As apposed to which elections in what country and/or alternative universe?

The powers that be, and wish to remain being, are worried.
Attack viciously? I'd say that's a given. :lol:
link The raw anger in most of the voters, of any stripe, is next step after desperation and exasperation, with the bullshit in congress. But they all forget the white house is the dog & pony show. The real problem is the manipulation of primaries to put puppets from gerrymandered districts in congress, state legislatures, and governor's mansions.

Just to be clear, the problem is for the voters, who are angry. The gerrymandered districts, which are the real problem, are the intentional product of the hard work of the politicians.

Eh. Sure - gerrymandering, the electoral college, first-past-the-post /winner-takes-all voting... There are many hindrances on the way to a more democratic system.

But I doubt having a more democratic system in place would solve many of your problems.

Instead they create muddy middle grounds, on one hand it would be much harder for one party to monopolize The House and cockblock every move of the other party, because when things are more democratic there are often smaller parties you can sway instead... On the other hand that becomes the standard procedure since the "ruling party" can't really monopolize it either, so every single move requires a lot of I scratch your back you scratch mine, every executive act becomes an awkward multi-party negotiation, thus voting one way or another on matters that the small party blocks voter's did not cast their votes about and might very well have completely different opinions. A more democratic election system can very easily result in a government that does a worst job in executing the will of the people then otherwise.

p.s.
I am not yet a 100% sure if the above is devil advocating or me changing my mind, I usually argue the exact opposite.

We call it flip-flopping. It's a sport here. Maybe you could go pro.

...For politicians, having consistent opinions between the time you run to get elected for describing what you think you should do and the time you actually get elected to do what you think you should do... Makes you a good representative.

For everyone else, not changing your opinion when you find a good enough reason to change it makes you an unreasonable human being.

Except ofcourse, the "for everyone else" bit is stupid, it applies equally to politicians, and creates an interesting result where what makes them good representatives also makes them unreasonable human beings. But just for kicks and/or potential point conveying, and mostly to see how you'd react, I am going to leave the "for everyone else" bit in there despite changing my mind about it mid post.

Well, I suppose that's alright, as long as it's for anyone else and not for everyone else.

Got me there :p:

“Today, the largest six financial institutions in this country have assets of some $10 trillion, equivalent to 60 percent of the GDP of America,” the senator from Vermont told a crowd of 11,000. “After we bailed them out, because they were ‘too big to fail,’ most of them are now a lot bigger than they were before.” - - Bernie Sanders.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...9f4_story.html

I'm glad to hear someone who's not an Occupy Wall Street activist acknowledge this dangerous situation.

Dangerous for whom? Certainly not the 1% who control the government.

So for those who appose Hillary...


If it came down to Clinton vs. Trump, who would you vote for?

The one who has the best vice presidential running mate to take over.

Whoever has the sharpest creases. I *swoon* for sharp creases!

Trump

When it comes down to it, does it really matter who is president? I think it is the corporations that control the Speaker of the House are the ones that control the nation. The party and constituents seem to have no influence over the speaker.