Avin Wargunnson wrote:
And it is not only Nazis, which is always an extreme example to use in discussion.
Many past and present regimes which are clearly crazy, backward, stupid, killing and damaging were supoported by majority of citizens, which really does not say anything about its sanity.
Millions of people, even in country like USA are not educated or informed enough to be able to vote with reason. People are not born with abilities to really decide what is best for them, some learn it, some not...
I think we need to stay away from Extreme regimes because the majority of them wouldn't actually qualify as being political. A dictatorship/totalitarian regime is not political in any way as the definition of politics is to debate.
I also think you're getting into slightly dodgy territory by saying people with no education don't deserve a vote. That's basically how dictatorships/totalitarian regimes start.
He didn't say uneducated people shouldn't vote. It's just that they usually make less informed decisions and they more easily manipulated, either by someone with a good speech (by good speech I mean who just screams more than his opponents), or different sorts of political bribery.
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
And it is not only Nazis, which is always an extreme example to use in discussion.
Many past and present regimes which are clearly crazy, backward, stupid, killing and damaging were supoported by majority of citizens, which really does not say anything about its sanity.
Millions of people, even in country like USA are not educated or informed enough to be able to vote with reason. People are not born with abilities to really decide what is best for them, some learn it, some not...
I think we need to stay away from Extreme regimes because the majority of them wouldn't actually qualify as being political. A dictatorship/totalitarian regime is not political in any way as the definition of politics is to debate.
I also think you're getting into slightly dodgy territory by saying people with no education don't deserve a vote. That's basically how dictatorships/totalitarian regimes start.
He didn't say uneducated people shouldn't vote. It's just that they usually make less informed decisions and they more easily manipulated, either by someone with a good speech (by good speech I mean who just screams more than his opponents), or different sorts of political bribery.
Fair enough. I misinterpreted what he said.
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
And it is not only Nazis, which is always an extreme example to use in discussion.
Many past and present regimes which are clearly crazy, backward, stupid, killing and damaging were supoported by majority of citizens, which really does not say anything about its sanity.
Millions of people, even in country like USA are not educated or informed enough to be able to vote with reason. People are not born with abilities to really decide what is best for them, some learn it, some not...
I agree, just simpler to use the Nazi's because everyone knows the story.
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
And it is not only Nazis, which is always an extreme example to use in discussion.
Many past and present regimes which are clearly crazy, backward, stupid, killing and damaging were supoported by majority of citizens, which really does not say anything about its sanity.
Millions of people, even in country like USA are not educated or informed enough to be able to vote with reason. People are not born with abilities to really decide what is best for them, some learn it, some not...
I agree, just simpler to use the Nazi's because everyone knows the story.
If only the Nazi story would make sense for such an example. It simply is way too far fetched.
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
Millions of people, even in country like USA are not educated or informed enough to be able to vote with reason. People are not born with abilities to really decide what is best for them, some learn it, some not...
But luckily there is Avin Wargunnson from PCMDaily who always know what's best for everyone.
(Not only directed at you) I think it's extremely arrogant to say people are stupid, just because they didn't vote as you would've liked. Even if they are stupid or uneducated, they are smart enough to see, that with the current policies, they are coming of worse and worse. If the majority of people would be happy with their jobs/living,.. a candidate like Trump would never have a chance, the same goes for movements in Europe like Le Pen, Brexit, .. The reason for increasingly unhappiness is for a major part politics from the last decades, at least the affected people identify it as that. Trump might be a moron and his voters might not benefit from his policies, but at least he is something different than the politicans before, that are held responsible for lots of people's misfortune. Voting Hillary would definitely have not resulted in any turn of the trend for them.
Regardless of that, I also think Trump is less lunatic than how he is portrayed in the media. As a non American, I have quite high hopes in his foreign policies, especially I hope for an improvement of the relationship between USA and Russia, for which there would have been no chance if Hillary was elected.
