It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democracy in UK.... compared to USA

page: 1
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2015 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Last night's Daily Show with Jon Stewart did this very interesting coverage of UK election and comparison to USA is just (unfortunately) funny and in big extent sad.

Just for comparison, whole election costs about 50 million, witch compares to approximately 1/50th of ONE USA candidate. Whole campaign and election lasts 6 weeks compared to this monstrosity that will last for 18 months?!

Jordan Klepper did good job by mentioning explanation that here money means free speech, that is why big corporation and rich folks own politics... Great job at pointing at how absurd and out of touch USA is...





posted on May, 12 2015 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog

That was really funny but also a really good comparison.

I hope the Americans on this site see this and understand why we Brits get a bit annoyed that in May we are having American election threads just now.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog

I've marveled at this disparity. What I just don't get is how trusting people are of the vote counting when it's fairly easy to rig.

Who controls the internet?

The UK is quick to adopt the methods of the US dark state and now Canada is getting on board too. With so much $ at stake, why would they let plebes determine who is in the offices?



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: SuperFrog

That was really funny but also a really good comparison.

I hope the Americans on this site see this and understand why we Brits get a bit annoyed that in May we are having American election threads just now.


Trust me, as an American, I ALSO get annoyed that in May of an off election year we are already getting election threads for the next year's election as well. I mostly get annoyed because every election cycle, the cycle starts earlier and earlier, and when it starts ALL real work by the politicians comes to a screeching halt. Instead we get blatant pandering bills that have no intention of going anywhere that are just used to suck up to constituents and get votes. And as a result, nothing gets done for a year and a half...
edit on 12-5-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   
What? you mean they don't start the elections cycle the day after the last person was elected? How laughably boring. Seriously though, how nice would it be not to have to be in a constant cycle of campaign mode.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog

Personally speaking, the length of time, and number of pounds sterling involved being less enormous than the resources applied across the pond does not fill me with any hope.

According to the last election result we had here, it only takes a complete sack of vomit mixed with crap, six weeks to BS people into voting for him, as opposed to two years of solid douchery in the States.

Good God, now all us Brits can feel like champions at something, eh? *vast sarcasm*



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog


I watch Jon Stewart he is hilarious. But I think it is ridiculous when people rely on a comedian for their information about the world.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: SuperFrog


I watch Jon Stewart he is hilarious. But I think it is ridiculous when people rely on a comedian for their information about the world.


What's become sad is that this comedian has become a more reliable source of information than the 24 hour "news" networks that claim it is their job to be a source of information.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What becomes sad is that people believe he is a more reliable source then anything else. Where does he get his information? Do you think world leaders and CEOs brief him personally.
edit on 12-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Haven't you watched his show? He literally gets his information from all the major news outlets then makes fun of all the ridiculousness and hyperbole. Heck, for the first part of his show it is usually just him talking and backing up his points with clips literally taken from various news networks.

To be honest, Jon Stewart is a good case study in good practices for watching the news. Don't just watch one source. Watch many sources. Then you can start to get a feel for what is and isn't ridiculous. I find it interesting that the biggest supporters for the craziest conspiracy theories seem to only have a select few sources that they comb for information (usually ones that exaggerate claims on the regular).
edit on 12-5-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What becomes sad is that people believe he is a more reliable source then anything else. Where does he get his information? Do you think world leaders and CEOs deliver their information personally to him?


You should really watch his show to see how often the same news gets misinterpreted by so called ''news" channels. They all report on the same news, but most try to paint demanded picture for selected population/viewers.

Just take this for example, how come no new channel showed you how whole English election costs ONLY 50 millions and how it compares to USA?? Why it takes comedy news channel to show absurd our political scene is?!

Right, because they are part of machinery and they will prosper out of campaigns as well its good source to tell news at what candidate had for breakfast... in shorts, news channels are just JOKE of a real news, and daily show again shows why...



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Greathouse

Haven't you watched his show? He literally gets his information from all the major news outlets then makes fun of all the ridiculousness and hyperbole.


