Why do Americans keep electing people they don't approve of?
 

The Democratic system relies on voters voting for the people that will do the job of making their lives better or at least not worse and people they approve of. BUT;

http://thehigherlearning.com/wp-cont...bs-resize2.jpg

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gal...gn7zps4hzw.png

This shows who you could have voted for. Instead, you voted for the people you don't approve and don't want. 2016 Presidential Candidates (Presidency 2016)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...,_2016#Results Look at who you voted for. There was nothing but your own will to change Washington, to change Washington. And you didn't.

So keep on arguing that Clinton is better than Bush and keep voting for the very people who are fucking you, to carry on fucking you. So far I'm the only one saying this, the rest of you are still stuck in the mud.

Since it takes millions and millions of dollars to run campaigns, unless you are rich or have "backing" you simply can not compete with the parasites already in place and sucking the blood of the country.

People are afraid of change - PERIOD

I always thought if they banned paid commercial advertising Americans would have better candidates and more competitive elections. Force the candidates to get out and talk to the people more -- more voices might get heard.

I think it is the election process that produces this disdain for elected politicians. The 30 second political commercial has to be banned -- Internet ads too.

Trump's upset victory is a harbinger of the future. Communication when direct, even on platforms like Twitter, Facebook or Youtube, allow some discussion between politicians and voters. Internet campaigning is no different than the whistle-stop train campaigns of the last century really. News media is fine -- good or bad -- it is a dialog for the voter.

People can better judge the politician by his words and his record.

Unpopularity of the US Supreme Court is another matter. People do not like the Court's interpretation of the law. The laws come from Congress and many are politically motivated. So, we are back to the same problem -- the wrong people are being elected. Some of the laws are bad -- who makes the laws?

Because people are as dumb as fuck and breed like rats. The movie Idiocracy comes to mind

its not an election it is a money race...the # 1, 2 & 3 most important factors in the money race is money, money and money...skill and stuff comes at a distant #4....waaaaay distant...waaaay....

The people that will get 100% approval ratings will never run for office.

Not the only one Paul, I have been voting 3rd party in all elections, right down to the local town councilman. The problem is too many Americans are married to a party above all else (see crocket threads for example).

Congress is a different animal, the whole country thinks they are a pile of shite, except for my guy, my guy bring lot's of milk from the government teat back to my district, so he is good, fuck them all!!! except my guy, he is good for America (me).

Throw the whole pile in a lava pit and start over.

Schizophrenia ...

@jeff;

There is a whole political class in this country.
What makes you think you can throw the whole pile in the lava pit?
They will eat you for dinner and spit out the bones metaphorically.

What third party? I am assuming the Libertarian Party. The Libertarian Party are never going to be a mainstream party because most people do not want to throw out the good with the bad and live under economic Darwinism.

Throwing them all under the bus is not a solution. That is a not very well thought out call for revolution.

If you ask people directly, they like their congress person but the others are horrible. Just a devil you know issue.

America is a pseudo democracy protected by guns...:BangBang:

Absolute rubbish. Getting a message to the people has never been easier or cheaper.

Unless those people are idiots and more interest in Kim Kardashian that who runs the country.

The Internet is a great place to get a message across. The problem for politicians is they are crap at selling themselves.

Explain in details what the problems are and how problematic the solutions are. Don't claim one can fix everything by just saying it. Explain how the solutions work.

Of course, I'm assuming people are intelligent enough to follow the processes.

Are the Supreme Court's decisions really objected to, or is their a minority with big mouths who claim the country doesn't like them?

For instance banning people on a no-fly list from owning weapons is common sense. As is limiting the power of weapons a civilian can own. But if you listen to some, they will tell everyone the government wants to disarm you. As if ordinary people would last a few days up against the Armed Forces.

for fucks sakes, can we put that horrible movie to rest already? it's a piece of shit... was a piece of shit, continues to be a piece of shit... it is nothing more than hipster porn..

mike judge is a hack with very little to say, he's as deep as beavis and butthead, who he created as well...

