"Give Me Control 1st, Then I'll Tell You What I'll Do,.."

[BoberFett]

So basically you guys don't care what a politician says, so exactly what are you basing your vote on? Popularity? Looks? Party?

I get it, politicians lie, politicians aren't potential dictators so their promises hold little weight but when that politician comes up for re election to what standards are you holding them to? One would think you would look at their previous promises and look at what they accomplished, did they attempt to accomplish their promises?

Promises? Such as the most transparent administration in history?

Campaign promises mean dick, Ds will vote D, Rs will vote R. Everything else is noise.

 

[lopri]

Except that in one case (the ACA) the people explicitly made that information available.

In the other case (McConnell) the person is explicitly NOT making that information available.

Obama is also the first presidential candidate (albeit as a sitting president) to openly support same-sex marriage before the election. His re-election accompanied by the first ballot box wins (three of them) for the same-sex marriage.

 

[thraashman]

It doesn't matter at all what McConnell says or doesn't say. History has shown that the actions he take will be the most obstructive and destructive ones he can and that the only people who will support his actions are the most vile individuals in this country.

 

[senseamp]

It's a mood election, so turn on some Barry White, and let Mitch McConnell stick his tongue in your ear. He'll tell you where this is going in the morning.

 

[BoberFett]

LOL, we can always count on thraashman for idiotic hyperbole.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Imagine the money the R's are going to save on elections.
Just trust us and put the x beside the R, done

 

[Newell Steamer]

Next question?

:thumbsup:

Updated OP and thank you.

 

[cubby1223]

So basically you guys don't care what a politician says, so exactly what are you basing your vote on? Popularity? Looks? Party?

I get it, politicians lie, politicians aren't potential dictators so their promises hold little weight but when that politician comes up for re election to what standards are you holding them to? One would think you would look at their previous promises and look at what they accomplished, did they attempt to accomplish their promises?

Personally, I look at statistics more than anything else when preparing for elections. And the statistics say I make up 0.00000041% of the voting-age population in the U.S. And 0.000010% of Illinois. And 0.00018% of my U.S. congressional district. The level of knowledge I obtain before election day is inconsequential to the outcome of the election.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Except that in one case (the ACA) the people explicitly made that information available.

In the other case (McConnell) the person is explicitly NOT making that information available.

This is pretty baffling. You're literally trying to say that two polar opposites are the same thing. It's even more baffling that you're then complaining that other people are being argumentative for pointing that out.

Of course McConnell isn't going to say. I recall a certain President who spoke about the evils of national surveillance then did Bush one better. I don't trust any of them.

 

[fskimospy]

Personally, I look at statistics more than anything else when preparing for elections. And the statistics say I make up 0.00000041% of the voting-age population in the U.S. And 0.000010% of Illinois. And 0.00018% of my U.S. congressional district. The level of knowledge I obtain before election day is inconsequential to the outcome of the election.

Yeap. If your goal is to install your preferred candidate in office voting is irrational.

 

[BUnit1701]

He can't say what his the US Chamber of Commerce Crony Capitalisim's agenda is because they will loose conservative votes, mainly moving forward with 'Amnesty Lite' and not making anymore waves about Obamacare. Don't get too worked up comrades, the establishment Repugs won't let the right wingers do too much

 

[The Merg]

Meh. Is it really worse to say "I'm not going to tell you my plans until I'm elected" than to lay out a bunch of bullshit that you have no intention of following up on? Nothing said before the elections matters.

Impotent rage thread.

Good point!

(Dang it! I hate it when we agree.)

- Merg

 

[cubby1223]

Yeap. If your goal is to install your preferred candidate in office voting is irrational.

It actually really is. Statistically, voting is the least effective positive action an individual can do to help a candidate win.

 

[fskimospy]

It actually really is. Voting is about the least statistically effective action an individual can do to help a candidate get elected.

I find it funny when people mention the 2000 Florida election as why your vote matters because the spread between the candidates was ~500 votes. That means in the best case scenario you are ever going to see in your lifetime your vote would have comprised .2% of the difference between the candidates.

