Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to Our Hoosier Board! Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions. Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful. Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine! Cheers, sirbrianwilson Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Gun Control | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 30 2013, 09:31 AM (858 Views) | |
| IUCOLTFAN | May 9 2013, 03:01 PM Post #91 |
|
Coach
|
+1 |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | May 9 2013, 04:08 PM Post #92 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
And what were the alternatives to them? The incredibly uncharismatic Al Gore followed by vanilla John Kerry, followed up by an eight years too late John McCain with an imbecile as a running mate and finally an incredibly out of touch Mitt Romney whose base didn't even really care for him. If a Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan had been running in 2000, 2004, 2008 or 2012, they would have wiped the mat with them. In 2000, the democrats only true option was Al Gore. John Kerry was a mistake, but they quickly learned from that in what it takes to win an election. The republicans did not learn a damn thing from the 2008 election. You have to keep in mind that in 2000 and 2004, Bush eeked out victores; in 2008 and 2012, Obama won landslides. Unless the republicans learn from their recent past, that is a trend worth noting. If they continue to run guys who look like they belong on dollar bills, they are going to be losing the presidency. |
| |
![]() |
|
| eelbor | May 9 2013, 04:17 PM Post #93 |
![]()
Zen Master
|
Exactly that. The only people that are interested in the presidency are in it for the power. It is probably the most underpaid job in the world. |
![]() "Liberal, shmiberal. That should be a new word. Shmiberal: one who is assumed liberal, just because he's a professional whiner in the newspaper. If you'll read the subtext for many of those old strips, you'll find the heart of an old-fashioned Libertarian. And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners." - Berkeley Breathed Meat is Murder. Sweet, delicious murder. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | May 9 2013, 04:21 PM Post #94 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
I am going to call hogwash on that. While you may not agree with the conclusions that people have on the information they receive, the fact that the information wasn't available to them except in very limited forms most certainly would not lead one to the conclusion that people have become less informed. We knew a hell of a lot more about Bill Clinton's blow job than we knew people in the 60's did about JFK's affairs. When he died, the general public would have told you that the Kennedys were the poster family for what a perfect family was. |
| |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | May 9 2013, 04:23 PM Post #95 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
People who become president aren't in for the immediate money. And even if they are in for money post-presidency, that still isn't going to be their top reason, IMO. |
| |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | May 9 2013, 04:24 PM Post #96 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
No doubt there is a wealth of info available, but people are too busy texting and watching reality TV shows. Sad, but true. |
| |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | May 9 2013, 04:26 PM Post #97 |
|
Coach
|
.....while you are in office. These people's wealth seems to grow vastly during the backsides of their "careers".... The endless pay and healthcare for life are pretty good perks. These guys get pocket change for life. Most use the free world travel perk for themselves and their families to the extreme too.... Considering the amount of actual work these guys do and the lifelong benefits after....it's a pretty cushy gig. |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | May 9 2013, 04:35 PM Post #98 |
|
Coach
|
Just because we have cable and Internet does not mean more people care about politics. The same types of people follow and care about politics now as in the 60's. most people really don't give a shit, cable and Internet haven't changed that. It may have got a few more people interested but by percentage of population the increase is probably very minimal, IMO. Many people you know use the net and watch cable tv all the time yet couldn't tell you the first thing about current politics or events in the world. They simply don't care. |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | May 9 2013, 05:06 PM Post #99 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
And back in the 60s when government was smaller, even less people cared because it was a smaller part of their life. Using the claim that less people are knowledgeable about politics despite there being more information easily and readibly available is counterintuitive. Other than that being based on conjecture, I see no substance to it. |
| |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | May 9 2013, 05:35 PM Post #100 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
The next time you're out in public, notice all of the people memorized by their phones. My bet is they aren't reading political commentary. |
| |
![]() |
|
| sirbrianwilson | May 9 2013, 05:43 PM Post #101 |
![]()
Stemlerite
|
Yes, but it's not like before phones people were walking around having deep political discourse. They were just walking. br |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | May 9 2013, 05:47 PM Post #102 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
People used to regularly watch the national and local news, and it wasn't overly biased. This gave people a reasonable overview of what was really happening. Now with all of the polarization, Joe Sixpack doesn't know what to watch, and doesn't trust anyone too much. |
| |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | May 9 2013, 05:48 PM Post #103 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
This is why liberals have eventually taken over the MSM. Reporters who are conservative and don't see a place for big government aren't interested in becoming political commentators. This also explains why there aren't many anorexic hosts on the Food Network. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | May 10 2013, 05:31 AM Post #104 |
![]()
Coach
|
The difference, IMO, is not that there are more politically uneducated and non caring people, but that more of them are now voting. Pop culture reaches those types of people very well and has placed more importance on voting but not necessarily on understanding the issues. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | May 10 2013, 06:29 AM Post #105 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
I respectfully disagree. I think as people we romanticize the past. Remember that JFK was losing to Nixon up until the first debate...and JFK overtook him because of how 'sweaty and old' looked on camera. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
7:55 PM Jul 10
|















7:55 PM Jul 10