Yeah because electing 47 year old Barack Hussein Obama was more of the same :disgust

Tell that to Sanders whom got pretty much zero air time on tv.

It's easy to say internet but not everyone lives on the internet.

The fact is Hillary easily got 80% more air time than Sanders and that's likely what cost him the nomination.

I forgot who said it but an ancient greek proverb about democracy says:
"the best way to silence a wise man is to give voice to fools"

the poor and uneducated have more kids than smart people...reverse natual selection is happening in all countries...it is just a matter of time before idiocracy becomes a prophecy...the easiest place for idiocracy to happen is in countries with small voter turnouts...the critical mass of dumb people is sooner achieved in such countries...

@paul

Politicians hire political consultants and strategists for this.

If they want to pay me $100K a month maybe I'll explain it a bit :laughing-

I assume what you said was rhetorical ...

Americans voted for Hilary tho. And got trump. So who's electing who?

You missed my point (or I did not state it clearly) that people do not do research. They only watch TV and the names they see flashing before their zombie like gaze is all they remember.

The more time you show a zombie something the more likely they are to just go with what they are familiar with.

Yes, their is more interest in Kim Kardashian than who "runs" the country.

http://i.imgur.com/EMAFXgA.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/7Es8gN3.png

I think you have a very valid point here. People do not research their candidates.

A poll the other day said 67% of Republicans believe unemployment went up under Obama, when the reality is unemployment was cut in half during Obama's term.

Whatever. It is what it is. Let's hope Trump doesn't fuck it up too much.

lack of choice

it's the same as this in every country atm though. Look at the UK, idiots wanting out of the EU, same environment as America & it's voting for presidency.

:2 cents:

Sure is a mystery...

They're not idiots. They're people who have lost income from being in the EU. Unless you're on Spanish Benefits the EU had done nothing for you but dumped Spain into debt.

Then he has to go to the Internet. And voters have to realise that Clinton was picked for them.

Of course, passing a simple law ensuring all candidates get the same airtime as their standing in polls. would solve the issue.

How much airtime did Trump get?

This is why Americans disapprove of the people they vote for.

You need to vote for people who will scare the Dems and Reps into listening to the voters and not the donors. The fear of getting thrown under a bus is the only answer. But you won't do it.

Then they're dumb. Because the devil they know is fucking them.

I had hoped he would make more changes. The problem came when he realised he's not a dictator. which is what's going to be Trump's problem. It needs a bigger swing in voting patterns to change the course of the few.

Watch Europe for inspiration.

Yes, we know they say the right things to get in. Then do as they're told to once they're in. Those $billions come with chains.

Trump created a media spectacle -- Hillary had to buy her time because she was not a spectacle. That's fair.

By being so controversial and offensive Trump won getting tons of publicity for free.

Bernie Saunders was not electable IMHO. Too bad the Democrat party has shoved him aside in the Senate leadership this coming session. New boss -- same as the old boss.

So, it is not a matter of equal time -- Hillary was only bad news while Trump was mixed news. Trump had a better message to slightly smaller group of followers. He won by being what his 'constituency' wanted to hear. Now comes the really hard part ...

What did Obama even do in the 8 years he was in office?

Sorry, I did miss your point.

Then they have no right to complain. Along with people who are scared to try to change the way their country is run. This better the devil you know attitude is what the billionaires rely on.

We're being fucked by migration, free trade, Nanny States and the obsession to spend more than we earn. That includes Americans who think low taxes is a way to run a modern country. Then vote for their man to get them money from the increasing debt and more goods made outside the US.

The future is going to be catastrophic for our children.

just no logic

So all those people sitting in the two houses are doing nothing and just for show.

I agree with you that nothing has changed to make Americans lives better, over the last 8 and even 20 years. Is that only down to the President or are their more levels of Government involved?

I agree, especially with the "Now comes the really hard part". He will be up against 535 Members of Congress. Some will go with him and I think most will try to stop him. Even Republicans if he tries to slow down illegal migration and export of jobs.

