Red Mosquito

and the electoral college

and the whites.

McParadigm wrote:The problem isn’t the candidates, it’s the voters.

I really don’t think it’s this simple. If anything, I think it’s much more a candidate problem than a voter problem. Establishment shills keep getting put up over and over.

meatwad wrote:I'd rather there be some sort of emotional/intellectual intelligence test than an age limit.

Who gets to create that test?

And yes, age limits on both voting and holding office are dumb and should be done away with.

Green Habit wrote:

meatwad wrote:I'd rather there be some sort of emotional/intellectual intelligence test than an age limit.

Who gets to create that test.

Smart people.

meatwad wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

meatwad wrote:I'd rather there be some sort of emotional/intellectual intelligence test than an age limit.

Who gets to create that test.

Smart people.

And how do you choose the smart people? Some of the most evil people in history were also highly intelligent.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:The problem isn’t the candidates, it’s the voters.

I really don’t think it’s this simple. If anything, I think it’s much more a candidate problem than a voter problem. Establishment shills keep getting put up over and over.

Donald Trump was not an establishment figure. In fact his most effective skill set was his comfort in adopting the language that conservatives most interpreted as anti-establishment. It’s exactly how he destroyed the establishment candidates in the primaries.

He was also voted into office by a combination of people so uninformed that they freaked the fuck out when they finally realized that the Obamacare they hated was the ACA they relied on, and people who just heard the word emails a lot.

The voters are the problem. Or more specifically, our culture that sympathizes with people who bitch that politics is too negative, and nods agreement when they wonder why politicians can’t just work together like adults, is the problem. An informed public is adversarial, but an uninformed public is a toy.

Green Habit wrote:

meatwad wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

meatwad wrote:I'd rather there be some sort of emotional/intellectual intelligence test than an age limit.

Who gets to create that test.

Smart people.

And how do you choose the smart people? Some of the most evil people in history were also highly intelligent.

C'mon Nick...we choose the people who do well on the test, duh!

Green Habit wrote:

meatwad wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

meatwad wrote:I'd rather there be some sort of emotional/intellectual intelligence test than an age limit.

Who gets to create that test.

Smart people.

And how do you choose the smart people? Some of the most evil people in history were also highly intelligent.

C'mon Nick...we choose the people who do well on the test, duh!

McParadigm wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:The problem isn’t the candidates, it’s the voters.

I really don’t think it’s this simple. If anything, I think it’s much more a candidate problem than a voter problem. Establishment shills keep getting put up over and over.

Donald Trump was not an establishment figure. In fact his most effective skill set was his comfort in adopting the language that conservatives most interpreted as anti-establishment. It’s exactly how he destroyed the establishment candidates in the primaries.

He was also voted into office by a combination of people so uninformed that they freaked the fuck out when they finally realized that the Obamacare they hated was the ACA they relied on, and people who just heard the word emails a lot.

The voters are the problem. Or more specifically, our culture that sympathizes with people who bitch that politics is too negative, and nods agreement when they wonder why politicians can’t just work together like adults, is the problem. An informed public is adversarial, but an uninformed public is a toy.

Trump is the definition of establishment. Not a conventional politician, sure. But establishment to the bone.

If your definition of establishment includes literally any person who has acted as a power broker or had the ability to buy influence, yes. But in terms of the scope of experience that could help inform his decision-making, he’s as much a neophyte as any waiter in America. Over and over again, he has crippled his own efforts or damaged important processes/relationships/institutions through a lack of background knowledge on subjects like policy law, international relations, and process. He is a living example of why a deep well of experiential knowledge is more valuable to a sitting president than any single vision or idea.

And in terms of who he blames for unsatisfactory conditions, and how he expresses that blame, he absolutely is anti-establishment. The establishment is always to blame....which worked better when he wasn’t the figurehead of the establishment.

He may be a rich white jackass, smearing his idiocy across the land like a diarrhetic snail trail, but he is also a good demonstration of some of the issues that would be more likely to recur in a world populated with antiestablishment candidates.

