Attack Of The Attack Ads
7/8/16 18:41![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
mahnmut.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsLong 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 fictional state as per the NationStates model, would have to collide with. You know, your extremist decisions are somehow supposed to shape up your country in the way you deem most suitable. The last time when we had one of these polls, the majority decided that the cure to terrorism is to first understand why terrorists act as they do, and reach out to the ethnic and religious minorities and seek common ground. But now the situation is quite different. So here goes...
The Issue
As an increasingly tense election season looms, candidates have already begun smearing their opponents with vulgar and offensive campaign advertisements. Politicians and pundits of all corners of the political spectrum have asked you to bring some civility back to politics (good luck with that!)
The Debate
1. “Whatever happened to the good old days?” cries MP Montgomery Burns, who saw an ebb of support along with a slew of negative ads targeting his large ears. “Politicians used to be elected based on merit, but now the election process has turned into such a sham! One single ad-hominem attack is all it takes to tarnish an honorable politician’s career. Not to be nosy, but the government should step in and prevent the media from advertising attack ads and political campaigns from producing them. I can hear the complaints now: ‘blah blah free speech, blah blah censorship’, but if that’s the price to pay to restore honour to politics, then so be it.”
2. “If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen,” vents political strategist Sven Yeltsin, who was the mastermind behind your most recent election victory. “Perhaps the reason the MP lost support was not because of negative campaigning, but rather poor policies and performance. Attack adverts are as old as politics itself and are no more rampant or influential today than than they’ve ever been - leave them be. I’ve even taken the liberty of producing a smear campaign for you to use regarding your main opponent being an East Lebatuckese spy who is also part of an illegal organ harvesting cult.”
3. “Have you ever thought that maybe there’s a good reason Insert Country Name is gripped by the magic of attack ads?” questions sleazy television executive Max Wong. “We love filth! We love drama! These issues like ‘climate change,’ ‘corruption,’ ‘deteriorating relations with Maxtopia,’ they’re real downers and will they ever REALLY be solved? Surely Insert Country Nameans agree - politics is a spectacle and a blood sport, and one that needs to be drenched in more garbage, not less. We shall make the politics of Insert Country Name the greatest reality show in this hemisphere! Heck, we can even use that Question Period footage that featured the Opposition Leader getting egged and that random MP smashing a chair on the Interior Minister for our opening title!”
The legislature of Insert Country Name is preparing to adopt a decision.
[Poll #2051376]
Of course, you already knew there was a reason that all these options have been deliberately made too extreme.
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 fictional state as per the NationStates model, would have to collide with. You know, your extremist decisions are somehow supposed to shape up your country in the way you deem most suitable. The last time when we had one of these polls, the majority decided that the cure to terrorism is to first understand why terrorists act as they do, and reach out to the ethnic and religious minorities and seek common ground. But now the situation is quite different. So here goes...
The Issue
As an increasingly tense election season looms, candidates have already begun smearing their opponents with vulgar and offensive campaign advertisements. Politicians and pundits of all corners of the political spectrum have asked you to bring some civility back to politics (good luck with that!)
The Debate
1. “Whatever happened to the good old days?” cries MP Montgomery Burns, who saw an ebb of support along with a slew of negative ads targeting his large ears. “Politicians used to be elected based on merit, but now the election process has turned into such a sham! One single ad-hominem attack is all it takes to tarnish an honorable politician’s career. Not to be nosy, but the government should step in and prevent the media from advertising attack ads and political campaigns from producing them. I can hear the complaints now: ‘blah blah free speech, blah blah censorship’, but if that’s the price to pay to restore honour to politics, then so be it.”
2. “If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen,” vents political strategist Sven Yeltsin, who was the mastermind behind your most recent election victory. “Perhaps the reason the MP lost support was not because of negative campaigning, but rather poor policies and performance. Attack adverts are as old as politics itself and are no more rampant or influential today than than they’ve ever been - leave them be. I’ve even taken the liberty of producing a smear campaign for you to use regarding your main opponent being an East Lebatuckese spy who is also part of an illegal organ harvesting cult.”
3. “Have you ever thought that maybe there’s a good reason Insert Country Name is gripped by the magic of attack ads?” questions sleazy television executive Max Wong. “We love filth! We love drama! These issues like ‘climate change,’ ‘corruption,’ ‘deteriorating relations with Maxtopia,’ they’re real downers and will they ever REALLY be solved? Surely Insert Country Nameans agree - politics is a spectacle and a blood sport, and one that needs to be drenched in more garbage, not less. We shall make the politics of Insert Country Name the greatest reality show in this hemisphere! Heck, we can even use that Question Period footage that featured the Opposition Leader getting egged and that random MP smashing a chair on the Interior Minister for our opening title!”
The legislature of Insert Country Name is preparing to adopt a decision.
[Poll #2051376]
Of course, you already knew there was a reason that all these options have been deliberately made too extreme.
(no subject)
Date: 7/8/16 15:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/8/16 19:39 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 16:46 (UTC)(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 7/8/16 21:29 (UTC)Why?
(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 8/8/16 04:54 (UTC)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.
(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 00:21 (UTC)(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 06:12 (UTC)You don't like the conversation? Skip it.
(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 15:27 (UTC)Given that in our last conversation (and here) you practically boasted about keeping the conversation as unfettered from reality as possible, I'm not sure what you imagine your point had been "reduced" from.
(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 15:36 (UTC)Oh thank you, you're so kind. As always.
(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 15:39 (UTC)Strawman.
> Deliberate dumbness
You were warned (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/2120260.html?thread=151611204#t151621700) already against personal insults. I'm not going to waste much time here, so...
Next one is a direct suspension.
(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 8/8/16 05:26 (UTC)(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 00:21 (UTC)(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 06:13 (UTC)You can't please everyone.
(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 06:27 (UTC)(frozen) (no subject)
Date: 10/8/16 06:28 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/16 05:06 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/16 17:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/16 18:53 (UTC)This is why politics is like it is: starting conditions, constraining rules, and participant alienation. If I were more than just an analyst I would be out making money. The Rothschilds came out of the French Revolution awfully well. Good show, and all that. Shame about the fuck-up of the world though.