Lifestyle > Train of Thought
What is the metric of success for the Iraqi elections?
Ant:
1. Go back to the beginning of the American Democracy and read the federalist papers. People were very well informed in our system.
2. Take out the campaign slogans in our election, and yadda yadda, and you do not have the iraqi election where people voted for "who they thought would do the best job." How the fuck did they vote for who they thought would do the best job, when 50% of the population thought they were voting for the president, and virtually they entire population had almost no knowledge of the candidates? Are you fucking retarded?
3. I think there is a big difference between the average American not really grasping the issues and the average Iraqi not even knowng who the candidates were of that they were voting for a national assembly. Dude fuck it... just stop talking unless you want to run for dumbest republican on this board. .
Thirteen:
--- Quote from: Ant on February 08, 2005, 11:07:59 PM ---1. Go back to the beginning of the American Democracy and read the federalist papers. People were very well informed in our system.
2. Take out the campaign slogans in our election, and yadda yadda, and you do not have the iraqi election where people voted for "who they thought would do the best job." How the fuck did they vote for who they thought would do the best job, when 50% of the population thought they were voting for the president, and virtually they entire population had almost no knowledge of the candidates? Are you fucking retarded?
3. I think there is a big difference between the average American not really grasping the issues and the average Iraqi not even knowng who the candidates were of that they were voting for a national assembly. Dude fuck it... just stop talking unless you want to run for dumbest republican on this board. .
--- End quote ---
1st off the entire population didn't vote... don't try and hope on the bush bandwagon...secondly, you don't even know how many people voted so how do you know how many of those voters didn't know anything about the candidates? you're grabbing at air with your reasoning... when i use the amount of voters to back up my argument, you toss them out from lack of proof, but then you base your argument on the same voters... doesn't make much sense to me
now if they thought they were voting for president...weren't they still voting for the person they thought would do the best job? i mean this is basic logic....do you think they found out they were voting for people to write up thier laws and then looked back and said "oh shit... i voted for abdul jamar because he drove a taxi very well, but he doesn't know shit about writing documents....we're screwed!" also one of the shiite leaders is in the lead meaning that a majority of these people recognized one of the names and voted for that person...so seeing as there were roughtly 1000 candidates, you would lead people to believe that all these voters that knew nothing of these people just guessed and ended up picking the same guy? so there goes your whole "they didn't know the candidates theory out of the window"
and secondly, one misinformed voter is better than a different type of misinformed voter? they are both examples of the flaws of voting... just because the candidate got to lie, and talk trash about another candidate makes him better than a candidate we don't know about? you have some good reasoning
so you think it's far better to vote for groups of liars that bash each other than to vote for someone you don't know... they both seem equally stupid to me
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version