Politics

Out of context: Reply #17033

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 33,773 Responses
  • mathinc0

    It's unconscionable the way media coverage works in elections. I think media coverage and corporate campaign contributions need to be reformed. Unfortunately the Supreme Court doesn't see it that way for the latter and nothing will ever be done about the former.

    For the past four months if you went to CNN to see what's going on in the GOP primaries you wouldn't even know that a guy named Ron Paul existed. Then when he started polling so well in Iowa that they couldn't ignore it any longer he got a little press. The minute he got third he was basically wiped off the website.. here's the first mention of him since:

    I'm not even sold on him.. but I hate all the other candidates so he's my horse. Whether you like him or not the guy has done astounding things for someone who is pretty much ignored completely by major news outlets.

    I wish they'd just homogenize the campaign process, put the whole thing on the web. No campaign ads, just one website that contained videos, voting records, etc. Take the marketing and all the money that's spent out of it, level the playing field. Make it easier for these politicians to be held accountable for their votes and issues when it comes time to consider them for a hirer office. Meh, just a dream.

    mathinc 0Permalink
    UpvoteDownvote
    Flag
    • i'm on board with thisBonSeff
    • super pac's are fucking bsBonSeff
    • I agree, waiting to see about Paul. Soft money (foreign and domestic), kickbacks, loopholes in system all evil.
      ********
    • Slush funds, etc.
      ********
    • How'd you think Obama got into the office. Hipster / Social Marketing edge, along with Bush sucking.
      ********
    • How much money was thrown at his ass, with his constituents knowing damn well he'd win and be paid back 10 fold.
      ********
    • Totally agree. With all the free technology available how in the world does it cost 744 mil to become president?!?mathinc
    • Was that the total amount?
      MY GOD! Imagine the kickbacks!?!?
      ********
    • Paul, as DrBombay pointed out, may run on a 3rd party ticket, to prove some point, which would give BHO pres again.
      ********
    • too many Tea Partiers and disenfranchised voters out there, they'll vote for him. Slice the R vote. Good night.
      ********
    • In that case then it would be Obama or Romney. Same robot, who really cares. I'd rather see some validity for amathinc
    • 3rd party candidate. More parties the better imo.mathinc
    • mathinc, I completely agree. I have been saying that for a while. Romney = Obama on a lot of levels. RomneyCare?
      ********
    • I don't think we should be like Europe on a lot of levels (not going into it), but their multi-party system makes sense.
      ********
    • I love the way the Germans do it.
      ********
    • Romney has said he would kill Obamacare by using waivers, not the same. Would end Consumer Protection office.DrBombay
    • Not the same at all, would deregulate everything. Not the same at all.DrBombay
    • What they say != what they do. I don't give a fuck about either of them tbh.mathinc
    • Not the same is the point.DrBombay
    • You win. It's not the same.mathinc
    • It's very fucking similar and you know it http://spectator.org….
      ********
    • What DrBombay is saying though is that it's not EXACTLY the same. He's right.mathinc
    • Romney is lying, that's fucking easy to see. He'd do the same shit.
      ********
    • Not EXACTLY, of course, nothing is EXACTLY the same, but it's damn near the fucking same shit.
      ********
    • You two are jerkoffs.DrBombay
    Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note
    SaveCancel

View thread