Post history

History for paulm

Things that make you go hmmmm

Back to topic

Current version

Posted April 18, 2018 03:15 · last edited April 18, 2018 03:17

el grapadura wrote:

paulm wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

 Don't they keep voting in representatives who run on anti-government spending platforms, and frequently deliver on those?

Yes, which was my original point. Their politicians are not representing their constituents accurately, by voting in policy that I don't think they want.

They are voting in identities, not policies, and they don't really have much choice, considering the absolutely locked down two-party system that they have. For example the organisation that runs their debates at election time is 100% funded by the two establishment parties, so they have a rule that no other parties are allowed in the debate. 

People need to break the shackles and vote for someone else, but it's hard when these two parties appear to be the only real option. It feels like a wasted vote. It's not though. 

No. Rather, this is the dissonance that I was talking about earlier. The politicians who get elected aren't hiding their agendas, in fact they sell them very hard. And then they get voted in. The issue is that when people get polled on issues, they can think of 'do we need to spend/invest more in x/y/z' as a good idea - and when that is framed in a political agenda context, i.e. this will mean more taxes, cutting spending elsewhere, or borrowing more, the voting results, in the US at least, tend to be quite different to the poll results conducted on a more abstract level (especially when the weird ideological dimension is added). Although this is hardly an American phenomenon - there's plenty of people here who want the Government to spend sharkloads on new roads, and who in the same breath make jokes about Taxcinda, etc.

The voters are voting in identities, not policies. They aren't even bothering to read the policies. 

Yes blame lies with the voter on that, they need to educate themselves. 

But at the same time, in the US it would feel like you have no choice. 

Both major parties agree that military spending should greatly increase, that the government should have greater leeway to spy on their own citizens, and plenty of other things. 

I believe most americans don't want those things in reality. 

Previous versions

1 version
Unknown editor edited April 18, 2018 03:17
el grapadura wrote:
paulm wrote:
el grapadura wrote:

 Don't they keep voting in representatives who run on anti-government spending platforms, and frequently deliver on those?

Yes, which was my original point. Their politicians are not representing their constituents accurately, by voting in policy that I don't think they want.

They are voting in identities, not policies, and they don't really have much choice, considering the absolutely locked down two-party system that they have. For example the organisation that runs their debates at election time is 100% funded by the two establishment parties, so they have a rule that no other parties are allowed in the debate. 

People need to break the shackles and vote for someone else, but it's hard when these two parties appear to be the only real option. It feels like a wasted vote. It's not though. 

No. Rather, this is the dissonance that I was talking about earlier. The politicians who get elected aren't hiding their agendas, in fact they sell them very hard. And then they get voted in. The issue is that when people get polled on issues, they can think of 'do we need to spend/invest more in x/y/z' as a good idea - and when that is framed in a political agenda context, i.e. this will mean more taxes, cutting spending elsewhere, or borrowing more, the voting results, in the US at least, tend to be quite different to the poll results conducted on a more abstract level (especially when the weird ideological dimension is added). Although this is hardly an American phenomenon - there's plenty of people here who want the Government to spend sharkloads on new roads, and who in the same breath make jokes about Taxcinda, etc.

The voters are voting in identities, not policies. They aren't even bothering to read the policies. 

Yes blame lies with the voter on that, they need to educate themselves. 

But at the same time, in the US it would feel like you have no choice. 

Both major parties agree that military spending should greatly increase, that the government should have greater leeway to spy on their own citizens, and plenty of other things. 

I believe most americans don't want those things in reality. 

But their entire election narrative was Trump vs Hillary and all the memes that came with it. Virtually no talk on policy, except for Trump's wall!

A hallmark of the presidential election before that was just how many issues Romney and Obama agreed upon. 

Where is the choice? It's the military industrial complex or bust, it seems.