Attack Of The Attack Ads

Aug 07, 2016 18:41

Long time, no ridiculous poll from me. For shame! That should be amended. But first, this just in:

Trump, in series of scathing personal attacks, questions Clinton’s mental health

Which brings us to our topic. It's time for our new installment of ridiculously over-simplified hypothetical situations that you, being the benevolent ruler of your ( Read more... )

poll, hypothesis, campaigning, scandal

Leave a comment

Comments 18

htpcl August 7 2016, 15:45:40 UTC
Let'em tear each other apart. For shits'n'giggles.

Reply


luvdovz August 7 2016, 19:39:15 UTC
As much as I find much of negative campaigning disgusting, I can at least ignore it. My argument is basically blah blah free speech.

Reply

mikeyxw August 10 2016, 16:46:14 UTC
Pretty much. Also I see a problem with letting politicians write the laws that would limit negative campaigning. I'd expect that those besmirching a sitting elected official would be severely dealt with. Possibly with penalties doubled if done by someone with "absolutely yuge ears" like the first guy, making the size of his ears a legitimate legal matter rather than a personal attack.

Reply


paft August 7 2016, 21:29:16 UTC
M: Of course, you already knew there was a reason that all these options have been deliberately made too extreme.

Why?

Reply

mahnmut August 8 2016, 04:54:54 UTC
The NationStates game has been designed in a way as to make the available options sound very stratified for several reasons.

Main one: To achieve stratification of responses and allow the preferences to chrystallize more clearly (i.e. little room for middle ground).

Bonus: To achieve ridiculousness (entertainment) through the extremity of dichotomy.

Reply

paft August 10 2016, 00:21:10 UTC
Sounds like a recipe for ensuring the conversation is as dumbed down as possible.

Reply

mahnmut August 10 2016, 06:12:26 UTC
Says the one who tried to reduce my point to funny noises with my lips the other day.

You don't like the conversation? Skip it.

Reply



airiefairie August 8 2016, 17:55:19 UTC
Ad hominems disrupt rational discourse and do not allow the voters to focus on issues and policies. And then we end up with electing candidates who are unsuited for the job. The ongoing general election in the US is a fine example of all that.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up