 

[cubby1223]

I find it funny when people mention the 2000 Florida election as why your vote matters because the spread between the candidates was ~500 votes. That means in the best case scenario you are ever going to see in your lifetime your vote would have comprised .2% of the difference between the candidates.

57 Presidential elections, I'll just estimate an average of 35 states per election, translating to you have a 0.05% chance your vote for President can swing the election by as high as 0.2%. I live in Illinois. The only time Illinois is a swing state are in years of a GOP blowout like Reagan in '84.

 

[FerrelGeek]

The current DC leadership needs to go, for they are corrupt stewards and not leaders.

FTFY

 

[FerrelGeek]

:thumbsup:

Updated OP and thank you.

At least you got the point. I'll give you props for that.

 

[xBiffx]

At least you got the point. I'll give you props for that.

x2

 

[thraashman]

LOL, we can always count on thraashman for idiotic hyperbole.

Having someone like you refer to me as idiotic would be like Hitler calling me a poor Nazi. Only if you started agreeing with me would I begin to consider my path incorrect. But so long as the vile such as yourself disagree with me, I know my path is a righteous one.

 

[werepossum]

It actually really is. Statistically, voting is the least effective positive action an individual can do to help a candidate win.

That's not the only concern here. Another is margin of win. Even if you can't swing your state, maybe you can help reduce the margin to the point they can't claim a mandate. No one's life, liberty or property are safe when either party can claim a mandate.

Also, if you're voting in a safe state for a third party candidate, at least one and probably both parties may wonder what they have to do to get that block of votes - or to prevent the other guy from getting them.

Saying your vote doesn't matter is like a mason saying there's no point in setting this block because it still won't be a building. Winning vote margins may be huge, but they are still composed of single votes like yours. (Well, in Chicago YMMV.)

 

[Fern]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/mcconnell-digs-hole-social-security-falls





This is some quite odd behavior.

Oh,.. and here is the sticking point;


If this was over some pedantic BS, like bus stop sign repair funding, then yes,.. by all means, tell us to STFU. But, this is over something pretty significant.

I understand that conservatives(EDIT) politicians are generally adverse to facts and figures, but this is over something pretty big, relevant to their success in being elected AND what they will actually be doing at the job!

What gives??

EDIT: Shut my mouth,..

Sort of an odd piece.

McConnell is not asking us voters "to give him control of the Senate". Heck, most can't even vote for him. That's up to the people in his state.

Furthermore, even if we all could vote for him it wouldn't be for control of the senate. That vote is done by senate members, not us.

I can see why he wouldn't disclose his intentions. His agenda is his only but the media will act like it's every Republican senate candidates' agenda. That would be stupid on his part.

I oppose privatization of SS. But this seems like the S.O.S. trotted out by Dems in every election: Scare the crap out of granny and pops with threats to SS. It's not going to happen and is a tiresome claim.

Fern

 

[Fern]

yeah that's bullshit.

tell us your plans. then i might vote for you. If you don't want to that's fine i won't vote for you.

Is he now running in IL?

Fern

 

[Fern]

So wait, you're trying to compare the refusal of McConnell to say what he would do when given power with a bill that was the subject of hundreds if not thousands of public meetings where its contents were discussed at length and where the entirety of the bill was available online for the public to peruse at any time.

Those sound totally the same to me.

Wow, revisionist history at its finest.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan" erc.

Fern

 

[Fern]

So basically you guys don't care what a politician says, so exactly what are you basing your vote on? Popularity? Looks? Party?
-snip-

What am I basing my vote on?

Don't know. Dumb question really since I (nor most here) don't live in Kentucky so I have no vote anyway.

If this is a story, it's a regional one. Not a national one.

Fern

 

[ivwshane]

What am I basing my vote on?

Don't know. Dumb question really since I (nor most here) don't live in Kentucky so I have no vote anyway.

If this is a story, it's a regional one. Not a national one.

Fern

It was a general question jackass!