Voting: Does it make a difference?? Why can't Presidents deliver? USA

ChronicObsession

Well-Known Member
Hi guys, I was just on a thread about God and I saw how the majority contends that he is useless, madeup, not good for mankind etc. Well now this got me to thinking about things that I believe are utterly useless. Voting. Voting seems like a waste of a massive effort that costs a lot of money, and the results that come out are always mediocre and the nation's leader doesn't improve the standards of living for the people. United States comes to mind about the last 3 voting episodes in 12 years. WTF guys? Who else thinks that voting is crap and even if you do vote, what they give us later is just more disappointing crap. The Black president didn't legalize marijuana, he didn't send the troops home, and Bush gave us a bunch of shit wars. Please, I'm not looking for fights. Just tell me why voting is necessary and why we should continue this shitty method for "determining" who is best for our country.
C/O
 

mame

Well-Known Member
Divided government, Check and balances, etc.

The President can't do much of anything alone, he needs both houses of congress as well.
 

ChronicObsession

Well-Known Member
I am proposing that people should stop voting for ANYTHING, until we get what we want. Affordable marijuana prices. fuck gas! have you seen the price of a gram of very good Nugget? Ha, no other plant in the world can compare to the government's inflated "value" put on our beloved plant
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Divided government, Check and balances, etc.

The President can't do much of anything alone, he needs both houses of congress as well.
They can sign a shitload of executive orders, look at what Bush did. They can send the Marines to wage war anywhere in the world without any congressional approval. They aren't completely impotent.
 

mame

Well-Known Member
They can sign a shitload of executive orders, look at what Bush did. They can send the Marines to wage war anywhere in the world without any congressional approval. They aren't completely impotent.
True, I was just thinking in terms of legislation where a presidents power is more limited(obviously by design). At any rate, Obama isn't likely to push for the legalization of weed even if he had the support of a significant chunk of congress - although if a legalization bill were passed I doubt he'd veto it.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
True, I was just thinking in terms of legislation where a presidents power is more limited(obviously by design). At any rate, Obama isn't likely to push for the legalization of weed even if he had the support of a significant chunk of congress - although if a legalization bill were passed I doubt he'd veto it.
Well I agree, but with Obama's talent for persuasion you would think he could at least get all the Democrats on board.
 

Coals

Active Member
The president, congress and the House can not do anything without the approval of their owners. We are not their owners, they do not work for us, we are simply an inconvenience in their self-interested conquest for total world rule.
 

deprave

New Member
....Your implying you have never heard this before?...Do you live under a rock?

Voting is becoming more an more useless as our elected officials are driven into the hands of corporations...What we have is mob rule at this point, a small handful of Representatives elected by corporate USA and special interest groups, just a small handful for the the 305+ million...That is mob rule......Google direct democracy its a system where we all vote on-line on every single issue on a regular basis, pretty neat concept...anyway...thats still mob rule..Politicians essentially can't do a whole lot of good especially as they become more and more intertwined into the monetary system. Money is the root of all evil. The only way we could ever be free of crime, corruption, and politicians is if we got rid of the monetary system all together and had a resource based economy..until then, Greed will continue to consume us.

There is one such system that works the best with a monetary system and still promotes human rights and can preserve some liberty. The free market capitalist system, the better of 4 evils... the republic that once stood as America, the freest nation on earth was a free market system that created liberty and prosperity.

[video=youtube;Y_YxNG3nUUk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_YxNG3nUUk[/video]
 

Johnny Retro

Well-Known Member
....Your implying you have never heard this before?...Do you live under a rock?

Voting is becoming more an more useless as our elected officials are driven into the hands of corporations...What we have is mob rule at this point, a small handfull of representives elected by corporate USA and special interest groups, just a small handful for the the 305+ million...That is mob rule......google direct democracy its a system where we all vote on-line on every single issue on a regular basis, pretty neat concept...anyway...thats still mob rule..Politicians essentially can't do a whole lot of good especially as they become more and more intertwined into the monatary system. Money is the root of all evil. The only way we could ever be free of crime, corruption, and politicians is if we got rid of the monetary system all together and had a resource based economy..until then, Greed will continue to consume us.

There is one such system that works the best with a monetary system and still promotes human rights and can preserve some liberty. The free market capitalist system, the better of 4 evils... the republic that once stood as America, the freest nation on earth was a free market system that created liberty and prosperity.
Maybe you would like voting better if Paul was a front runner?

Lmao
 

sso

Well-Known Member
havent voted for years.

its absolutely bloody pointless and a big fucking joke.


ive talked with good people that tried going into government but were driven out, congress is the most corrupt place on the face on the planet, thinking your vote counts there.
well, let the words of 2 politicians cement their own grave

"read my lips, no more taxes" (or i will not raise the taxes or something lol, not as memorable as the last one, but still, just the same old drivel everyyear)

"im not a crook!"
 

deprave

New Member
Not quite seeing your point here..maybe you could elaborate?

And everyone who went to Jr. High knows what an electoral college is..get off your invisible high horse.
I am the one on an invisible high horse following you making such a statement lmao...right....your the douche saying voting is fair...are you out of of your mind man?

the point is...

If more people vote for one candidate then it doesn't mean he wins...it happens..Since you said your aware of the electoral college then how the hell can you think voting is fair...that alone..the common person knows this...You know I could really go on and on but Ill just keep to that one simple point.
 

Johnny Retro

Well-Known Member
I am the one on an invisible high horse follow you making such a statement...right....your the douche saying voting is fair...are you out of of your mind man?

the point is...

If more people vote for one candidate then it doesn't mean he wins...it happens far to often..Since you said your aware of the electoral college then how the hell can you think voting is fair...that alone..the common person knows this...You know I could really go on and on but Ill just keep to that one simple point.
This thread is saying voting is worthless, which it is not.
I do agree that we should repeal it. The reason is was put out in the first place was because information was not widely available as it is in this age. Voters from each state would just vote for the guys that lived closest to them.
But coming from a guy who is obsessed with Ron Paul and following our constitution, this is a bit hypocritical wouldn't ya say?
 

deprave

New Member
This thread is saying voting is worthless, which it is not.
I do agree that we should repeal it. The reason is was put out in the first place was because information was not widely available as it is in this age. Voters from each state would just vote for the guys that lived closest to them.
But coming from a guy who is obsessed with Ron Paul and following our constitution, this is a bit hypocritical wouldn't ya say?
Id say your a jerk...obsessed with following the constitution? I wouldn't call it obsession to believe that the government should obey the law of the land. Id call it having common sense and on the side of the people. Do you think the government should be able to violate the law of the land, to violate peoples rights?

I bet you love paying taxes don't you ..you sucker.
 

Johnny Retro

Well-Known Member
Id say your a jerk...obsessed with following the constitution? I wouldn't call it obsession to believe that the government should obey the law of the land. Id call it having common sense and on the side of the people. Do you think the government should be able to violate the law of the land, to violate peoples rights?
Ok, so since the electoral college is the 12th amendment to our constitution, you think we should have it then, right? Cause we are obeying the law of the land, right?
 

beardo

Well-Known Member
Yeah the truth is 99% of people could vote for something or someone- it doesn't meen it will happen or he will win- Voting is just a trick to make people feel like they have a choice.
 

deprave

New Member
Ok, so since the electoral college is the 12th amendment to our constitution, you think we should have it then, right? Cause we are obeying the law of the land, right?
Nope. thats not what I said, scroll up. You could call it hypocritical yes, fair enough..I agree
 
Top