If you have "no place to go," come here!

'The debates' are a game show- the winner gets to preside over our continued servitude

Rangoon78's picture

Corporate media, trying to keep a straight face, slips:

"Welcome to the first US presidential primary debate - the first round in the longest electoral game show in the world." -BBC

Chris Hedges spells out what's at work here:

The corporate state seeks to maintain the fiction of our personal agency in the political and economic process. As long as we believe we are participants, a lie sustained through massive propaganda campaigns, endless and absurd election cycles and the pageantry of empty political theater, our corporate oligarchs rest easy…

No votes yet


V. Arnold's picture
Submitted by V. Arnold on

It is really remarkable, these many candidates vying for coronation in 2016.
Of the declared; there is not one fit for office. 310 million U.S. citizens and they are all that's offered?
That, in and of it self, should be a flashing red light that all is not well; crisis mode should be in force.
There is not one qualified candidate presently running for the U.S.'s highest office; if that doesn't tell y'all that something's broken (understatement); then you're beyond redemption...

Rangoon78's picture
Submitted by Rangoon78 on

DC, You find fault with Hedges on strategy and/or tactics. I seem to remember back around Halloween 2008 you found admirable an article which championed the strategy and/or tactic of electing Obama to bring about Universal healthcare.

I think Chris saw that as a failing strategy and/or tactic as did I.

blues's picture
Submitted by blues on

I use strategic simple score voting. I can vote for up to 20 candidates, and give them from 5 to 10 votes each. I will give Jessie Ventura and Cynthia McKinney 10 votes each. In case those don't win, I will probably give some Democrat (but not Hillary Clinton) 9 or 8 votes. That way, I will sacrifice only 10 or 20 percent of my franchise.

Why use the absurd single-selection method that forces two-party lock-in?

Why bother with the Ivory Tower "voting theory" that takes up 30 pages in Wikipedia, requires fuzzy set theory, and is hopelessly complicated?