Author Topic: Vladimir Putin wins Russian presidential election with over 73% of the vote  (Read 520 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 16706
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
^^ See what I mean -- case in point.     ::unknowncomic::

Pshh, it's all good.

"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Offline AlanS

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 7326
  • Proud Infidel
^^ See what I mean -- case in point.     ::unknowncomic::

Pshh, it's all good.

Bless his heart. ::danceban::
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

Thomas Jefferson

Online Syzygy

  • Likes the place
  • **
  • Posts: 90
::curtsy4::

I asked about admitting DocTroc; I should have asked about this character, too.

As an Admin, I can ban 'em (and I usually do, right away) and then a couple others here get on me 'cause they didn't get to play with the Lefty like a rrrrrubber mouse.

Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't ..........

Aw Mom, please can I keep him? He is fun to play with.
Look Ma, He even does tricks. Look - see - he provides his own charts.

Yes Syzygy,  I know his schtick.  Its already in evidence here - but that is par for the course. No liberal  will ever respond directly to any point you make unless they feel they have a chance of refuting it. And if they can't?  All they can ever do is deflect, but I take a certain amount of pleasure in seeing if I can get him to  do what I expect him to next.

 ::laughonfloor:: ::laughonfloor::

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 44014
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
I'm done with the wee rodent... he's all yours Weisshaupt!  Let Pan know when you're done. 

 ::hat-tip::
Irrumabo!  GOP? - Nope. No more. They made their bed, now let them die in it.*
* © Libertas (H/T Glock32)

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5260
It's a two-party system and those two parties are the Democrats and the Republicans IMO. I'm honestly surprised that there's disagreement about this. Yes there are more than two points of view and two ways of thinking about things but somehow in 2016 94% of voters cast a ballot for the nominee of one of these two parties. Americans largely decided to disregard their own views and vote for one of these two candidates because that's how the system works. If you don't vote for "the lesser of two evils" then you're "throwing your vote away". Or so thinks roughly 94% of the voting population.

Citation needed- If you are in here trying to change minds, then the burden of proof is on you. You suggest there is a cycle that, as a result of our government's own  operation,  automatically creates and perpetuates two parties. I suggest that is not the case, and that at times only one party really exists.
Also explained that one way of detecting a captured party would be to look at its success rate at passing new legislation enacting its stated  policies and repealing the  legislation of the opposing party. 

If any given dictator  had placed an  "R" and a "D" next to names on the  ballots of their "free elections" , would they have had a "two party" system? Two party implies there are two , opposing factions attempting to control things and take power.   If you want to show there is indeed a two party system in play,  then simply suggesting that different labels are used is hardly evidence of that, is it?

If the majority of both parties feel like they are voting for the "lesser of two evils"  then please provide data showing that.  I  would not be at all surprised that was the case in the last election cycle..given the abject nature  and criminal offenses  of Clinton  were so bad that even Democrats couldn't ignore them.. ( I still find it very interesting that Democrats find Trump unfit for office because of locker room banter about pussy, but Bill Clinton is accepted even when its proven he sexually harasses interns. Tribal loyalty is very strong with Democrats.) 

but I certainly don't think most Democrats  thought  of Obama  as "the lesser of two evils"  - or are you suggesting that Obama was also  bad candidate and evil?
I suspect that support among Democrats for Obama was High  and that they voted for Obama because they believed in him, not because they felt he would suck, but would be marginally better than McCain or Romney.

What level of education do you have, and what are you trained in, if I may ask?
Did your education include a course on logic and fallacy?

Or is Syzygy's description of your tactics accurate? Do you intend to simply ignore and refuse to respond to the points I make, because you have no intention of engaging in a good faith discussion?

Here are some  charts of my own: Can you stay above level 4 on this chart? Will you follow the flow chart?  If you can't, why would any person want to converse with you?


« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 09:04:04 AM by Weisshaupt »

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5260

Do you think there is any merit to this as it's explained here?

Sure, I said its entirely plausible. However you have yet to provide any evidence that is what occurs. The article you cite ( did you read it?)  actually details  exceptions to this statistical phenomenon - not so much a law as a statistical likelihood. But that is a long way from proving that having a single winner in a given district  is the cause, or even the only cause. Cum Hoc ergo Propter hoc is a fallacy. Again, I ask, did you take  a logic and fallacy course  at any point?

Further this still assumes a two party system, which I do not believe you have shown to exist.

I note that - according to  Syzygy's predictions, you did not address a single point of mine, nor did you agree to follow the flow chart.  Is there a reason for this?







 

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5260
So I ask for your opinion if you could please keep it brief, why do you think that through the great majority of our Republic's history power has been overwhelmingly shared between only two parties? Corruption? Collusion? Why is two the perfect number instead of three, or four, or one for that matter?

Is that even English?
Its certainly a Non Sequitur.

As previously stated, there are many factors that encourage certain politcal affiliations  at different times and in different places. In fact the GOP was a third party tat replaced the Whig party in the lead up to the Civil war, so  there are certainly circumstances that not only allow for third parties in your system , but in fact allow them to become a new dominant party.  There are certain economies of scale that drive the formation of parties, and since a political party is based in ideology, perhaps there are are simply two ideologies that tend to be reflected in such parties.  For instance, maybe there is on ideology that sees people as the property and wards of the state, and another that sees them as sovereign individuals,  and that only after one of those two ideologies has been adequately wiped out in a nation, do party's break into smaller factions, since the larger, more important, questions are held already in agreement?

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5260

you say "There are certain economies of scale that drive the formation of parties".

It's been some 158 years since the ascendancy of the most recent major political party, the Republicans. Can you explain your theory of "economies of scale" as they relate to this, and why they have not driven the ascendency of another major party in so long? I think that's a bad explanation.

Also you say "since a political party is based in ideology, perhaps there are are simply two ideologies that tend to be reflected in such parties". Do you really think there are only two possible ideologies to be represented?

Economies of scale means exactly that. That a pooled pile of cash and a pooled set of administrative resources to promote an politcal agenda  is more efficient than many separate organizations  with their separate piles of cash and administrative resources. I am guessing you never took an economics course either?

Can you suggest a third world view not represented  by the ideas:

1) An individual owns himself and serves others only by choice
2) An individual is owned by others and serves them before he may serve himself

I remind you that you are the one with the premise you haven't proven.
Kindly refrain from asking me questions about my ideas if you refuse , apparently maliciously, in bad faith, and with a dogmatically closed mind, to answer questions put to you.
 

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 16706
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
I banned him.  IT.
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Online Alphabet Soup

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4824
  • Hier standt ich. Ich kann nicht anders
Well that was...........interesting

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 44014
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
It has to be that common Prog-Virus symptom - misery, which I can only guess is a vestigial conciousness resembling the condition known as cognitive dissonance that normals experience when confronted with BS that threatens their invioble dogma...and the unfortunate knee-jerk instant gratification of imposing misery on others they deem deserving as a surrogate pacifier since they can no longer suck their mommies teat.
Irrumabo!  GOP? - Nope. No more. They made their bed, now let them die in it.*
* © Libertas (H/T Glock32)