And with mass immigration, people who aren't interested or even opposed to those elements are let in without a second thought.

Hey @Timcast this isn't important in the slightest but just out of curioustiy:
I see you replying to comments in the past week, but in the year+ i've been subscribed i've almost never seen you do that. What caused the shift to now engage with the comments? Or am I wrong and have you always done that (per occasion)?

What's the best way to contact Tim for a potential story regarding censorship, I could find an email contact

He replied to me here once before, so when your lucky stars are right he may take a glance at discord. eventually.

His email is [email protected].

pinning comments is new, just seemed like something I was neglecting but Ive always responded to comments

Out of curiosity, knowing that you don't vote. Are there any conditions you can think of where you would feel that you'd want to vote, and potentially any separate conditions where you'd feel the need to do so?

@possumsquat93 thanks I didn't realize that was an email Addy lol

Id only for if we eliminate first past the post and adopt a ranked voting system

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/opinion/hamas-israel-media-protests.html

I kinda like the system France has

The top two candidates move onto a secondary election where it’s just the two of them

But that only occurs if the top candidate doesn’t get above 50% of the votes

I can understand, though.

With the current system, a vote for anyone other than an elephant or a jackass is essentially a wasted vote.

The primaries only help so much.

I'd say that's the truth of most elections.

I've rarely been proud of my votes for Republicans. I've just been afraid of letting up.

Any voter you convince to not vote is a vote for your side

Any Democrat you convince to vote republican is worth two votes.

Such is the nature of a zero sum game in a two party system.

To quote Styx (the band, not the Vermont candidate for governor), 'If you choose not to decide
You still have made a choice'

that quote is far older, and I haven't traced it back to its origin

maybe it's too old for written history

but something not taught in school or by parents, and that makes it hard to figure out on your own. because it's something so obvious that it's not obvious. because if you deny that truth, you can tell yourself to not have had responsibility in the outcome

had to learn that shit the hard way when i had positions of responsibility, and that's just not a fun place for that. because you have to decide between pest and cholera or shit and lesser shit, but the lesser shit is worse in the long run every fucking time something lands on your desk

what i despise really are people in such positions of responsibility, of their own volition, and then refuse to make decisions, because they don't want to be responsible for the outcomes. but all that happens is the worst possible one, and you accepted by not even guiding it

You know alot of us in msia were like that. Except most of us were either too stupid or lazy to see it.

3 parties that claimed to fight for x race rights.

But they are all in a coalition with one another.

Personally it was more of convincing people to vote in the first place since they were all convinced that any vote not for the coalition was a wasted vote since they had a stranglehold on the rural areas and the more paranoid members of society.

We do have a 2 partyish system but all the major parties are all coalitions of several more all with somewhat different focuses.

Its not perfect, but at least it keeps the smaller parties wary, since everyone you piss off is less support for you and more for fhe opposition.

true, but the issue with coalitions, like we have here in the netherlands for example,
Is that no decissions are made because the ruling coalition can't even agree with itself

and they then start blocking the other members of the coalition

over ridiculous matters, stuff like, "Because you won't agree with our demands for Euthenasia, we won't support your desire for better infrastructure"

on the other hand, all of them could find solice in voting to remove the citizens rights to a public referendum...

Which is strange, since I dont recall parties here bickering over issues like that. For example, I am only aware of 2 positions as of now, finance is now under the mayor of penang, our version of san fran. And defence is under former leader of PAS.

They work in accordance to their own choices. People can disagree but they can still do it. And if you are unhappy, you can state it, and if its bad enough, you join another coalition instead.

Funny thing, those two I mentioned were opponents before. Some progressive chinese guy and a really relligious malay guy. Both were arrested under some anti sedition law.

well i guess the difference here is that theres no big country-wide issues to tackle (aside from the mass immigration, but they're pro-that and anti-referendum to oppose it)

So they start bickering, because they know the people won't hang them for wasting time and lives