Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who'll be the next president – Google Search

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 152 posts

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

#41

Post by 4ad »

Shivetya wrote: post #38
joelrunyon wrote: post #3

Another unintended consequence of Google doing the things that Google recommends you don't do (in this case, scraping sites). Can we talk about how terrible a piece of pro-hillary propaganda that was? Namely this: > America is ready for the leadership of a Hillary Clinton. A new history will be made when she becomes the leader of the free world. The world of women everywhere will change Sure, this sounds very reminis…

Why not just flag the submission? Just like the hit piece we had last week on Rubio under the guise of prison reform. Look, we likely will have to filter any story where a candidate is mentioned because its been obvious for far too long that their supporters who are in the press will slip in favorable or unfavorable stories as they are instructed to do so all under the guise of hard journalism. Best yet there are ent…

Why flag the submission? The submission illustrates a real problem (maybe?) and people have a (potentially interesting) discussion about it. I don't see any reason to flag it.

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

#43

Post by rsynnott »

joelrunyon wrote: post #7
visakanv wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do people really think like this? All you have to do is "pay your dues" and you "deserve" it instead of voting on issues, track record & potential to make real change? Yes. Source: Click around the Facebook comments of any substantially large digital publication. Tonnes of people don't even vote. Of those that do, most vote for the parties they're already loyal to. Of the few that are in the middle, most decide acc…

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%).

I think the "paid their dues" thing is meant to be necessary but not sufficient. That is, a lot of people would be cautious of voting for someone who had no significant political experience.

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

#45

Post by SomeoneWeird »

EU_hacker_nrd wrote: post #44

..err..so you guys get identical search results? Are you all on Tails over Tor with en_US? I get: "Who will replace Sepp Blatter? - ESPN FC", "Who will be Zambia's next president? | - sardc" etc. Is this an American problem?

Nope, I'm in aus and I see it.

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

#46

Post by mcv »

adventured wrote: post #31
MrDosu wrote: post #21

"Because the other side doesn't have a viable candidate" Glorious two party system, how is that even remotely called democracy by anyone?

There's no correlation between having a lot of parties and a sound, well functioning political system. See: Italy, and a dozen other examples from Europe over the last 70 years If your culture is rotten, your politics will be rotten, regardless of whether you have 2, 5, 27 parties.

A multi-party system does not guarantee that there will be no political problems (particularly not if it polarizes into what's effectively a two-party system), but a two-party system is practically guaranteed to not represent minority opinions, and very likely to degenerate into a "vote for the lesser evil".

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

#47

Post by stefantalpalaru »

danmaz74 wrote: post #37
MrDosu wrote: post #21

"Because the other side doesn't have a viable candidate" Glorious two party system, how is that even remotely called democracy by anyone?

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

Some of them are caucuses organized by the parties themselves with slim guarantees of a fair electoral process. It's really the closest thing to election by acclamation in a unique communist party without being such a clear departure from democracy.

This way it's the most limited choice possible: like the school bully who asks you whether you want to be hit with the left fist or the right one :-)

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

#48

Post by mrweasel »

adventured wrote: post #31
MrDosu wrote: post #21

"Because the other side doesn't have a viable candidate" Glorious two party system, how is that even remotely called democracy by anyone?

There's no correlation between having a lot of parties and a sound, well functioning political system. See: Italy, and a dozen other examples from Europe over the last 70 years If your culture is rotten, your politics will be rotten, regardless of whether you have 2, 5, 27 parties.

>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, granted many have very similar policies. It's completely unrealistic that a country of 320million people should feel that their views should represented by two large parties, when 5.5million people in a small Scandinavian country need 10 parties (9 of which managed to get seats in parliament)

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

#50

Post by stefantalpalaru »

adventured wrote: post #31
MrDosu wrote: post #21

"Because the other side doesn't have a viable candidate" Glorious two party system, how is that even remotely called democracy by anyone?

There's no correlation between having a lot of parties and a sound, well functioning political system. See: Italy, and a dozen other examples from Europe over the last 70 years If your culture is rotten, your politics will be rotten, regardless of whether you have 2, 5, 27 parties.

"a sound, well functioning political system" is not the goal, or we'd all adopt the single party run like a corporation model from Singapore.

The goal is to represent all the citizens' wishes as best as possible when taking decisions about issues of common interest. And the more power is concentrated in unaccountable parties, the less chances we have at doing that.

Italy may have more than 2 parties, but they are already moving towards a less democratic system where only 2 of them matter. They are already at the point where the only way to access significant positions is through a party. Independents are heavily penalized and mostly eliminated from the picture.

Then there's the lack of internal democracy in those structures supposed to democratically represent the people. Party members are forced to respect party lines instead of what they personally believe, and in some cases the party line is dictated by a single person - the founder/CEO/father-figure of the corporate party (Berlusconi, Grillo, etc.).

Post reply on HN