The proper term is Tionerroroct. 
Humans just call them terrors, of which Tacet takes offense too.
In regard to actual terrorists, I somewhat don’t blame them for their actions. It is primarily political agitation and radical extremist interpretations of their religion that got them that way. Yes, they have to be dismantled, but war cannot kill an ideology. War is essentially what started their ideology in the first place.
Well to be honest you have to give the government mad props for what it has pulled off.
Give the illusion that people have a choice between two parties and get them devoted to one. Then sit back and do whatever you want while the citizens fight over which imaginary friend is better. People are so busy arguing about which party is better that they do not really see what is happening.
Republicans tell you to vote for them and they will fix everything. Nothing gets done and they blame the Democrats.
Democrats tell you to vote for them and they will fix everything. Nothing gets done and they blame the Republicans.
Wash rinse and repeat…
The real blame falls on the uninformed citizens that allow this to continue.
If you want amazing unbiased media dismantling and talk about the real things that we are being distracted from go listen to:
These guys are funny, and informative, take no political stance but dismantle the lies of the media not just in the U.S. But european also. (Mostly Netherlands).
Here’s some perspective on things:
The USA is currently holding primaries. So ONLY Democrats get to vote on a democratic nominee, and ONLY Republicans get to vote on the Republican nominee.
In generall elections (where EVERYONE votes) you tend to get centralist candidates. Because people as a whole like that. But in a primary where you restrict voting to just people with strong political convictions, you can sometimes get really skewed & extreme candidates. The popularity Bernie Sanders & Donald Trump are enjoying from their own parties would probably not translate into popularity in a general election.
Further increasing this bias is the fact that very few people even bother to vote in primaries. It’s like 15% of voters actually vote. So what you are seeing is in NO WAY a representation of what the majority of voters want. Instead, you are getting the choice of the most extreme 15% of half of the population, on both sides.
All of which is to say - the 2016 primaries are pretty wild, but do NOT in ANY WAY represent a reasonable sample of the US population.
This is not exactly true.[quote=“Grimmorith, post:31, topic:6700”]
There are only two real parties left
[/quote]
Not necessarily.
The squirrel knows nuts better than any of us.[quote=“CSZ, post:36, topic:6700”]
A terror furry
[/quote]
Who is the terror furry?[quote=“DonBoba, post:40, topic:6700”]
Wheres the difference between a zoo and a political campaign?
[/quote]
One wears a suit and throws poo and the other is in a cage.
We sowed our greed into their soil and they grew anger in return.
I avoid media bias by going straight to the source (being the candidates officail websites.) If it isn’t on the site then they are not working to do (it).
As an informed voter (lol i hope) i will give this a try.
I can understand trump but bernie’s popularity is just getting off the ground in my opinion. I do like (sanders) transparency though.
I overestimated the primaries then.
Actually the rules for primaries vary from state to state. They can be open (where anyone can vote and choose which party’s primary they want to participate in, but the voter can only participate in 1 primary) or closed (where you must be registered to the party holding that primary and can not vote in any other.)
Much of Sanders’ successes have come from open primaries where he could attract independents. And Trump’s notoriety has drawn more people to republican primaries.
All this if course is separate from Caucases which has their own set of rules. Things really do get quite complicated beneath the apparent “we vote for who we want and that’s it.”
Also do not forget the “popular” vote where the votes do not matter cause they were not put in the right area.
Even if you win the popular vote you can still lose the election.
While true, I don’t really approve of this sentiment. In my experience it’s used as a justification for inaction, rather than anything productive. You might as well say “If I go to the polls, I might get into a car accident and die.”
Gerrymandering at the state level is a HUGE problem - absolutely. But at the national level, there is very strong correlation between popular vote and winning the election.
Gerrymandering is disgusting, but then so also is having the electoral college decide against overwhelming popular vote.
I realize it is not Tuesday and we are not eating Tacos, but the crew of the Enterprise just might be reacting to some of the politically charged rhetoric in this thread.
;tldr KITTEH: blasted beatniks smoked all my catnip.
There is only one person to vote for and there is only one reason to vote for her…
The comedy gold of hearing these words:
“And here comes President Clinton and her First Gentleman Bill!”
Ol’ Slick Willy C is the Nation’s FIRST First GENTLEMAN!! 
Are you kidding? Either candidate would be comedy gold.
First gentleman, or first playboy lady?
I know it has already been stated, but I would just like to clarify that statement is wrong. Only closed primary states are like that. States that have open primaries can vote in either as any affiliation, and in some can even vote in both. Mixed primaries also allow a form of this, but that too changes quite a bit state by state.
The whole system is really messed up. xD
I could not figure the question in the poll – is it who one wants to win or who will most likely win?
As a general comment, US keeps handing out surprises for me. The election was usually just the ‘douche and the turd’ (Douche and Turd - Wikipedia) but it managed to lower the bar significantly for every next election.
Meanwhile de facto annihilated the constitution got annihilated US managed to build a cop state and spice it with socialism. And now will give the power to the bitch that made evident must be kept as far away from it decades back? And the alternatives are a communist and a clown?
If the rest of the world would not look for all the collateral damage I’d have a really good laugh. Especially when someone stands up speaking the superiority of the “democracy” and how it must be exported everywhere else. What need to happen for a wake up call?
It’s designed so that the candidates the party “leaders” want are the nominees. That’s why EVERY SINGLE fringe candidate has never been nominated by a major party.
People are crazy to think that what Trump says is what he really thinks. He has flat out said he is saying insane things to garner attention, because politics is a popularity contest. Anyone who takes the time to read his policies will see that he’s actually quite moderate. His opponents are just using the same old tactic of fear-mongering. Politicians aren’t progressive thinkers, so they will always resort to attacking their opponent instead of focusing on THEIR OWN stance. Government nowadays is essentially akin to running a business, something Trump has had massive success in.
TL;DR: Trump’s trolling everyone, it’s working and he’ll probably win and be the best President the USA has had in the last century.
I’m Canadian, but I follow politics very closely. Clinton is beating Sanders because most Americans think socialism = communism. Clinton will struggle against Trump because she’s about the shadiest candidate in American political history. She’s been caught violating a ton of laws and procedures and “hoarding” confidential information on unauthorized hard drives. How she’s not in jail is beyond me.
So have other US presidents WHILE they were presidents, and instead of going to jail they get re-elected…
While being President? The President is authorized to view any and all “top secret” or “confidential” information. It’s a right that comes with the office.
Violating laws isn’t.
It’s really beside the point if Trump does or does not believe the hateful and disturbing things he has said. This is real life not a reality show. The issue is that he is stoking the fires of a volatile situation. Just take a look at the violent mess that his rallies had become. It’s insane, and it’s real.
So, no, I don’t think the guy that manipulates people’s base bigotry and fear will be a good leader for the country. His sort of odious rhetoric is dangerous. In my opinion, you can’t care for your country and play such an irresponsible game.