roflcopter

Welcome to real life. Why do you think politicians kiss babies and visit sports teams, other than to gain popularity? It's sure not about their policies.

Quote: Original post by meh
As far as I can tell this isn't a failing of democracy just that you don't like the result. Your guys might be better qualified but at the end of the day the electorate chooses who they want and that doesn't always mean the better qualified people automatically win. Losing and blaming the system seems like a cheap way of avoiding looking at the failures of the campaign.

Abertay or Dundee?

Abertay. I don't think their campaign failed, as much as the student body was apathetic towards the whole thing. In a small university knowing the right cliques can tip the balance. I don't see how a person abstracted from both parties could have voted for the other guys.

Quote:
None of these, in themselves, make your friends the better candidates.

I'd be interested in what you think makes a good candidate.


Maybe people should have to pass some sort of essay question based test before being allowed to vote...

Quote: Original post by WinegumsMaybe people should have to pass some sort of essay question based test before being allowed to vote...

Sure, you could call it a Jimmy McCrow law.

Quote: Original post by Bregma
Democracy is a terrible system.

All the alternatives are even worse.

Are you sure? What about anarchy? Before you go "OMGLOLMADMAXMASTERBLASTER" go read up on it.

Quote: Original post by capn_midnight

Quote: Original post by WinegumsMaybe people should have to pass some sort of essay question based test before being allowed to vote...

Sure, you could call it a Jimmy McCrow law.

Lol

Quote: Original post by Winegums
Abertay. I don't think their campaign failed, as much as the student body was apathetic towards the whole thing. In a small university knowing the right cliques can tip the balance.

Unless somehow you got the inside scoop on who voted, for whom and why I'm not sure you can really make that comment. You might suspect that popularity had something to do with it but it doesn't make it a dead cert. Phrases like, "I don't see how a person abstracted from both parties could have voted for the other guys," are the sort of thing your friends should be asking themselves. Why if they had such a killer platform did they not succeed? Blaming the popularity of opponents and an apathetic electorate just smacks of avoiding asking hard questions. Did your friends do any sort of exit polling at all?

How many people voted in total and what was the spread of votes?

The voters wanted a popularity contest and not surprisingly, the popular candidate won. Your friends either needed to play the game or show the voters why it would be better to elect a geek who can get things done and not Captain Cool. They did neither and lost.

Having a kick ass agenda and never getting the support to do anything with it is just as unrealistic as making promises that you have no control over.

It could be worse, the popularity contest could determine something like running the U.S....... . . .. .

Quote: Original post by capn_midnight

Quote: Original post by WinegumsMaybe people should have to pass some sort of essay question based test before being allowed to vote...

Sure, you could call it a Jimmy McCrow law.

Wish I got that...this thread is the first hit on google for that name (unless it's a combination of two other names...in which case I am truly snookered) :/

Quote: Origonal post by meh
*snip*

My conclusion is a conjecture of the fact that they had no valid points to run on. They couldn't have been picked because they had good ideas, because none of their running points extended beyond making night life in the student bar better (an issue they have no authority on whatsoever). Therefore I can only asume they were voted in on one of the following:

i) Their friends voted them in
ii) They were deemed the lesser of two evils
iii) Everyoen voted randomly

Quote: Original post by phantom

Quote: Original post by Mithrandir
"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." - Winston Churchill

I like this quote, because it is true; however it doesn't negate the fact that democracy is slowly becoming worthless and we really need to find a new way to do things.

Granted, this new way would probaby see all those in power out on their ears which means it would never happen, but I guess we can all dream....

I agree, but I'm at a complete loss to think of anything that could possibly work better.

The idea of "benevolent dictatorship" always seems to pop up in these discussions as a solution but how in the world can that possibly exist for more than mere fraction of time before it inevitably becomes corrupt and anti-liberty?


In the end, rule by the people is really the only way to sufficiently prevent feelings of disenfranchisement which inevitably lead to frequent bloody revolutions. People can be dumb, people exhibit herd mentality and get outraged at the wrong things (re: raging at AIG bonuses that were a tiny fraction of all the money going to crooks over the current economic fiasco), but it's better than the alternatives.