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
Millions of people, even in country like USA are not educated or informed enough to be able to vote with reason. People are not born with abilities to really decide what is best for them, some learn it, some not...
But luckily there is Avin Wargunnson from PCMDaily who always know what's best for everyone.
(Not only directed at you) I think it's extremely arrogant to say people are stupid, just because they didn't vote as you would've liked. Even if they are stupid or uneducated, they are smart enough to see, that with the current policies, they are coming of worse and worse. If the majority of people would be happy with their jobs/living,.. a candidate like Trump would never have a chance, the same goes for movements in Europe like Le Pen, Brexit, .. The reason for increasingly unhappiness is for a major part politics from the last decades, at least the affected people identify it as that. Trump might be a moron and his voters might not benefit from his policies, but at least he is something different than the politicans before, that are held responsible for lots of people's misfortune. Voting Hillary would definitely have not resulted in any turn of the trend for them.
Regardless of that, I also think Trump is less lunatic than how he is portrayed in the media. As a non American, I have quite high hopes in his foreign policies, especially I hope for an improvement of the relationship between USA and Russia, for which there would have been no chance if Hillary was elected.
What I have been saying for the last 3 pages. Welcome to the debate
I see that Unfortunately some people have resorted to name calling, which is a shame. If you are "tired of arguing" then just don't post, don't start calling people names. I've never said anything personal to anyone, I've simply argued my opinion. If you don't agree then I respect that. But don't start calling people who you don't agree with names. That's what started this whole thing off in the first place with anti-trump people calling Trump voters stupid, simply because they don't agree with them.
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
I think the ultimate point of the past few pages should come down to just giving Trump a few months/years to see what exactly he does. He could have just been saying all the things he said so people would vote for him, thinking change would actually come.
PCM.Daily NFL Fantasy Football Champion: 2012 PCM.Daily NHL Prediction Game Champion: 2013 PCM.Daily NFL Prediction Game Champion: 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2021
Bikex wrote:
Even if they are stupid or uneducated, they are smart enough to see, that with the current policies, they are coming of worse and worse. If the majority of people would be happy with their jobs/living,.. a candidate like Trump would never have a chance, the same goes for movements in Europe like Le Pen, Brexit, .. The reason for increasingly unhappiness is for a major part politics from the last decades, at least the affected people identify it as that. Trump might be a moron and his voters might not benefit from his policies, but at least he is something different than the politicans before, that are held responsible for lots of people's misfortune. Voting Hillary would definitely have not resulted in any turn of the trend for them.
And there I see a big danger though. Yes. People might be unhappy with the actual politicians and might hope for better. But in especially those that not really trusting Trump to make it better but only to have something new, they go a huge risk there to make it even worse for themselves.
Bikex wrote:Regardless of that, I also think Trump is less lunatic than how he is portrayed in the media. As a non American, I have quite high hopes in his foreign policies, especially I hope for an improvement of the relationship between USA and Russia, for which there would have been no chance if Hillary was elected.
Also there a huge danger. It surely is a bit weird to see Russians celebrating after Trump won. And surely they did not celebrate because USA and Russia could get closer together.
In the end I fear this will be a very one-sided "relationship" and while it might be closer than with Hilton or Obama (and yes, there are good reasons why it was not that close recently), the fear I have is that Trump is just becoming a Marionette of Putin just like Hilton has said in the TV duel. And I am not sure if this is a "relationship" I want to see.
jseadog1 wrote:
I think the ultimate point of the past few pages should come down to just giving Trump a few months/years to see what exactly he does. He could have just been saying all the things he said so people would vote for him, thinking change would actually come.
I agree with the point that now Trump got elected and people must live with that/respect that. In the end the "majority" wanted it this way no matter their reasons behind it or no matter who didn`t even vote and caused such result in the end.
A US guy I know said back in the first Bush Jr. election that it`s crap but it is like it is. When he was elected also the 2nd time for another 4 years, he just said, well 4 years ago we didn`t know better, now it`s our own fault and we have to pay for it.
