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: 3
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

i guess it depends on what you consider "each candidate". I presume they are referring to the final 2 candidates that come out of the primaries.

And at a $6bil total spend in the last major election....2.5 apiece doesn't seem farfetched.




posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I guess if you make that presumption you could be right.


witch compares to approximately 1/50th of ONE USA candidate.


Myself I would've expected a more specific post. I read the statement when he said one candidate as encompassing them all. Like the OP did about all the candidates under the UK system.



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

you aren't a presidential candidate until you win your parties nomination. Until that point, you are campaigning for the nomination, unless you are a third party candidate. But they spend next to nothing because no one backs a lame horse apparently.

That is what I was thinking while reading it: The DNC and GOP nominees are who they are referring to



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Here we go, rather than worry about semantics, lets put a number to the 2012 election:

www.opensecrets.org...

Over 1bil each. So there is an exaggeration.....

....but really? a billion isn't enough to grab attention?



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't agree. Because as soon as someone declare's the are running for president they are a presidential candidate.

Please read the whole thing one more time in context.


whole election costs about 50 million, witch compares to approximately 1/50th of ONE




Ralph Nader Ran for President three election cycles in a row and he traveled coach.

edit on 12-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



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

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't agree.


so that is that.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 01:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ancient Champion
Wasn't all the brits on ATS whining about their election a couple days ago and now they're whining about ours. Fix your own problems first.

This thread started in the first place because an American poster (I assume) drew attention to an extract from an American TV programme.
The interest in American politics and the criticisms of American politics are both largely American in origin.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 05:56 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.


Not as ridiculous as US politics looks to the rest of the world!



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

No problem about ad-hominem, but from your conversation with bigfatfurrytexan I got impression that fact that is grabbing attention (1/50 of ONE US candidate) you somehow misread and misinterpreted.

It states 'ONE', as single, in no way implies EVERYONE or EVERY candidate. Does this makes you feel better, now that we know not every candidate will get that much money, but top 2 probably will get MORE according to ALL research. After all, whole point from daily show was in regards that here 'MONEY means Free Speech', and I am sure we all will agree here on site that this is just nonsense and that this is all you need for corrupted election and government.


edit on 13-5-2015 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: Ancient Champion
Wasn't all the brits on ATS whining about their election a couple days ago and now they're whining about ours. Fix your own problems first.

This thread started in the first place because an American poster (I assume) drew attention to an extract from an American TV programme.
The interest in American politics and the criticisms of American politics are both largely American in origin.


I wasn't talking about the OP I was talking about the brits. Focus



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

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...


I so agree, it's like Xmas or Halloween it starts nearly 3 mths in advance so during summer time the stores are filled with halloween crap.

Politicians are now Marketers as well, the market their crap a full year in advance as to ensure mass brainwashing.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Ancient Champion
That is exactly what I was talking about myself. That is, the fact that "the brits" were not the OP.
The criticism has been an American phenomenon in the first instance.




top topics



 
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join