Done, an easy one, one guess.

Phil, we don't vote for the policies of our government. We vote for the people who make the policies.

And because of our first-past-the-post voting system, we're pretty much always going to have two parties to choose from.That may change occasionally, but Duverger's Law explains how we're always going to trend back to the two party system.

So the reason that there are so many policies in place that Americans as a whole don't agree with is that while a great majority of us care, we don't care ENOUGH to make it a litmus test for our vote.

So a small committed group can get their way, even though the majority or Americans don't like the policy.

This explains the war on drugs (most Americans hate it), the lack of gun control (most Americans want some form of gun control), and, weirdly, the inclusion of ethanol in our gasoline.

Don't even ask about that last one. It's a terrible policy that most Americans wouldn't support if they even knew about it; it's bad science, bad economics, and bad policy, and every election season, every single major presidential candidate pledges to continue it.

We're weird.

Start

Done.

The world knows there's a lot of weird Americans SJ, that's not in doubt. In the UK and Oz it we pretty much also have 2 parties to choose from but it always comes down to policies not so much people. At the end of the day you want them to tell you what they are going to do when in office and how it affects you as an individual and also the country as a whole. Seems to work pretty well. And although we have had the longest campaign in history here at 8 weeks (normally 4) the government gets to prove their credentials for 3 years or get voted out,

g/ng - simple logic

ding for yesterdays

Morning. Go.

Seriously simple for an Expert. Done. NG. EZPZ.

The problem with our system and all systems that allow voting is they are prone to be manipulated by money and propaganda. Look at the Brexit vote. Look at all the disinformation fed to the British voters to get them to vote to leave. And in this country all the lobbying and propaganda for special interest to get voters to cast their vote against their best interest. Get the money out of campaigns and restrict lobbyists and this country will reflect the will of the people to a greater degree. Bring back the Fairness Doctrine, insist on Equal Time so that the propaganda being shoved down our throats can at least be rebutted.

KnightTime I did not say we had a true Democracy, I said we are both a Democracy and a Representative Republic.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/\n01/united-states-republic-democracy/

start

ding

In Oz we get disinformation all the time from the politicians. Fortunately we have a dew good journalists that put them on the spot. The best questions usually come from members of the public. If the politicians can't or don't answer the question properly they usually get found out. They need to be good at communicating what their intentions are clearly, but they don't take their voters for idiots either.

One more day to go then we get to vote. Well actually I'm working that day so I voted early and avoided the queues.

Unfortunately Phil, there has been a concerted effort over the last 40-50 years to dumb down the U.S. citizens. No longer teaching civics in High School, cutting funding for education, ridiculing Higher Education as worthless. Making it too expensive. Calling our Universities bastions of marxism when they teach the truth concerning our history and economic systems inadequacies and inequalites. Plus with deregulation of the Media the number of individually owned radio and television stations have shrunken to a handful. A few large media conglomerates control what is told to the masses and it is always tainted so as not to offend their corporate boards or advertisers.

Tuco: the link you gave on Democracy vs. Republic is a good one. One other important idea that influenced Madison in writing the Constitution was Montequieu's idea of separation of powers. In our government the people are sovereign, meaning they are the ultimate source of all power. However, our republican form of government prevent the sovereign (the people) from directly exercising any of the powers of government.

Right drwho the people exercise it through their elected officials. They can vote them out as well as vote them in.

And that is an application of the principle of separation of powers.

We don't have to waste our time running the country. We entrust our elected officials to act in the Peoples best interest and uphold the Constitution.

And if they don't we can prosecute them or vote them out.

But what is this I hear from you yearning for the "good old days" of the fairness doctrine? You do remember we have a 1st amendment?

The Fairness Doctrine did not infringe on anyones 1st amendment right.

It gave more freedom of speech.

Nonsense.

your opinion.

Doing away with the Fairness Doctrine gave way to the tyranny of Right Wing Talk Radio.

And crushed the Free Speech of any opposing views.

Well, talk radio was not possible with the fairness doctrine. Just because you don't like what you hear on talk radio is no reason to say eliminating it would increase freedom of speech.

It sure was possible. I was listening to Larry King before the Fairness Doctrine was done in many Right wing talk show guys in NYC

So you want the laws to be written so only left wing talk radio will thrive?

Absolutely not!!!

That's what the fairness doctrine does!

Now who is talking nonsense. Fear mongerer.

There is nothing stopping left wing talk radio from existing except it does not sell.

