Trump, Clinton......

[Instant Karma]

Oh I am well aware that all systems are flawed. However, when you look at a system like "democracy", the US fails, pretty badly. The three fundamental principles of Democracy (Freedom, Control and Equality) are done so much better, in many other countries. The quality of Democracy in countries like Denmark, Finland and even Canada stay true to the spirit of what Democracy is supposed to be, and represent the people much more fairly and effectively. The biggest problem now, is that the decision making machine in the US is so powerful, that it might be virtually unfixable. The politicians who want to change the US for the better and do away with the money and corruption, are just not strong enough.

The people in power with the money are smart enough to realize, that the single only thing that might threaten the current system, is the general population getting pissed off enough, that they resort to drastic measure to facilitate change. The people in power with money are smart enough to keep the general population happy enough, that a drastic measure is highly unlikely. It's evolved into a terrifying reality.

Rylant

Yes, it's true that Denmark, etc. have better government than we do. But they don't have the complicated demographics, infrastructure, or population that we have here. There are more people living in the metropolitan area in which I currently reside than in the entirety of Denmark.

The annual defense budget of Denmark is roughly $3 million U.S. I mean, c'mon. Really?

Comparing the task of governance of the United States to that of a country like Denmark is akin to lecturing a failing med-school student by holding up their six year-old cousin who's currently making straight-As in First Grade as an example that they should emulate.

[Rylant]

Yes, it's true that Denmark, etc. have better government than we do. But they don't have the complicated demographics, infrastructure, or population that we have here. There are more people living in the metropolitan area in which I currently reside than in the entirety of Denmark.

The annual defense budget of Denmark is roughly $3 million U.S. I mean, c'mon. Really?

Comparing the task of governance of the United States to that of a country like Denmark is akin to lecturing a failing med-school student by holding up their six year-old cousin who's currently making straight-As in First Grade as an example that they should emulate.

I think you might be missing my point. Yes, the US has a very unique setup regarding population, infrastructure and demographics. This all adds to it probably being the most difficult country in the world to govern well. However, there is a HUGE difference between "difficult" and "corrupt", and the problem right now is NOT that it's "difficult", the problem is that it's "corrupt".

The majority of politicians in the US are more concerned with perpetuating their own worth and longevity in office, and appeasing their higher financial backers, than governing well. They are more concerned with blocking members on the other side of the aisle, than representing the best intentions of the people. The Second Amendmant is now LESS about "Freedom", and more about "Profit". The American Health and Education systems are LESS about serving the people, and more about "Profit". The American Military is now LESS about "Protection", and more about "Profit". Money is the driving force of the people in power in the US, and they have set it up so well, and so powerfully, that it may be next to impossible to change.

Rylant

[finminer]

Any of you Canadians got a spare bedroom I can use for at least 4 years?

[Instant Karma]

I think you might be missing my point. Yes, the US has a very unique setup regarding population, infrastructure and demographics. This all adds to it probably being the most difficult country in the world to govern well. However, there is a HUGE difference between "difficult" and "corrupt", and the problem right now is NOT that it's "difficult", the problem is that it's "corrupt".

The majority of politicians in the US are more concerned with perpetuating their own worth and longevity in office, and appeasing their higher financial backers, than governing well. They are more concerned with blocking members on the other side of the aisle, than representing the best intentions of the people. The Second Amendmant is now LESS about "Freedom", and more about "Profit". The American Health and Education systems are LESS about serving the people, and more about "Profit". The American Military is now LESS about "Protection", and more about "Profit". Money is the driving force of the people in power in the US, and they have set it up so well, and so powerfully, that it may be next to impossible to change.

Rylant

I'm not missing your point at all, I believe that you're mistakenly separating the concepts of difficulty vs. corruption as if the one can exist without the other. The corruption is just a symptom of the complexity of the system.

I think you're oversimplifying the issue to a simplistic notion of "good guys" and "bad guys". But most of these "bad guys" got into the game as "good guys".

The larger and more complex that any system is, deviations become exponentially harder to manage and police. This is true for any system.

Why do people seem to think that the governance of 350 million self-interested individuals who each theoretically have a say in the matter is going to go according to plan?

