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

deprave said:

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

Click to expand...

The United States Constitution said:

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.
The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.[1]
The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Click to expand...

deprave said:

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

Click to expand...

You believe in following our constitution but don't think the electoral college is fair.

yep..I agree hypocritical.....but really...what is your point? Im a big flamin hypcrit, Im glad we have established that...I'm sure your never hypocritical? Your subhuman? Are you one of those lizards people?

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

To the OP:

Hopefully you read this response, because this something that I would like for ALL people to understand, and you bring up a great point. However, I think that the subjective view you put forward is too narrow to fully encapsulate the impact of voting, and political figures.

Voting can be a powerful tool. People, on their own - cannot and will not ever be as effective. This includes presidents especially. Every president is faced with circumstances that demand action on their watch. Infact, most presidents don't have a choice in the issues they choose to address - circumstance has already chosen it for them. That is why candidates can promise the world without restraint, they are not facing the same circumstances they will in office. Heads of state are to a certain extent, helpless. Most decisions they make are quite literally forced upon them. They have little manuverability to take on the grandiose and ambitious pledges they may have made during the campaign when faced with reality. Of course, this will never be admitted to while actually campaigning, the public doesn't want to hear that. They want to hear that someone is going to come on in and fix everything right up, which is total bullshit. Sadly, the same people that say "we aren't going to be fooled again" are the same people that are so quick to support candidates reciting campaign pledges that jive with their POV. Those same people don't ever care to delve deeper into the muck that is "politics." Soundbytes and mass media are enough for most people to take casual glances and say "oh fuck it, I've heard enough."

The problem is that since people decide that now they are "informed" because of their access to information - not necessarily having an in-depth knowledge, but having "heard" some things, they forego any further investigation into the details. This includes policy-making either through congress or the ballot. How many people actually read about all of the propositions and people running for office? Very few. If the agenda is not present at the media level, somehow people take this as an indicator that such decisions are pointless, and wont lead to anything. Thus, you have the "powerless voter." If voting conciously were so pointless, old people and gun owners would be screwed. But, since those to demographics are highly involved and politically active (they know how to put pressure on their elected leaders), they fucking wreck shop when it comes to voting in favor of their interests.

Our generation has lacked the finesse to manipulate the vote in our favor. We don't even know, collectively WTF is going on half of the time. And sadly, many dont care to. Reading legislation proposals and diving into codified law is a tedious and fucking boring endeavor. But this is what it takes to effect change - NOT placing all of your hopes in the hands of some one person that "promises" to make EVERYTHING better.

Anyway, let the shit-talking and hate-fest begin.

I don't want a shit fest with hate talking I enjoy your appreciation of everything that can actually be proven as true. But you know what? This thread is about the part where you say "the public doesn't want to hear the truth". You make a good point, and I wonder if you found that out on your own, as I did. This thread is about us "customers" of the state and the Federal Conglomeration, some of us are just here to enjoy forming feces angels in the 6" deep pile of poo that has covered the scene called voting, while me and some others are going to pack up some nice shitballs and we're aiming for faces. Nothing better to do anyway... Nothing that isn't extreme or illegal. yaaaaaayyyyyyy.

The Ruiner said:

To the OP:
Of course, this will never be admitted to while actually campaigning, the public doesn't want to hear that. They want to hear that someone is going to come on in and fix everything right up, which is total bullshit. Sadly, the same people that say "we aren't going to be fooled again" are the same people that are so quick to support candidates reciting campaign pledges that jive with their POV. Those same people don't ever care to delve deeper into the muck that is "politics." Soundbytes and mass media are enough for most people to take casual glances and say "oh fuck it, I've heard enough."

The problem is that since people decide that now they are "informed" because of their access to information - not necessarily having an in-depth knowledge, but having "heard" some things, they forego any further investigation into the details. This includes policy-making either through congress or the ballot. How many people actually read about all of the propositions and people running for office? Very few. If the agenda is not present at the media level, somehow people take this as an indicator that such decisions are pointless, and wont lead to anything. Thus, you have the "powerless voter." If voting conciously were so pointless, old people and gun owners would be screwed. But, since those to demographics are highly involved and politically active (they know how to put pressure on their elected leaders), they fucking wreck shop when it comes to voting in favor of their interests.

Our generation has lacked the finesse to manipulate the vote in our favor. We don't even know, collectively WTF is going on half of the time. And sadly, many dont care to. Reading legislation proposals and diving into codified law is a tedious and fucking boring endeavor. But this is what it takes to effect change - NOT placing all of your hopes in the hands of some one person that "promises" to make EVERYTHING better.

Anyway, let the shit-talking and hate-fest begin.

Click to expand...

The electoral college is in the damn rule book, and therefore it is found without flaw and is perfect according to our founding fathers. I like to scrap entire projects and implement new ones. Especially the electoral college.

the problem is not voting, the problem is it does´nt matter what voters say, it matters who is lining the pockets

Johnny Retro said:

I do agree that we should repeal it. <snip>

Click to expand...

By ... voting? cn

it doesnt matter what the voters need, it matters what the dude with the cash wants.

and the problem with that.

is that any time cream rises to the top, its quickly spoiled by all the shit floating there.

Johnny Retro said:

Voting is useless?

Lmao, just when i thought i've heard it all..

Click to expand...

Welcome to real life. Your government killed your "democratically" elected president in 1963. If you elect someone they dont like they kill them. "They" are in control, your welcome to vote all you want, dont expect any changes though.

Look at every president since Kenedy, they all ran different campaigns but have all done the same damn thing: Increase/maintain the debt. Increase/maintain the industrial millitary complex. Increase/maintain the war on drugs. Increase/maintain the police state. Increase/maintain the destruction of individual freedoms/rights.

Heres a speech by JFK just befor he was wasted for executing executive order 1110 - ENDING THE FEDERAL RESERVE MONOPOLY. LBJ reversed that order the day he was killed.

Speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GR5m1-5ksj0 Listen carefully,he is warning us of something evil and literally predicting the future at the same time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iSTZH-bPl8&feature=fvst Executive Order 1110

Go ahead and vote. Just remeber that regardless of who you vote for, "they" will shoot them in broad daylight if "they" dont like them. The president is just a stand in, a public relations oficial for our government, thats all.

Voting doesnt always give us what we want. We often feel we are battling a government that is supposed to represesnt us, who doesnt want to follow the will of the people, despite our votes indicating what we want. However, if we dont vote, what is to stop them at anything? We are not completely voiceless, our votes still half matter. Is it ideal? Certainly not. Often I feel like when you give a child a "choice" between bathing at 8 or at 830, however, the child doesnt get to chose between bathing or not bathing, that vote is not an option. It is the illusion of choice that is all that is needed for satisfaction. The process is certainly flawed, but the majority of options left are pretty shitty.

Filthy Phil gives good insight to exactly what voting is. You can vote for the hour of bath time ("Them" cleaning us of our money) but you can't skip the entire bath. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. I don't feel so patriotic about our new world order since they capped Kennedy, and I wasn't even born when that happened