c'mon guys

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Rachel-Maddow-sums-up-what-happened-in-the-election

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by NicoleBee. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

She's not having a debate about the two party system here...she is talking in regards to the reality of the system we currently have.>> ^VoodooV:

Oh Rachel, so smart, but so dumb.
did it ever occur to you that the two party system is BAD. Our founders did NOT want Parties,
One party may be less bad than the other, but the system of parties is BAD. How many people, on both sides of the aisle, voted not for Obama or for Romney, they voted for democrat or republican.
Don't you see a fundamental problem with that....with the party being more important than the person...than the country.
The two party system needs to go. ban all parties. vote for the person, not the party

>> ^volumptuous:

Random Internet commenter calls Rhodes scholar dumb.
Ugh
>> ^VoodooV:
Oh Rachel, so smart, but so dumb.
did it ever occur to you that the two party system is BAD. Our founders did NOT want Parties,
One party may be less bad than the other, but the system of parties is BAD. How many people, on both sides of the aisle, voted not for Obama or for Romney, they voted for democrat or republican.
Don't you see a fundamental problem with that....with the party being more important than the person...than the country.
The two party system needs to go. ban all parties. vote for the person, not the party



Yes, because it's impossible for an educated person to say something dumb and perpetuate a system that continues to divide this nation. While I may agree with Maddow most of the time, she's still a pundit just like the others.

and to @hpqp nah, when you're electing anyone, you have to pick a person because of their character and convictions. If you're just voting on ideas, then you might as well go back to voting parties. Dem and Rep alike both represent an idea. How many people couldn't stand Mitt but voted for him anyway because he was a Rep. How many were disappointed in Obama but voted for him anyway because he was a Dem.

It's a shitty system. If you can't stand Mitt, don't vote for him, if you can't stand Obama, don't vote for him...write someone in. You have more options than just red vs blue.

Random Internet commenter calls Rhodes scholar dumb.

Ugh

>> ^VoodooV:

Oh Rachel, so smart, but so dumb.
did it ever occur to you that the two party system is BAD. Our founders did NOT want Parties,
One party may be less bad than the other, but the system of parties is BAD. How many people, on both sides of the aisle, voted not for Obama or for Romney, they voted for democrat or republican.
Don't you see a fundamental problem with that....with the party being more important than the person...than the country.
The two party system needs to go. ban all parties. vote for the person, not the party

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:

The older I've gotten, the more importance I've placed on the character of the candidate, rather than his ideas. A candidate's ideas are the product of their advisers. I want to know if my leaders are honest or deceitful, brave or cowardly, rigid or flexible, ideological or practical.

The older I've gotten, the more I've realized that our politicians are not leaders; they are puppets, each with a modicum of power, doing the bidding of whoever pulls the strings the hardest. Occasionally they get yanked into behavior which benefits ordinary citizens; more often they get yanked into behavior which benefits large corporations at our expense.

Not in my lifetime have I seen any politician exhibit leadership. I wonder regularly when this changed, because I'm sure at some point in the past we did elect leaders.

>> ^VoodooV:

Our founders did NOT want Parties

I feel the same about parties but I am having a hard time reconciling the quoted text.

The Democratic-Republican party was founded by Jefferson and Madison. If they are not our founders, who is?

The older I've gotten, the more importance I've placed on the character of the candidate, rather than his ideas. A candidate's ideas are the product of their advisers. I want to know if my leaders are honest or deceitful, brave or cowardly, rigid or flexible, ideological or practical. No one can fully anticipate what challenges a country will face, so you have to pick someone that you trust to tackle the unknown.

This isn't an absolute of course. I've still rejected the better man (I don't think I've voted against a major party woman) because he believed in an ideology I couldn't stomach.
>> ^hpqp:

>> ^VoodooV:
Oh Rachel, so smart, but so dumb.
did it ever occur to you that the two party system is BAD. Our founders did NOT want Parties,
One party may be less bad than the other, but the system of parties is BAD. How many people, on both sides of the aisle, voted not for Obama or for Romney, they voted for democrat or republican.
Don't you see a fundamental problem with that....with the party being more important than the person...than the country.
The two party system needs to go. ban all parties. vote for the person, not the party

No, vote for the ideas, not the person, nor the party. (but I think that's what you meant, amirite?)

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Rachel-Maddow-sums-up-what-happened-in-the-election

I can't call it since I posted this.

.....

Your video, Rachel Maddow "Last night the Republicans got shellacked", has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^VoodooV:

Oh Rachel, so smart, but so dumb.
did it ever occur to you that the two party system is BAD. Our founders did NOT want Parties,
One party may be less bad than the other, but the system of parties is BAD. How many people, on both sides of the aisle, voted not for Obama or for Romney, they voted for democrat or republican.
Don't you see a fundamental problem with that....with the party being more important than the person...than the country.
The two party system needs to go. ban all parties. vote for the person, not the party


No, vote for the ideas, not the person, nor the party. (but I think that's what you meant, amirite?)

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

I thought this was brilliant.

In reply to this comment by MrFisk:
*news *controversy *promote

>> ^bobknight33:

Ignorance is blind.>> ^EvilDeathBee:
Maybe America will be alright after all...



It sure is, hence yourself and all the staunch republican losers that lost their losing battle. You lost, btw

Ignorance is blind.

This economy has been held together by unsustainable government spending and Federal Reserve manipulation. If a true bottom had been reached in this economy, the Federal Reserve would not need to be intervening again and again. While some hopeful signs have emerged in housing and in other areas due to the stimulus and QE3 programs, that is likely to unravel in 2013. The real Obama economy (not the one that has been artificially propped up to win an election) and austerity is coming to America, whether it is induced by politicians or by the markets.

The marked drop 316 points the day after election for a reason. Obama is bad for America.
>> ^EvilDeathBee:

Maybe America will be alright after all...

Oh Rachel, so smart, but so dumb.

did it ever occur to you that the two party system is BAD. Our founders did NOT want Parties,

One party may be less bad than the other, but the system of parties is BAD. How many people, on both sides of the aisle, voted not for Obama or for Romney, they voted for democrat or republican.

Don't you see a fundamental problem with that....with the party being more important than the person...than the country.

The two party system needs to go. ban all parties. vote for the person, not the party