[iwinthings]

god thats such delusional bs. this aint our shit dont stink but our shit stinks because were big and awesome and thats just the way its going to have to be so deal with it. typical american. disgusting. its no wonder people laugh at you folks

[Instant Karma]

god thats such delusional bs. this aint our shit dont stink but our shit stinks because were big and awesome and thats just the way its going to have to be so deal with it. typical american. disgusting. its no wonder people laugh at you folks

If it's people such as yourself doing the laughing, then I can deal.

I mean, what the hell do you really know, anyway? Why should anyone care what you think? You bring nothing.

Why don't you order another drink and go back to annoying your bartender? At least he/she is getting paid to listen to your bullshlt.

[ericdaoust]

Giant douche
Turd sandwich

That is all.

[Rylant]

I'm not missing your point at all, I believe that you're mistakenly separating the concepts of difficulty vs. corruption as if the one can exist without the other. The corruption is just a symptom of the complexity of the system.

I think you're oversimplifying the issue to a simplistic notion of "good guys" and "bad guys". But most of these "bad guys" got into the game as "good guys".

The larger and more complex that any system is, deviations become exponentially harder to manage and police. This is true for any system.

Why do people seem to think that the governance of 350 million self-interested individuals who each theoretically have a say in the matter is going to go according to plan?

Nope. I am sorry; I reject this.

First of all, the statement that the concepts of difficulty versus corruption can't exist without each other, is ridiculous. I will give you examples of each; With enough training and dedication, many people would be able to eventually run a 5 minute mile. Now, if you can make that change in your life WITHOUT cheating, I would be confident saying that would probably be "difficult", but not "corrupt". Now, if there was a 5 year old standing in front of me holding twenty dollars, I imagine that I would be able to take it from them fairly easily. Again, confident to say that this is "corrupt", but not "difficult". I also understand that I am simplifying this by exaggerating to illustrate a point, but I pretty firmly believe that the substance of what I am saying, is sound.

As far as "good guys" vs "bad guys" and the statement that most politicians got in "good", and became "bad", well doesn't that exactly display what I am talking about? What are the options here as to why they became "bad"? They got into it with "good" intentions, but were lured to the dark side when they realized how much they could benefit using the example of all the "bad" guys around them? Or perhaps they were weak, and just eventually gave in like sheep when they realized how daunting the task of doing "good" actually was surrounded by all of that "bad"? In this case, it IS just as simple as "good" guys vs "bad" guys. The "bad" guys are SO powerful, that the "good" guys either don't stand a chance, or become one of the "bad" guys themselves.

Of course there is corruption in politics. However, in the case of Political Corruption in the US, it is another one of the things that might be "too big to fail". I am not the only one who feels this way. It is one of the things I REALLY loved in Bernie Sanders.

IK, for whatever reason, you seem more intent on taking a "woe is me" stance and making excuses as to why it is that way, rather than admitting that there is a HUGE problem and wondering what can be done about it. Sadly IK, I feel that too many people in the US have taken your position on the subject for too long and NOT done anything to stop it, that it has allowed this beast to grow to the point where it is now. Now, we can make excuses as to "why" until we are blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that this evil is happening right now, and it is ugly.

Rylant

[iwinthings]

If it's people such as yourself doing the laughing, then I can deal.

I mean, what the hell do you really know, anyway? Why should anyone care what you think? You bring nothing.

Why don't you order another drink and go back to annoying your bartender? At least he/she is getting paid to listen to your bullshlt.

i dont drink. gave that up ages ago. why should anyone care what anyone thinks. this is the internet. my verbal barfings are at least close to reality unlike yours

[Instant Karma]

i dont drink. gave that up ages ago. why should anyone care what anyone thinks. this is the internet. my verbal barfings are at least close to reality unlike yours

Hey, I was just trying to give you the benefit of a doubt. Have it your way.

[Instant Karma]

Nope. I am sorry; I reject this.

