Politics All the phone calls.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Stevenson said:
If you don't or can't trust Carl Bernstein, or if you don't know who he is and what he has done, then you really have no idea what you are talking about.
Click to expand...
Don’t know about or give a shit about Carl Bernstein. I find it hard to believe he is the sole barometer for other people’s knowledge though.
 
jonnyboy said:
Don’t know about or give a shit about Carl Bernstein. I find it hard to believe he is the sole barometer for other people’s knowledge though.
Click to expand...
Woodward and Bernstein, Pulitzer prize, ring a bell?
 
jonnyboy said:
Don’t know about or give a shit about Carl Bernstein. I find it hard to believe he is the sole barometer for other people’s knowledge though.
Click to expand...

Then your ignorance (about this subject) is getting in the way of having an intelligent take. Sorry, but true.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
“
jonnyboy said:
Don’t know about or give a shit about Carl Bernstein. I find it hard to believe he is the sole barometer for other people’s knowledge though.
Click to expand...
Don’t know or give a shit about Carl Bernstein “
This speaks volumes.
Probably never heard of a guy named “Woodward” either?
 
andalusian said:
Sorry River, but without clarification - that is a horrible idea - because without some regulation - you will get thousands of nut cases presenting their crazy ideas for the same time ahead of everyone - which will present a glut of information where people will not be able to pay attention and who knows what kind of garbage prevails.

I honestly believe that a small number of parties with primaries is a proper idea - you basically have a funnel that ideas have to move through multiple stages and pass enough people to be presented to the entire nation so we do not waste everyone's time on every crazy idea that some idiot comes with.

Now, if the number of "parties" should be 2, 3, 4 or 5 is up to debate - but realistically, you need some kinds of mechanism to filter the wheat from the chaff...
Click to expand...
We have numerous parties now that are registered and have websites.....they get no ink. I believe they should have equal debating and air time and I believe money should not be the driving factor for running for office....most of the alternative parties have been around since the 1970s but just have no way to compete because of....money....the big 2.....I don't think it's a stretch to have more choices..to form a party you need a base...they already have these checks and balances in place so it's not like Joe Homeless Nazi is going to run for office
 
riverman said:
I don't think it's a stretch to have more choices..to form a party you need a base...they already have these checks and balances in place so it's not like Joe Homeless Nazi is going to run for office
Click to expand...

History does not agree with this idea.
https://www.thrillist.com/lifestyle/nation/creative-virtual-party-ideas-for-having-fun-indoors

I am sorry, but there is already too much information in the world and no-one can process it efficiently - which is why funnel systems were created before AI - and by definition, a republic is a funnel system for democracy, so having a funnel system for election of the republic representatives is a very reasonable system.

We already have access to every piece of junk out there thanks to the web and social platforms - so what you want is already out there, everyone can create a presence for whatever ideas they have. If you want to have meaningful discussions by a large population - you need a way to sift among this junk. The options really are hierarchical funnel systems (like the old Yahoo, for example) and AI (modern day Google). Since AI is very good for very specific problems - but still not really good for everything (as we see from all the stuff that social platforms surface because their AI systems are not good enough yet) - it makes sense to have elections done using a funnel (hierarchical) system.

The only thing that makes sense to discuss imho is maybe demanding that the top-level of the funnel is 3, 4 or 5 options instead of 2, but anything over this is an exercise in futility.
 
andalusian said:
History does not agree with this idea.
https://www.thrillist.com/lifestyle/nation/creative-virtual-party-ideas-for-having-fun-indoors

I am sorry, but there is already too much information in the world and no-one can process it efficiently - which is why funnel systems were created before AI - and by definition, a republic is a funnel system for democracy, so having a funnel system for election of the republic representatives is a very reasonable system.

We already have access to every piece of junk out there thanks to the web and social platforms - so what you want is already out there, everyone can create a presence for whatever ideas they have. If you want to have meaningful discussions by a large population - you need a way to sift among this junk. The options really are hierarchical funnel systems (like the old Yahoo, for example) and AI (modern day Google). Since AI is very good for very specific problems - but still not really good for everything (as we see from all the stuff that social platforms surface because their AI systems are not good enough yet) - it makes sense to have elections done using a funnel (hierarchical) system.

The only thing that makes sense to discuss imho is maybe demanding that the top-level of the funnel is 3, 4 or 5 options instead of 2, but anything over this is an exercise in futility.
Click to expand...

how about no more primaries with the addition of ranked choice voting in general election. additionally the two major parties may select 1 official candidate. to make each vote more valuable congressional districts become larger with more representatives to try to eliminate/limit partisan gerrymandering. i would predict coalitions forming to include less of the purity standard by extreme view points in the center candidates and a more diverse party make up. i would venture that newer parties would gain more influence over the original pair?
 
kjironman1 said:
Doesn’t sound like it?
Click to expand...

Well, I can tell you that after feuding with him for awhile, I realized that though we may disagree politically, he at least seems to know the issues. Maybe he doesn't always articulate his stance as well as some, he also is not as trollish and bombastic as some. He also doesn't whine and complain to the mods and try to portray himself as the victim and then suck up to the mods when the Mods try to explain the facts of life and the rules of this board to him.

JB also doesn't waste nearly as much of his time on this board as many of us and so he does not seem so concerned about his "message board persona".
 
yankeesince59 said:
Well, I can tell you that after feuding with him for awhile, I realized that though we may disagree politically, he at least seems to know the issues. Maybe he doesn't always articulate his stance as well as some, he also is not as trollish and bombastic as some. He also doesn't whine and complain to the mods and try to portray himself as the victim and then suck up to the mods when the Mods try to explain the facts of life and the rules of this board to him.

JB also doesn't waste nearly as much of his time on this board as many of us and so he does not seem so concerned about his "message board persona".
Click to expand...

I've met @jonnyboy and his family. Very nice guy. He definitely married up. I'm guessing blackmail or maybe a large dowry to his wife's family.
 
Shaboid said:
I think about how many telemarketing calls I get and it also pisses me off.
Click to expand...

My #1 rule for the phone is, if I don't recognize the #, I don't answer. And my #2 rule is if they don't leave a message, I made the right choice.
 
julius said:
My #1 rule for the phone is, if I don't recognize the #, I don't answer. And my #2 rule is if they don't leave a message, I made the right choice.
Click to expand...
Rule #3
If I do happen to answer they need to introduce themselves before asking if they have reached the person they are calling for.
If they don’t I will ask who is calling?
 
julius said:
My #1 rule for the phone is, if I don't recognize the #, I don't answer. And my #2 rule is if they don't leave a message, I made the right choice.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, due to my occupation I don't have the option for #1.
 
kjironman1 said:
Rule #3
If I do happen to answer they need to introduce themselves before asking if they have reached the person they are calling for.
If they don’t I will ask who is calling?
Click to expand...
Doesn't everybody do these things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Featured content

Back
Top