McParadigm wrote:If your definition of establishment includes literally any person who has acted as a power broker or had the ability to buy influence, yes. But in terms of the scope of experience that could help inform his decision-making, he’s as much a neophyte as any waiter in America. Over and over again, he has crippled his own efforts or damaged important processes/relationships/institutions through a lack of background knowledge on subjects like policy law, international relations, and process. He is a living example of why a deep well of experiential knowledge is more valuable to a sitting president than any single vision or idea.

And in terms of who he blames for unsatisfactory conditions, and how he expresses that blame, he absolutely is anti-establishment. The establishment is always to blame....which worked better when he wasn’t the figurehead of the establishment.

He may be a rich white jackass, smearing his idiocy across the land like a diarrhetic snail trail, but he is also a good demonstration of some of the issues that would be more likely to recur in a world populated with antiestablishment candidates.

I think we may have different definitions of who or what "the establishment" is.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:If your definition of establishment includes literally any person who has acted as a power broker or had the ability to buy influence, yes. But in terms of the scope of experience that could help inform his decision-making, he’s as much a neophyte as any waiter in America. Over and over again, he has crippled his own efforts or damaged important processes/relationships/institutions through a lack of background knowledge on subjects like policy law, international relations, and process. He is a living example of why a deep well of experiential knowledge is more valuable to a sitting president than any single vision or idea.

And in terms of who he blames for unsatisfactory conditions, and how he expresses that blame, he absolutely is anti-establishment. The establishment is always to blame....which worked better when he wasn’t the figurehead of the establishment.

He may be a rich white jackass, smearing his idiocy across the land like a diarrhetic snail trail, but he is also a good demonstration of some of the issues that would be more likely to recur in a world populated with antiestablishment candidates.

I think we may have different definitions of who or what "the establishment" is.

anyone older than the age of 35 amirite??

fucking millennial's man, i tell you.

Strat wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:If your definition of establishment includes literally any person who has acted as a power broker or had the ability to buy influence, yes. But in terms of the scope of experience that could help inform his decision-making, he’s as much a neophyte as any waiter in America. Over and over again, he has crippled his own efforts or damaged important processes/relationships/institutions through a lack of background knowledge on subjects like policy law, international relations, and process. He is a living example of why a deep well of experiential knowledge is more valuable to a sitting president than any single vision or idea.

And in terms of who he blames for unsatisfactory conditions, and how he expresses that blame, he absolutely is anti-establishment. The establishment is always to blame....which worked better when he wasn’t the figurehead of the establishment.

He may be a rich white jackass, smearing his idiocy across the land like a diarrhetic snail trail, but he is also a good demonstration of some of the issues that would be more likely to recur in a world populated with antiestablishment candidates.

I think we may have different definitions of who or what "the establishment" is.

anyone older than the age of 35 amirite??

fucking millennial's man, i tell you.

Im just messing here.

Whose meme magic brought AOC into existence? What is her Shadilay?

https://www.atr.org/green-new-deal-air- ... essary?amp

“the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity”

Bi_3 wrote:https://www.atr.org/green-new-deal-air- ... essary?amp

“the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity”

so.... no one can travel internationally anymore?

Bi_3 wrote:https://www.atr.org/green-new-deal-air- ... essary?amp

“the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity”

There is no fucking way that fossil fuels will ever be phased out as quickly as they need to be without nuclear energy. It's so frustrating that people try to have this both ways.

And yes, there are plenty of other problems with this as well. At least I do like that it's excise tax averse.

Green Habit wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:https://www.atr.org/green-new-deal-air- ... essary?amp

“the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity”

There is no fucking way that fossil fuels will ever be phased out as quickly as they need to be without nuclear energy. It's so frustrating that people try to have this both ways.

And yes, there are plenty of other problems with this as well. At least I do like that it's excise tax averse.

I think we're now playing the game where you suggest things that are ridiculously far to one side of the political spectrum until you manage to move the normal more in that direction.