That does sound like one of the most fun ways to apply an education in philosophy. Have you thought about looking into writing material for Wisecrack? They're a channel on youtube that has a lot of segments on specifically what you mention, the philosophy of video games.
I just drink and philander, even if it earns me an early grave it doesn't sound like such a bad way to go. Hey. I read earlier that you were a major in philosophy, yeah? Would you be super cool to me and tell me about what you're learning?
I feel like I should dope up before engaging anyone politically right of me on the internet. I don't know how to or don't want to engage on a level that isn't "WHAT THE **** IS THE MATTER WITH YOU?" I admire everyone's calmness, haha.
The big thing I've come to understand, from doing research on this thread and talking with Canadian friends, is that Trudeau is something of a professional weenie. But also I kind of don't know a lot about Mulcair, either, so I guess there is that.
(I ddn't want to bring this up in the thread because then I'd be rambling)
It's not just Trudeau. Pretty much everyone the Liberal party chose to be their leader since 2006 has been disappointing. In 2008 they even chose someone who was living in the U.S for over 30 years prior. They just don't seem to know how to win anymore and it looks like they are just experimenting by electing different people to lead their party and hoping they get lucky.
Then the NDP came along with Jack Layton as leader and they came off as having a spine, so they gained loads of support in the 2011, while Michael Ignatieff, the American guy, lost in a landslide since he really had nothing to offer. Harper only barely won, but still got a majority government because of how the ridings are set up. It could be argued that Layton would have won if it wasn't for the Robocall scandal, where a Conservative politician Michael Sona sent automated calls to left leaning ridings, falsely telling citizens that their polling stations have changed. Then Layton died, Mulcair took over, and that spine seems to have slowly disappeared. Thus we have two left leaning parties that are really not so different from each other, dividing the progressive vote.
Haha okay. For me it gets brought up ad nauseum, but I guess that's because the people I hang around really don't like the Tories. My point was basically they will do pretty much anything to get re-elected even if it looks bad on them, so they don't just rely on their supporters convincing youth not to vote.
Are the Republicans in the GOP the same way? Haven't paid too much attention to U.S politics honestly.
The answer is simple: conservative plants just have to swindle left-leaning youths into thinking that no candidate is "progressive enough" and therefore voting is worthless.
At least, I assume it's right-wing plants that have been working on doing that to young voters since at least 2012.
Stephen Harper's conservative party usually thinks of more... creative(?) ways to keep the voter turnout down. Have you heard of the robocall scandal?
That sounds about right. Although, ex-polys in the UK tend to have a bad reputation, and sometimes their degree programs are jokingly referred to as "mickey mouse degrees", whereas MIT is pretty prestigious as far as I am aware. They aren't better or worse of course, but it's just a reason for people in older, research-oriented redbrick institutes to brag.