously).

Besides, this is complaining about the Hamas election victories, Bush just couldn't imagine them winning, despite pretty much everyone who had the slightest knowledge about the situation knew what was going to happen.

Idk if Hillary would ever settle for working as VP. Problem is, you gotta like each other and idk if they like each other at all...

Umm. You don't have to like each other. It works better but you hardly don't have to like each other. Theres been some pretty ridiculous Pres/VP combos throughout history.

Personally, If I were Hillary I'd go as OBama's VP double-quick... the amount of assassination attempts that guy is going to go through if he gets elected, gonna be the center of a assassination industry xD