That's why people have to start making those 535 Members of Congress scared of losing their jobs. Voting for an outsider is the way to scare them. Thinking you can change them and vote for them is foolish.

What's the Third biggest Party in the US?

I know. Voting for the same people to keep fucking you is illogical.

no logical explanation obviously...

There is no larger 3rd or 4th party. That is a big part of the problem.

There is no 'uncola.' There are two colas to choose from. Both the Libertarians and the Greens are diametrically opposing extreme viewpoints.

I find little congruence with either of them and very limited congruence with the Democrat or Republican parties. So, I end up choosing who will do the least harm to my personal position. I don't find my situation that bad. So, trashing what is there and starting over is not a real option I am willing to entertain.

The ball is in the Republicans court 100% now. They will get the blame or credit due them -- no excuses accepted.

First...for the umpteenth time America is NOT a Democracy, it never has been and untill we trash the Constitution it never will be, although I will allow that the presidential election is a SOMEWHAT democratic process.

But to fix the problem I think we have to get rid of the two party system for one, and as someone else pointed out we have to get rid of paid political ads.

But the deeper problem comes in educating the voters, back when there was a concept in the media called equal time, that has pretty much been abandoned. I think there is a responsibility for the major networks to provide free, equal time to candidates, they are after all "public airwaves"

I don't know but maybe proportional representation is an answer, I haven't given that a lot of thought but I know it works elsewhere.

There is also an argument that people on the public dole lose the right to vote, I tend to disagree with that one even though it IS evident that people trade votes for handouts.

As my friend Tim Walker wrote today on MikeSouth.Com It is becoming increasingly difficult to determine where the truth is even in major news stories, it seems everyone is skeptical, and rightly so, the media has become the tool of the politicians to scare us into relinquishing our Constitutional rights. It's a complex problem with no easy answer...but it does need to be fixed. thats my :2 cents:

It's always funny and scary af watching the gong show from the North. It will be interesting to see how Trump presidency directly affects Canada.

A Trump hotel in every major city by 2020. I hear Saskatoon & Regina aren't off the table.

The ball is in voters court 100% now. Because so long as people vote for Republicans or Democrats funded by the 1%. The 1% win. In reality, the US isn't a two party State if it only gets money from one minority. So voting for those outsiders is the only way to grasp back control. Once in power the Greens are faced with the real world and have to change their policies. However, reducing fossil fuels is a great policy.

The biggest problem the US faces is population versus jobs that pay well enough to keep a family and raise enough taxes. If that trend isn't reversed their will be real problems.

I know you keep going on about this but life in the US amazing. I think you are confused as this point. Go to a country with serious shit going on and then you will see some politics that makes you cringe.

Paul, it did reverse. We have a labor shortage, and it is only going to get worse. The next ten years are demographic disaster here. Tons of newly retired and not many new workers.
Don't drink the kool-aid. The big issues facing the US and Europe is declining growth and population, combined with large groups of pensioners. It will even out as we get used to it but the change is going to be the issue.

The Voters :1orglaugh

They just elected a new swamp.

If you think a bunch of billionaires should run the US government -- you just got what you asked for.

The point that most miss is that only half of the US eligible voters even voted in the election - that means that half of the population really doesn't give a shit what happens right off the bat.
The half that does vote depends on mass media to make their decision...the better message you can put out on media, the better chance you will have...it's an advertisers mantra.

With the money that is involved currently in the US election process, you will only get to see candidates that have a money machine...that is what this country "runs on" right now

The people supplying the money will be the deciders...not conspiracy theories or magic...it's just a fact right now. And it won't change ever...no matter how many people say they are going to "drain the swamp" or run the lobbyists out of town...ALL candidates depend on that money - it's a basic need in a republic (The US is not and never has been a democracy no matter what you were taught in grade school) :thumbsup

Like where? I'm only concerned in the First World.

The idea of a labour shortage would lead to higher wages, the opposite is happening.

Jobs that pay a decent wage are disappearing. Exported or going automated. Yes, there will be problems with raising enough in pensions because lower wages means lower taxes and more Government expenses.