First of all, the statement that the concepts of difficulty versus corruption can't exist without each other, is ridiculous. I will give you examples of each; With enough training and dedication, many people would be able to eventually run a 5 minute mile. Now, if you can make that change in your life WITHOUT cheating, I would be confident saying that would probably be "difficult", but not "corrupt". Now, if there was a 5 year old standing in front of me holding twenty dollars, I imagine that I would be able to take it from them fairly easily. Again, confident to say that this is "corrupt", but not "difficult". I also understand that I am simplifying this by exaggerating to illustrate a point, but I pretty firmly believe that the substance of what I am saying, is sound.

As far as "good guys" vs "bad guys" and the statement that most politicians got in "good", and became "bad", well doesn't that exactly display what I am talking about? What are the options here as to why they became "bad"? They got into it with "good" intentions, but were lured to the dark side when they realized how much they could benefit using the example of all the "bad" guys around them? Or perhaps they were weak, and just eventually gave in like sheep when they realized how daunting the task of doing "good" actually was surrounded by all of that "bad"? In this case, it IS just as simple as "good" guys vs "bad" guys. The "bad" guys are SO powerful, that the "good" guys either don't stand a chance, or become one of the "bad" guys themselves.

Of course there is corruption in politics. However, in the case of Political Corruption in the US, it is another one of the things that might be "too big to fail". I am not the only one who feels this way. It is one of the things I REALLY loved in Bernie Sanders.

IK, for whatever reason, you seem more intent on taking a "woe is me" stance and making excuses as to why it is that way, rather than admitting that there is a HUGE problem and wondering what can be done about it. Sadly IK, I feel that too many people in the US have taken your position on the subject for too long and NOT done anything to stop it, that it has allowed this beast to grow to the point where it is now. Now, we can make excuses as to "why" until we are blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that this evil is happening right now, and it is ugly.

Rylant

Reject it to your heart's content, Rylant. As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water...

And I'm not taking a "woe is me" tone, either. That's a mischaracterization and a reduction. What I'm doing is taking a pragmatic approach, leveraging my education and experience and applying them to the issue If I don't endeavor to do that in any kind of analysis, than what is the use of either?

I accepted long ago that the world is not as we'd want it to be. That doesn't make me self-pitying; it just makes me a realist

If we're to accept your theory that it's simply a matter of corruption, then that begs the question of why it continues to persist. If it's not a matter of the difficulty in managing complex system(s), then the other alternative is that everyone is either indifferent or in on the racket.

But neither of those is the case, at least not in total. Politicians and civil servants don't go to Washington with the intention of getting rich. There are far better ways to do that.

It's because they're in a system where individuals can rarely if ever make a difference. You jump on board or you get left behind. This is true even for the POTUS. If your theory that the government is full of crooks and carpetbaggers is correct, then truly the POTUS must be the biggest one of all, right?

I see this in my own job every day, and I expect that you probably do too. And the organization that I belong to is a lot smaller and less complex than the Federal government. But it's large and complex nonetheless. And the bigger it gets, the more chaotic it gets. It's the nature of things.

Every time some corporate HR or other bullshlt comes up at your place of employment, do you stand up, raise your fist in the air, and proclaim that you're not going to stand for it? If you do, I expect that you're not going to last very long there.

What makes you think people in government service are any different? They're just going out and fighting that world, same as you and me.

[Rylant]

Reject it to your heart's content, Rylant. As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water...

And I'm not taking a "woe is me" tone, either. That's a mischaracterization and a reduction. What I'm doing is taking a pragmatic approach, leveraging my education and experience and applying them to the issue If I don't endeavor to do that in any kind of analysis, than what is the use of either?

I accepted long ago that the world is not as we'd want it to be. That doesn't make me self-pitying; it just makes me a realist

If we're to accept your theory that it's simply a matter of corruption, then that begs the question of why it continues to persist. If it's not a matter of the difficulty in managing complex system(s), then the other alternative is that everyone is either indifferent or in on the racket.

But neither of those is the case, at least not in total. Politicians and civil servants don't go to Washington with the intention of getting rich. There are far better ways to do that.

It's because they're in a system where individuals can rarely if ever make a difference. You jump on board or you get left behind. This is true even for the POTUS. If your theory that the government is full of crooks and carpetbaggers is correct, then truly the POTUS must be the biggest one of all, right?

I see this in my own job every day, and I expect that you probably do too. And the organization that I belong to is a lot smaller and less complex than the Federal government. But it's large and complex nonetheless. And the bigger it gets, the more chaotic it gets. It's the nature of things.

