MT residents thoughts on Steve Bullock
- Thread starter Ben Nicholson
- Start date
- Status
Nameless Range
Well-known member
The fact that we have a DNC and an RNC that clearly favor candidates, choose who gets the spotlight via some sort of arbitrary criteria, and then throw ten of those people on stage two nights in a row, who with the confidence of a religious nut use tweetable sentences to distill subjects that would take a lifetime to fully understand, is so effed. It's a weird illusory assessment.
I like Bullock, but even if he were up there for round one I see no way he would have rose to the top. In fact, I think the more someone "wins" a debate, the less I like them. It's not about logic or facts, it's about the signaling.
All that said, of all the Dems I saw the last two days, I liked Gabbard most.
I like Bullock, but even if he were up there for round one I see no way he would have rose to the top. In fact, I think the more someone "wins" a debate, the less I like them. It's not about logic or facts, it's about the signaling.
All that said, of all the Dems I saw the last two days, I liked Gabbard most.
@Nameless Range have you listened to her on the Rogan podcast?
She’s definitely more sensible than most the rest
She’s definitely more sensible than most the rest
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Meanwhile, Governor Steve Bullock was featured on the Stephen Colbert late show in a debate with nine other Steve Bullocks. As expected, Steve Bullock easily was the winner, as he clearly articulated his assertions about his strong candidate credentials and his commitment to fighting against dark money.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I have yes. It's in those long form conversations that last hours as opposed to ten people fighting for maximum-gotcha that you see who is full of chit or not, and though I don't agree with her on everything, I think she is legit and genuine.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I will say that I don't think an alternative system for choosing candidates is obvious. I don't think Americans have the attention span to find out what candidates really think vs what they are just saying.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
375H&H
Well-known member
Asleep Steve Bullock would have got him in.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
It's kind of entertaining. Like watching a 20 car demolition derby.
elkduds
Well-known member
Bullock won the nationally televised debate last night on the Colbert Show.
Watching the debates, my main thought throughout was one the Bern spoke to: We have essentially the same flea circus of a presidential debate process that we have had for @ least the last 40 years. It favors the best reality star or sound bite artist. It reduces complex considerations to 3 seconds of blather by a talking head. Evidently voters make their crucial decision based on this process, and here we are. Here we shall remain if voters don't demand more substance from candidates. Disgusting process yielding abysmal results. I am not optimistic about how this all goes forward.
I thought Bennet sounded well-considered, given the obvious constraints. And I know where he's @ on public lands/environment, discussion of which is glaring in its absence so far in this campaign.
Watching the debates, my main thought throughout was one the Bern spoke to: We have essentially the same flea circus of a presidential debate process that we have had for @ least the last 40 years. It favors the best reality star or sound bite artist. It reduces complex considerations to 3 seconds of blather by a talking head. Evidently voters make their crucial decision based on this process, and here we are. Here we shall remain if voters don't demand more substance from candidates. Disgusting process yielding abysmal results. I am not optimistic about how this all goes forward.
I thought Bennet sounded well-considered, given the obvious constraints. And I know where he's @ on public lands/environment, discussion of which is glaring in its absence so far in this campaign.
Last edited:
I am curious if placing preference points per candidate would enable multiple parties...
Say Dems, Repubs, Indep, Liber...
first vote ranks 4 points, fourth vote ranks 1 point...
If a preference scale was in place, I believe multiple parties would begin to form a base worth contention come future elections. See? World problem's solved in 37 words...
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I am curious if placing preference points per candidate would enable multiple parties...
Say Dems, Repubs, Indep, Liber...
first vote ranks 4 points, fourth vote ranks 1 point...
If a preference scale was in place, I believe multiple parties would begin to form a base worth contention come future elections. See? World problem's solved in 37 words...
It sounds like you are describing instant runoff voting, which is a superior voting system to our own IMO.
Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is a type of ranked preferential voting method used in single-seat elections with more than two candidates. Instead of indicating support for only one candidate, voters in IRV elections can rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each voter's top choice. If a candidate has more than half of the vote based on first-choices, that candidate wins. If not, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. The voters who selected the defeated candidate as a first choice then have their votes added to the totals of their next choice. This process continues until a candidate has more than half of the votes. When the field is reduced to two, it has become an "instant runoff" that allows a comparison of the top two candidates head-to-head. Compared to plurality voting, IRV can reduce the impact of vote-splitting when multiple candidates earn support from like-minded voters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
Lots of interesting voting theories out there. https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/D6trAzh6DApKPhbv4/a-voting-theory-primer-for-rationalists
I was a bit bummed they didn't debate hand size. Maybe they will get on track next month.It's kind of entertaining. Like watching a 20 car demolition derby.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Patience. Wait for the ratings to slip a little before bringing back the hand size debate.
RockyMtnMT
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2019
- Messages
- 81
Lots of drivel being spewed. Someone asked a legit question that was never answered. How many people that want to come to the United States should we let in? Our country has never let everyone that wants to immigrate here to do it. Every one of us do have ancestors that were "selected" and we should always be thanking God that they were selected so that we can live in the greatest country the world has ever known.
RockyMtnMT
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2019
- Messages
- 81
Maybe one of you really smart guys can help me out. How old are the glaciers in gnp? When did they start melting?
RockyMtnMT
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2019
- Messages
- 81
What made it so hot in the 30's when most of the high temp records were set? Man made global warming? Then when it got so cold in the 70's, that must have been Carter and the gas lines caused by the shortage of fuel that brought the temps down? And to think during Carter's administration they were worried about the impending ice age. Little did they know they were saving its from global warming by creating a gas shortage.
RockyMtnMT
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2019
- Messages
- 81
We are all for Bullock vetoing a bill that would ban sanctuary cities because it would save money. Besides there are laws that ban hiring illegal aliens we just need to spend more money enforcing that. Did I get that right?
RockyMtnMT
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2019
- Messages
- 81
Did anyone here who's ancestors immigrated receive instant welfare when they arrived?
- Status
Similar threads
