2012 Election Megathread

[Lalam24]

How about we settle down for a moment then realize how much both candidates suck, then realize America's probably still gonna suck either way?

>implying it hasn't always sucked

It's always been a pissing match between two political parties.  The idealogy behind the two has changed over time, but neither have shown more benefit to the country than to their own individual party.

[Ad Bot]

[Momentum]

How about we settle down for a moment then realize how much both candidates suck, then realize America's probably still gonna suck either way?

no lets blame obama!

blame obama because its raining!

blame obama because my dog shat on my floor!

blame obama because i was 2 cents off enough money to buy milk!

[Doomonkey]

Excuse me?  How the hell is media inherently liberal?  What the hell are you even implying by free media?

Freedom of the Press is a right granted to the people and enforced by the government. One of the classic liberal beliefs is that the rights are to be protected firmly by the government. This is why social services and the right to choose and such are considered liberal.

The classic conservative position on the same idea is that freedoms are the job of the individual to protect and the government can sometimes infringe on some freedoms. The bill of rights was added to the constitution because the liberals of the time (anti-federalists) wanted the freedoms to be secured by the highest law.

So the idea that the press can print whatever and is protected is liberal.

[Kimon]

>implying it hasn't always sucked

It's always been a pissing match between two political parties.  The idealogy behind the two has changed over time, but neither have shown more benefit to the country than to their own individual party.

I don't think we've ever been in a lot of debt recently, and I don't think any of them will do stuff, so we're probably just gonna have to go along with whatever stuffty cards we're dealt.

[Nickelob Ultra]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=2IG3LgusJ3Q#t=196s

remember to vote libertarian so they can get at least 5% hopefully

I don't think we've ever been in a lot of debt recently,

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

you should read things often

[GEN.Fire Bird]

CNN

oh god, my sides!

[Kimon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=2IG3LgusJ3Q#t=196s

remember to vote libertarian so they can get at least 5% hopefully
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

you should read things often

forget not what I meant. I meant I don't think we have had this bad of a debt before, as in like 10 years ago or something.

[Lalam24]

Freedom of the Press is a right granted to the people and enforced by the government. One of the classic liberal beliefs is that the rights are to be protected firmly by the government. This is why social services and the right to choose and such are considered liberal.

The classic conservative position on the same idea is that freedoms are the job of the individual to protect and the government can sometimes infringe on some freedoms. The bill of rights was added to the constitution because the liberals of the time (anti-federalists) wanted the freedoms to be secured by the highest law.

So the idea that the press can print whatever and is protected is liberal.

A law implicated by liberal ideals isn't implicit of its relatives being liberal.  It's a two way street, aswell -- it's a protected freedom.  It's a freedom (conservative) protected (liberal).  News stations are NOT inherently liberal and do NOT all support liberal ideals.  Using this sort of information to try and state that Fox may be credible is absolutely atrocious.  Again, see that nonbiased study showing how illiterate Fox News viewers are in comparison to others.

Protecting a freedom may be liberal, but to state that the people who promote these freedoms ARE liberal is hilarious.

[Fracture]

oh god, my sides!

What?

[WALK2222]

[Kimon]

Ok, haha but do you really think that provides any facts about Romney or what his plans are? That's definitely not what he would do.
Yeah that was pretty sarcastic but I hope that picture wasn't actually meant to slander Romney or whatever. That's just silly.

[Ben Grapevine]

Obama did a few of those things lol

[Dezcaban]

what the forget is so bad about being a successful business man and having money?

[Kimon]

Obama did a few of those things lol

... Wait how?

[Doomonkey]

A law implicated by liberal ideals isn't implicit of its relatives being liberal.  It's a two way street, aswell -- it's a protected freedom.  It's a freedom (conservative) protected (liberal).  News stations are NOT inherently liberal and do NOT all support liberal ideals.  Using this sort of information to try and state that Fox may be credible is absolutely atrocious.  Again, see that nonbiased study showing how illiterate Fox News viewers are in comparison to others.

Protecting a freedom may be liberal, but to state that the people who promote these freedoms ARE liberal is hilarious.

You don't seem to understand. The press don't just promote these freedoms, they only exist because of these freedoms. Whether they are intentional or not about it, what they say is usually liberal leaning. The exception is when they are intentionally right (Fox News)

In order to get any split issue information evenly, you need to take from a variety sources. Which means that someone who looks at Fox News as well as other sources probably gets more information than you do.

As for your survey. It is essentially: "People who look at only conservative sources are more likely to believe stupid things conservatives say." I can guarantee you that people who look at only liberal sources are more likely to believe stupid things liberals say.