Who'll be the next president – Google Search • Hacker News Board

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#101

Post by IanDrake » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:26 PM UTC

The thing that scares me is that Google is probably right (my political leanings aside).

It's scary because the political machine (the "news" and media) probably gives off a signal that a deep neural network has learned. It might be that simple.

Our entire democracy could be exposed for the sham that it is. It doesn't matter what a candidate has done or says they're going to do, it only matters what media keeps saying about it 24/7.

I've seen this over and over. I'd tell someone about a particular congressmen's voting record and bills he's sponsored and they'll say "wow, that guy sounds too good to be true, I'd vote for him", then tell them it's Ron Paul's voting record and they'd say "That guys is crazy" and then repeat everything they've ever "heard" about him.

That's just one example, but voters only know candidates by the media's labels, not by their actions or platform.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#102

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:26 PM UTC

MrDosu wrote: post #65

danmaz74 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are primary elections for both parties, aren't there?

Yeah and it's also the only country in the world where those elections lead to the same couple of families winning every time...

Hyperbole much? Out of fifty-something Presidential elections under the Constitution, there have been two close family members of a past President elected, the families involved winning a total of five elections.

That's not the same couple of families winning every time.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#103

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:29 PM UTC

MrDosu wrote: post #91

happyscrappy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is easier to pretend people were tricked by marketing than accept the fact that the majority disagree with you.

To pretend you are not a product of your environment is just silly. I know that basically all my thought process is crafted by the countries i grew up in. Travel the world a bit, you'll get it eventually.

You're changing the goal posts. Of course your views are shaped by the country you grew up in. That's not the same as saying they're manipulated from up high by the media. My mom grew up in Bangladesh. Even when I, much less she, was a kid, we had one TV station that was off the air half the day. Nobody was spending billions to influence her opinions. Saying her voting patterns here in the U.S. are the product of media manipulation is frankly offensive as it denies her agency and free will.

The motivating philosophies behind American voting patterns are present all over the world: distrust of individualism, strong reliance on government to organize social affairs, condemnation of speech that tends to upset the social order, etc. Whether you're talking about a New England farming town or a Bangladeshi village, these viewpoints are recurring. There is a good reason why: they are beneficial in a society with limited resources that must work closely together to survive.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#104

Post by happyscrappy » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:30 PM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #99

mrweasel wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There's no correlation between having a lot of parties and a sound, well functioning political system. Absolutely true, but it is remarkable that the Danes had 10 parties to choose from at our election for parliament last week and the US is supposed to be able feel represented by only two parties. Denmark is pretty much as homogeneous a society as it is possible to be in a modern world and yet we have 10 parties, gr…

The US does have more than two parties. Most ballots have anywhere from 3 to 6. It's just that nobody votes for them unless they happen to nominate someone from the big two.

When the Green party gets a lot of votes those votes come from the Democrats and the Republicans win. Conversely with libertarians.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#105

Post by clarky07 » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:30 PM UTC

zxcvcxz wrote: post #97

briandear wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sanders? An admitted Socialist? How about Rand Paul? Someone that has actually fought on the right side of issues important to the HN community. Sanders actually supports an 80% tax rate. If you want an economy that resembles Romania in the 1980s, vote for Sanders. If you want freedom, vote Rand Paul. Democrat values are inconsistent with entrepreneurial. They want to disincentivize success with higher taxes and they…

>This instinctive anti-Reublicann sentiment is depressing Most people on HN are probably too young to remember a republican president before GW Bush.

Is that true? Is the HN demographic really that young. No wonder it seems like everyone here is more liberal than average.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#106

Post by at-fates-hands » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:31 PM UTC

madengr wrote: post #71

briandear wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Set the country back to the 1960s? You also actually think Bush is going to be the nominee? You don't seem to know much about Republicans if you think that. As far as the 1960s goes, the economic picture was much better then than it has been over the past 8 years. The JFK tax cuts caused a decade of prosperity; the middle class was much stronger, wage growth was steady. What we have now is a generalized malai…

Too bad people in their 20/30s don't recall the Whitewater scandal. The Clintons ripped elderly people off on mortgages. How anyone could vote for that witch is beyond me.

At least all of the Clinton Foundation stuff is finally coming to light.

Wherever the Clintons have gone, scandals and coverups seem to follow them - which should be a clear red flag to anybody with a half a brain.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#107

Post by thomnottom » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:31 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #69

gerty wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does read like an ode before a coronation. Though a poorly written one. Anything but Clinton/Bush. Sanders perhaps.

Sanders? An admitted Socialist? How about Rand Paul? Someone that has actually fought on the right side of issues important to the HN community. Sanders actually supports an 80% tax rate. If you want an economy that resembles Romania in the 1980s, vote for Sanders. If you want freedom, vote Rand Paul. Democrat values are inconsistent with entrepreneurial. They want to disincentivize success with higher taxes and they…

Personally the deaths of multiple people at the hands of a domestic terrorist and the racist societies that support him matter more to me than how much I pay in taxes.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#108

Post by mrweasel » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:32 PM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #99

mrweasel wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There's no correlation between having a lot of parties and a sound, well functioning political system. Absolutely true, but it is remarkable that the Danes had 10 parties to choose from at our election for parliament last week and the US is supposed to be able feel represented by only two parties. Denmark is pretty much as homogeneous a society as it is possible to be in a modern world and yet we have 10 parties, gr…

The US does have more than two parties. Most ballots have anywhere from 3 to 6. It's just that nobody votes for them unless they happen to nominate someone from the big two.

I do understand that there's more than two parties, I should have made that clear. The US system is more or less a "winner takes all" system, leaving small parties little or no change for representation, even if they do represent a large percentage of the population. It is pretty much the same "problem" the UK has.

If the Americans are happy with the system, then then there's no issue, but if a large population group feels unrepresented then I don't think it's a fair system. There's a valid point to be made in terms of the size and diversity in the US might pose a problem for a parliamentary style of government, in as so fare as a plethora of parties could gridlock legislation.

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#109

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:33 PM UTC

Arnt wrote: post #90

joelrunyon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get voting on party - what scares me is voting on someone because they "paid their dues" - which is especially mind boggling when you look at people's approval ratings of those same candidates in their previous jobs (typically congress - which is hanging out at around 16%).

Wouldn't you like Alexis Tsipras a little better if he'd spent more time wearing out chairs in Brussels, eating canapés and learning what leads to results and what leads to nothing worthwhile? I mean, before he started attending really serious meetings where failure is serious?

[deleted]

Re: Who'll be the next president – Google Search

#110

Post by MrDosu » Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:34 PM UTC

happyscrappy wrote: post #96

MrDosu wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To pretend you are not a product of your environment is just silly. I know that basically all my thought process is crafted by the countries i grew up in. Travel the world a bit, you'll get it eventually.

You have no free will? Only what your country taught you? Speak for yourself because you are not arguing that the majority is not in agreement you are just saying "you are a stupid American" which is one of the few acceptable slurs.

Putting words in my mouth... Ofc there is free will, but if you think media manipulation means you are forced in front of a television you are just a blabbering idiot.