Oh yes there is. You have to be broadcast by a network. Who owns the networks? Who has crushed left leaning hosts and cancelled their shows even when their ratings were higher than their replacements?

The listeners ultimately decide. Not the networks. The networks only air what people will listen to. If they don't they go broke.

There have been attempt to get left wing talk show going, but just look at their ratings. That is why they don't make it, not any conspiracy of the networks.

You are very naive. Why not lookup how broke IHeartRadio is going. If you saturate a listening area you have a captive audience. You will take in what the market there affords.

That is KoolAid you are talking drwho. I hear the same line from Limbaugh. His employers may not be able to resign him to his present salary because his ratings are falling. Yet he is saturated in every market. They pay stations to carry him.

I can listen to radio shows from anywhere in the world via the internet. How am I a captive audience?

Why don't you listen to them?

Most people can't get internet radio in their cars or homes or at work.

They are a captive audience.

Rush Limbaugh pay to get air time? You are dreaming. Limbaugh gets to charge the highest rates in the industry for his show.

Those are rates to advertisers. Not to the stations carrying him.

No, Limbaugh charges the radio stations. It is the radio station's responsibility to get the local advertisers.

And those stations share in the ad revenue. His listeners are falling off the table and dying off.

As Mark Twain once said, "the reports of my demise are greatly exagerated."

Neither you nor Limbaugh are Twain.

Nor am I

Thanks for the reminder, Rush's show starts in 2 minutes!

Bottom line, if people didn't want to listen to Rush the advertisers would not pay his confiscatory prices. They would find someone else so there ads would actually be heard.

their ads, not there ads. Pet peave!

Radio stations and advertisers are like manufacturers and taxes. If you tax a manufacturer he passes it on to his customers in the price of the product. Rush's program charges the radio station, but they pass the cost on to their advertisers. If they can't find advertisers then they try a different show that the advertisers are willing to pay for.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/04/12/rush-\nlimbaugh-facing-big-pay-cut/209876

The advertisers can't find anyone else since corporate media has swallowed up all the independents and killing competition. Even though this has happened advertisers have left Limbaugh and others. Fortunately for Limbaugh and Hannity they are heavily subsides by the American Petroleum Institute and the Heritage Foundation.

And if you don't think the news has been cancelled then maybe you remember all the coverage the huge anti-fracking rallies here in NYS got on all the media. Oh, that's right. There wasn't any.....

Rather like the news coverage of anti-abortion rallies.

Not like that at all. They got lots of coverage.

go

They don't have to rally anymore, their elected officials are passing abortion restriction laws that get overturned at the SCOTUS.

dng, 1 guess

Difficulty score 41. No green.

done

Oh dear. I hate to have to say this, but tuco: drwho is right, you're wrong, and your links don't support your points.

The Fairness Doctrine was a mess that led to the insipid reporting of "present both sides": That is, "Experts think genocide is wrong. Here is someone who disagrees, because the law says we have to have this moron on our show."

It was the left's version of Teach the Controversy.

Rush Limbaugh died a natural death. Well, his show did. Well, his show's listeners are. His major problem is that the people who listen to him are as old as he is. It's not the raw numbers that he lacks, it's the desirable demographics that he no longer has.

And his show is going down largely because 1) Mitt Romney's Bain Capital signed a bad deal, and 2) he just can't get the lucrative younger demographics to listen to him any more.

Also: This was a fairly easy Expert.

Bain Capital did not sign a bad deal, that is their business model. Airing both sides of the argument exposes the faulty argument. Presenting only one side because either they have better ratings or they have a monopoly on the airwaves and not allowing an alternative viewpoint is propaganda.

Case in point. Where I live the 3 AM radio stations carried the following programming. Station A: Right Wing Talk. Station B: Sports, Station C: Air America. After the midterm elections when Pelosi becam speaker, the corporation that owns all 3 stations switched Station C to a rival to Station B's sports Network. Station C was getting just as good ratings as Station A and this was before Air America started to implode. Luckily for me I work in Ithaca which still broadcasts alternative talk radio and it is thriving. The company that owns the alternative station also owns a right wing talk station. They are both doing great and this company proves that it can be done even without the Fairness Doctrine. Unfortunately this is not the norm since you no longer have law that states you can only own 1 AM, 1 FM, and 1 TV station in any market, allowing the mom and pops to survive. They have all been gobbled up.

Have a great 4th of July weekend. I am taking a break from chat before I am banned. :-)

go