Every time some corporate HR or other bullshlt comes up at your place of employment, do you stand up, raise your fist in the air, and proclaim that you're not going to stand for it? If you do, I expect that you're not going to last very long there.

What makes you think people in government service are any different? They're just going out and fighting that world, same as you and me.

Fair enough. Perhaps I didn't fully grasp where you were coming from. After this post, I feel as though I am clearer on where you stand, and I apologize if you feel I reduced your opinion in any way. To be frank, I enjoy these types of debates, as I hope you know that I have nothing but respect for your beliefs.

I also think, however, that you have also mischaracterized my stance as well. Again, I am not saying it's "simply a matter of corruption". I am saying that it is serious enough and big enough, that the "good" guys are in trouble, and have a huge uphill battle to fix, or to at least, lessen it.

As well, I am not suggesting that EVERYONE in politics is corrupt; however it is rampant. Even though I disagree with some of Obama's stances and polices (I really dislike his cavalier use of drone strikes with virtually no due process), I still pretty firmly believe he is one of the greatest Presidents of my lifetime.

Rylant

[Pengwin7]

My post from May 13:

I believe, by statistics/analytics, Hilary is considered a near lock to win presidency.
But Trump has a chance, he really does... (oof)

Trump is dangerous candidate though... because he's appealing to a lot of a demographic that is:
i) Annoyed as shit with how they feel much of the country (esp. democrats) view them
ii) Represents a voter-base that probably only shows up at a 50% rate to begin with... but now they are so... so riled up... that they have rallied together enough where that extra 10% maybe 20% of them will now turn out at polls.
Extra voter turn out. That's dangerous - and not something analytics can capture.

One of my fave analytics site is 538 fivethirtyeight.com... where they cover everything from SPORTS to POLITICS.
538... and Nate Silver (the guy who nailed his prediction on all 50 states in the 2012 election) actually MISSED the prediction that Trump would win the Republican nomination.
Why?
Well - because even analytics can't capture the surging flow of a cult-following that really rallies their group.
The media gave Trump so much face-time and hate... that people will show up and back somebody if they feel like the way they believe (if Trump-ish) is being publicly slandered.
They'll show up, at the polls, to silently say "I feel the same way as you guys are hating on."
It's a dangerous phenomenon... Trump voter turn-out.

BUMPING an old thread... because I can't shake the recent election results... either.

I'm over the physical result.
But I find the numbers... the demographics... interesting.
For those that are still searching for the "WHY?" or "HOW?" on the election, here's two good ones from the past year that foresaw the path.
Both from David Wasserman of fivethirtyeight (pretty sharp guy):

From Sept 16, 2016:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...-popular-vote/

And even earlier, going back to Dec, 2015:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...2016-election/

*Specifically, the "Swing-O-Matic" was a pretty cool demographics tool to play with back then.
I actually moved it to see what needed to happen for Trump to possibly win.
I had to move a couple bars a LOT to get him over to the win... and I thought it impossible... but turns out... it's what happened.

Good reading for those that like to study demographics, analytics, and numbers.

[havanablast21]

Giant douche
Turd sandwich

That is all.

Excuse me, it's pronounced "Douchay"..."Giant Douchay"!!!!
And Turd Sandwedge.

Now you may say "that is all".

[Bass56]

My post from May 13:



BUMPING an old thread... because I can't shake the recent election results... either.

I'm over the physical result.
But I find the numbers... the demographics... interesting.
For those that are still searching for the "WHY?" or "HOW?" on the election, here's two good ones from the past year that foresaw the path.
Both from David Wasserman of fivethirtyeight (pretty sharp guy):

From Sept 16, 2016:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...-popular-vote/

And even earlier, going back to Dec, 2015:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...2016-election/

*Specifically, the "Swing-O-Matic" was a pretty cool demographics tool to play with back then.
I actually moved it to see what needed to happen for Trump to possibly win.
I had to move a couple bars a LOT to get him over to the win... and I thought it impossible... but turns out... it's what happened.

Good reading for those that like to study demographics, analytics, and numbers.

How about this for analytics:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-a-trump-win/