It could be similar with Trump. Now they might not know better and go the risk. In 4 years the next election might be the one, where you can make "idiotic" votes (Obviously depending on the upcoming 4 years now).
Yeah, I can see why people want something new, but that doesn't mean the choice they make isn't stupid. Just because the beer I'm drinking isn't very good doesn't mean I'm going to swap it for sodium hypochlorite.
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
Yeah, I can see why people want something new, but that doesn't mean the choice they make isn't stupid. Just because the beer I'm drinking isn't very good doesn't mean I'm going to swap it for sodium hypochlorite.
You'd swap to a different beer though.
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
Actually, the point you made about more Americans wanting Trump is false. Trump is our president because he will win the electoral college,
Hillary Clinton won the United States popular vote by over a million people. Similar to what happened in 2000 when Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the presidency.
PCM.Daily NFL Fantasy Football Champion: 2012 PCM.Daily NHL Prediction Game Champion: 2013 PCM.Daily NFL Prediction Game Champion: 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2021
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
Yeah, I can see why people want something new, but that doesn't mean the choice they make isn't stupid. Just because the beer I'm drinking isn't very good doesn't mean I'm going to swap it for sodium hypochlorite.
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
Yeah, I can see why people want something new, but that doesn't mean the choice they make isn't stupid. Just because the beer I'm drinking isn't very good doesn't mean I'm going to swap it for sodium hypochlorite.
You'd swap to a different beer though.
I would, but I'm not crazy .
Clinton is like a Fosters. It's a beer, you know it's a beer, but it's not a good beer.
Trump is absinthe. Still alcholic, so it could give you a buzz, but it could also blitz you into a coma.
People are just bored of beer. Shame no-one turned up with a whiskey to steal the show.
jseadog1 wrote:
Actually, the point you made about more Americans wanting Trump is false. Trump is our president because he will win the electoral college,
Hillary Clinton won the United States popular vote by over a million people. Similar to what happened in 2000 when Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the presidency.
If you refer to my post. This is why I put it into "".
But as it`s the US system, he got voted by the needed "mayority".
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
Yeah, I can see why people want something new, but that doesn't mean the choice they make isn't stupid. Just because the beer I'm drinking isn't very good doesn't mean I'm going to swap it for sodium hypochlorite.
You'd swap to a different beer though.
I would, but I'm not crazy .
Clinton is like a Fosters. It's a beer, you know it's a beer, but it's not a good beer.
Trump is absinthe. Still alcholic, so it could give you a buzz, but it could also blitz you into a coma.
People are just bored of beer. Shame no-one turned up with a whiskey to steal the show.
Whats the matter with Foster's? I like Foster's.
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
Yeah, I can see why people want something new, but that doesn't mean the choice they make isn't stupid. Just because the beer I'm drinking isn't very good doesn't mean I'm going to swap it for sodium hypochlorite.
You'd swap to a different beer though.
I would, but I'm not crazy .
Clinton is like a Fosters. It's a beer, you know it's a beer, but it's not a good beer.
Trump is absinthe. Still alcholic, so it could give you a buzz, but it could also blitz you into a coma.
People are just bored of beer. Shame no-one turned up with a whiskey to steal the show.
Whats the matter with Foster's? I like Foster's.
The conclusion from all of this is that you're crazy.
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
Yeah, I can see why people want something new, but that doesn't mean the choice they make isn't stupid. Just because the beer I'm drinking isn't very good doesn't mean I'm going to swap it for sodium hypochlorite.
You'd swap to a different beer though.
I would, but I'm not crazy .
Clinton is like a Fosters. It's a beer, you know it's a beer, but it's not a good beer.
Trump is absinthe. Still alcholic, so it could give you a buzz, but it could also blitz you into a coma.
People are just bored of beer. Shame no-one turned up with a whiskey to steal the show.
Whats the matter with Foster's? I like Foster's.
The conclusion from all of this is that you're crazy.
Crazy, or I just like a different beer to you
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