Yes I've watched his show. He gets all his news from the mainstream media then presents his views with the twisted humor. Peoples endorphin levels go up when they laugh that's why he so popular.

Now if you actually think about how the show works. You aren't even listening to his views you're listening to some comedy writers views.
edit on 12-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

The point is that he is showing the mishmash of all the news' reporting and what they are saying or yelling (as is usually the case with Fox News).

Jon Stewart is a good example of someone who brings the news down to a more realistic level. Though at no point am I advocating him being your primary source of information. It's just that he is one of the better ones, which is sad, because he is supposed to be a comedian not a news pundit.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse


Let's for moment focus on news, not reported?!

Can you honestly say why report as this one done by Jordan you will not see on CNN, Fox news or NBC News?



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog

Okay take this for example. Your OP quoted him as saying $50 million is one 50th of the budget a US candidate runs for president on. Do you really think every presidential candidate has a warchest of $2 .5 billion ? Or could that have been an exaggeration to set everyone up for a laugh?


Like I said I've watched him. I've laughed my ass off watching that show. But he's a comedian, his whole angle of his show is the make you laugh. What is sad in this country. Is that some people will take a comedians opinion plus a YouTube video by some random idiot and believe them as truth above all other information. (I am not speaking about your embedded video in the 0P)

I get my news from mainstream media among other sources. The thing is when a story concerns me I look into it myself and check different views Then make up my own mind.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: SuperFrog
a reply to: Greathouse


Let's for moment focus on news, not reported?!

Can you honestly say why report as this one done by Jordan you will not see on CNN, Fox news or NBC News?



Because this didn't even need reported everyone knows it. During the election process in the US you're reminded nightly how much money they spend. But I could see the reason why this story was run. It's an easy irony to throw in front of an audience that leans toward your views for a couple laughs.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Star for you, well said I can agree with that version.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
Okay take this for example. Your OP quoted him as saying $50 million is one 50th of the budget a US candidate runs for president on. Do you really think every presidential candidate has a warchest of $2 .5 billion ? Or could that have been an exaggeration to set everyone up for a laugh?

No, some will have more then that...


Here is interesting info regarding last USA election, this one from looks will be much more expensive...


WITH nearly every American election cycle new spending records are broken. This autumn's midterm elections are nearly nine months away, but already candidates in Kentucky's Senate race have raised $19.4m and spent $7.3m. In the 2012 cycle candidates in the Massachusetts Senate race alone spent over $85m. That is small change compared with that year's presidential contest, in which $2 billion was spent (the total cost of the 2012 elections, including congressional races, topped $7 billion). Not every country shells out so much on its democracy: in France, for instance, presidential candidates' campaign spending is capped at $30m. Why are American polls so pricey?

Source: www.economist.com...




originally posted by: Greathouse
Like I said I've watched him. I've laughed my ass off watching that show. But he's a comedian, his whole angle of his show is the make you laugh. What is sad in this country. Is that some people will take a comedians opinion plus a YouTube video by some random idiot and believe them as truth above all other information. (I am not speaking about your embedded video in the 0P)

I get my news from mainstream media among other sources. The thing is when a story concerns me I look into it myself and check different views Then make up my own mind.

So, while we are talking about news and OP video, is that really made to make me laugh or to make me realize what's wrong with our election system?! Just think about it...

Sure, Stewart's team watches all those news channel you watch as well, and then bring best of the best in show... I am fine by watching that. Bit of fun and then sometimes just sad at what I see... like OP video.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog

My point is, that if Jon Stewart was a far right comedian. We wouldn't be having this conversation, even if you listened to him you would not find the far right views comical.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: SuperFrog

My point is, that if Jon Stewart was a far right comedian. We wouldn't be having this conversation, even if you listened to him you would not find the far right views comical.


Does such a thing even exist??


The Rush Limbaugh Show is full of comedy stuff, including himself...


Let's keep it in contest of election, it is sad that we don't have a cap, we should have it. Money is not equal speech, it means our political scene is making 'whole sale' event... right in front of our eyes...




top topics



 
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join