!!! Donald Trump for the President (Mushing and grabbing some pussy!) - Page 4 - Politics version 7.0 -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

If that were the case, I'd have made it higher.

No, it's that people don't care, don't pay attention and don't think about what matters. They are practically voting blind, so they just vote for the party they believe more closely aligns with their views, and that's why we have the garbage system we do.

chicken/egg syndrome. I conjecture that people don't care enough to be fully informed because either the side they pick gets all the glory or their vote doesn't matter.

Civic pride gets them into the booth, but once they're there, it doesn't really matter what they do and people are smart enough to know that.

07-23-2015 , 11:10 AM

#78

rjoefish

Got Out the Vote

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 31,086

I wish I could quote deleted posts.

07-23-2015 , 01:19 PM

#79

NC Flounce

banned

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 359

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjoefish

I wish I could quote deleted posts.

There are not too many people whose word I would trust, but yours is one, paraphrase for us

07-23-2015 , 03:17 PM

#80

Low Key

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 33,327

You can. Not directly, but you can view deleted posts and copy/paste into quote tags.

Not that I recommend doing it.

07-23-2015 , 06:10 PM

#81

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,090

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

People are worried that the Trump candidacy will shine too much of a light on the fact that so many people are not qualified to vote. Normally we look the other way regarding this fact because those votes normally split in such a way that they are unlikely to affect the election.

Perhaps there would less pushback if I replaced the word "people" with "Republicans".

07-23-2015 , 06:13 PM

#82

AsianNit

banned

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 9,881

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

Perhaps there would less pushback if I replaced the word "people" with "Republicans".

The first occurrence of "people", the second, or both?

07-23-2015 , 07:14 PM

#83

adios

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 22,530

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

Well lets try it out:

Quote:

Republicans are worried that the Trump candidacy will shine too much of a light on the fact that so many people are not qualified to vote. Normally we look the other way regarding this fact because those votes normally split in such a way that they are unlikely to affect the election.

Well if Republicans in power are worried who cares, I sure don't.

Quote:

People are worried that the Trump candidacy will shine too much of a light on the fact that so many Republicans are not qualified to vote. Normally we look the other way regarding this fact because those votes normally split in such a way that they are unlikely to affect the election.

Well I don't think the Democrats would mind seeing this.

Quote:

Republicans are worried that the Trump candidacy will shine too much of a light on the fact that so many Republicans are not qualified to vote. Normally we look the other way regarding this fact because those votes normally split in such a way that they are unlikely to affect the election.

Well yeah they should be worried.

07-23-2015 , 09:58 PM

#84

TwoMoos

adept

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 1,089

Or try it with Democrats and Sanders.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

Democrats are worried that the Sanders candidacy will shine too much of a light on the fact that so many Democrats are not qualified to vote. Normally we look the other way regarding this fact because those votes normally split in such a way that they are unlikely to affect the election.

Sanders and Trump are about equally unlikely to be nominated. It's just less obvious for Republicans because they have more choices at the moment.

07-23-2015 , 10:28 PM

#85

Jbrochu

banned

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 16,054

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoMoos

Or try it with Democrats and Sanders.

Sanders and Trump are about equally unlikely to be nominated. It's just less obvious for Republicans because they have more choices at the moment.

Nice theory except for the fact that most of the other choices are also wingnuts.

07-23-2015 , 10:46 PM

#86

Low Key

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 33,327

Quote:

Originally Posted by adios

Well I don't think the Democrats would mind seeing this.

And you would be mistaken.

One politics persuasion has, historically and presently, tried to prevent others from voting. It hasn't been liberals.

In fact, democrats are trying to make voting easier for everyone in a lot of places. Republicans on the other hand want to block democrats from being able to enjoy their constitutionally granted freedoms and rights.

07-24-2015 , 01:24 AM

#87

rjoefish

Got Out the Vote

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 31,086

Quote:

Originally Posted by Low Key

You can. Not directly, but you can view deleted posts and copy/paste into quote tags.

Not that I recommend doing it.

Well I know how to do it obviously, I was saying I wish it was okay.

07-24-2015 , 01:26 AM

#88

rjoefish

Got Out the Vote

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 31,086

Saying people are 'unqualified' to vote is really weird. What are those qualifications? AFAIK it was just being of age and registered.

07-24-2015 , 10:07 AM

#89

AlexM

ignored

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 20,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by Low Key

It does matter. The problem is that the races where it matters are the ones they know the least about: county commissioners and such. And if people in general cared more about these races where their votes actually do matter, it would affect the political system as a whole.

FWIW, I agree that the system causes this behavior in the people as much as the other way around.

07-24-2015 , 10:08 AM

#90

AlexM

ignored

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 20,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjoefish

Saying people are 'unqualified' to vote is really weird. What are those qualifications? AFAIK it was just being of age and registered.

If you don't know, you're not qualified to be told.

07-24-2015 , 01:42 PM

#91

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,090

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjoefish

Saying people are 'unqualified' to vote is really weird. What are those qualifications? AFAIK it was just being of age and registered.

Cmon. You know I wasn't using the word literally. Basically I mean people who don't realize what they are voting for.

07-24-2015 , 01:50 PM

#92

AsianNit

banned

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 9,881

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

Cmon. You know I wasn't using the word literally. Basically I mean people who don't realize what they are voting for.

Voters tend to use heuristics that lead to them voting for who they would have voted for if they studied the issues and candidates in-depth.

07-24-2015 , 02:54 PM

#93

zikzak

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 22,199

Quote:

Originally Posted by AsianNit

Voters tend to use heuristics that lead to them voting for who they would have voted for if they studied the issues and candidates in-depth.

Link? I read a study or something along these lines years ago but have never been able to find it again and don't quite trust that I am remembering it correctly.

07-24-2015 , 02:59 PM

#94

Low Key

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 33,327

Voters mostly stick with whoever their parents or spouse votes for.

07-24-2015 , 03:03 PM

#95

AsianNit

banned

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 9,881

Quote:

Originally Posted by zikzak

Link? I read a study or something along these lines years ago but have never been able to find it again and don't quite trust that I am remembering it correctly.

The best I can do is point you to this book as a starting point.

07-24-2015 , 03:15 PM

#96

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,890

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

Cmon. You know I wasn't using the word literally. Basically I mean people who don't realize what they are voting for.

If that's the criteria how few would be left?

07-24-2015 , 03:31 PM

#97

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,090

At The very least you don't want voters to vote for somebody because, for example, they will lower taxes when in fact he has said directly or indirectly that he will raise them.

07-24-2015 , 03:40 PM

#98

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,090

In any case I reiterate my contention that those who are calling for Trump to withdraw are doing that not because of what he has been saying but rather because he is polling so high. And that those high numbers are not making them worry that he will win the nomination but rather highlighting how dumb many voters, especially Republican primary voters are. Surely most here would tend to agree with that analysis.

07-24-2015 , 03:49 PM

#99

Low Key

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 33,327

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

At The very least you don't want voters to vote for somebody because, for example, they will lower taxes when in fact he has said directly or indirectly that he will raise them.

What I want and what I'm okay with happening are two different things.

A large portion of society has no clue where the various parties stand on issues. In my estimation, it's probably a pretty even split.

07-24-2015 , 04:30 PM

#100

FoldnDark

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,930

Everyone's dumb, regardless of political ideology, the early support for Trump shows how much white hot rage conservatives have after 8 years of Obama.

Page 4 of 665

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 24 54 104 204 504

Last

...

Page 4 of 665

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 24 54 104 204 504

Last