Reality begs to differ, a third candidate always splits the votes of an already established candidate and on whichever side of the spectrum they're on decides which candidate loses them
I don't really like Amy. But that last point she made about taking votes was dead on. That selfish "team player" mentality is exactly what pisses me off about the two dominant party system in elections
That's the reality. In a first past the post system, the election is always between 2 parties. All a 3rd candidate does is siphon off votes from the candidate they are most aligned with.
Except Sanders didn't run as an independent because he knew all it would do is split the dem vote and hand the republicans a big win. The problem is your first past the post system.
Definitely not. Bernie ran in the primary, and when he lost, he fully backed his team. This situation is closer to Ralph Nader/Jill Stein. It might apply to Bernie's supporters, though, even if not Bernie himself.
"I didn't stage a nutty ..." No, Amy, you did that BEFORE you lost. Remember cutting the cord to his house phone and boiling his cell? Right here: ruclips.net/video/QETrQg5IJN4/видео.html Seriously, y'all can talk about how cute or smart or whatever-you-find-endearing Amy was, but it's crap. She was insufferable, selfish, hypocritical even beyond the D.C. norm ... basically, going by today's standards, she may be the most "real" character on the show, and that's not a compliment.
How can a person abuse every position and relationship in their life to chase often impossible goals and then be angry when other people win. She claims to be nonchalant about "losing the fight," but doesn't seem to understand that dropping someone's phone in a pot of soup, or trying to put words in the mouth of the first lady are unacceptable. She constantly plays a victim while treating others like shit.
It's good to see the primary characters get the wind taken out of them from time to time. They definitely are arrogant, in a largely positive way, but I like it when someone else legitimately gets the better of them. It was what kept TWW from being entirely a liberal fantasy.
Has anyone notice josh and the president have not talked since the argument in season 3 we killed Yamato. I think josh should be mad at President not Amy
+shihoblade She's using the fallacy of equivocation around the word "his". Not his votes by right but certainly his in the sense of "will get most of them if the 3rd candidate drops out".
shihoblade, you have 1 Republican candidate, 1 democratic candidate, and 1 candidate from a 3rd party all running for a specific elective body that has only 1 seat to fill. One of those candidates gets 34% of the total vote, another one gets 33% of the total vote, and the 3rd one gets 32% of the total vote. Not knowing which person gets how many votes...........what do you say about the outcome?
@@nudist0885 I say that's precisely why more countries should adopt preferential voting systems. Winner takes all is particularly bad at representing the vote.
"They're not his votes." Such a great closing line to this scene and a great perspective to remember!
Excellent writing delivered by excellent actors
Loved this series, it’s what we wish the Executive Branch was really like
Have you watched the HBO series The Newsroom? Good writing by Sorkin, in fact, the first eight minutes of Episode one are phenomenal writing.
"People who are so howl-at-the-moon, lazy-ass stupid . . . " What a great phrase.
There's a lot of those people around now.
History repeats itself... in a twisted sorta way..
I love how her voice cracks at 1:03.
The point of this one is that the votes don't belong to the politicians, they belong to the people voting!
The Electoral College is laughing at this notion.
@@elijahcanning3020- as is the people expecting SCOTUS to be neutral, yet laughing at the idea that they be made by 9 independent Justices
She got ya there, Josh.
☮
'there not his votes' true and they all forget that...
Historybuff they’re......
Reality begs to differ, a third candidate always splits the votes of an already established candidate and on whichever side of the spectrum they're on decides which candidate loses them
MLP is so beautiful.
"I fought you, I lost, I had a drink, I took a shower. Cuz that's how it is in the NBA. You wanna know what I do when I win. 2 drinks."
This is what I told Clintonistas who blamed Bernie for her loss.
I genuinely liked amy
Me too, you know why? She's just like Josh.
I don't really like Amy. But that last point she made about taking votes was dead on. That selfish "team player" mentality is exactly what pisses me off about the two dominant party system in elections
That's the reality. In a first past the post system, the election is always between 2 parties. All a 3rd candidate does is siphon off votes from the candidate they are most aligned with.
The two party system demands compromise among the electorate.
This is absolutely the argument against frump.
Do I hear a bell? 'Cause someone just got schooled.....
Stackhouse seems like a Bernie Sanders type (old, leftist senator), and Josh is exactly what dem establishment thinks of the Bernie Sanders type
Except Sanders didn't run as an independent because he knew all it would do is split the dem vote and hand the republicans a big win.
The problem is your first past the post system.
Definitely not. Bernie ran in the primary, and when he lost, he fully backed his team. This situation is closer to Ralph Nader/Jill Stein. It might apply to Bernie's supporters, though, even if not Bernie himself.
"I didn't stage a nutty ..." No, Amy, you did that BEFORE you lost. Remember cutting the cord to his house phone and boiling his cell? Right here: ruclips.net/video/QETrQg5IJN4/видео.html
Seriously, y'all can talk about how cute or smart or whatever-you-find-endearing Amy was, but it's crap. She was insufferable, selfish, hypocritical even beyond the D.C. norm ... basically, going by today's standards, she may be the most "real" character on the show, and that's not a compliment.
Wow. I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Amy. They ARE not 'his' votes.
How can a person abuse every position and relationship in their life to chase often impossible goals and then be angry when other people win. She claims to be nonchalant about "losing the fight," but doesn't seem to understand that dropping someone's phone in a pot of soup, or trying to put words in the mouth of the first lady are unacceptable. She constantly plays a victim while treating others like shit.
I know right. She's the best character in this show.
>slap!
What song is that
And Amy is basically girl!Josh - they could both be rather annoying.
Do I have a reason to be mad at you?
It's good to see the primary characters get the wind taken out of them from time to time. They definitely are arrogant, in a largely positive way, but I like it when someone else legitimately gets the better of them. It was what kept TWW from being entirely a liberal fantasy.
I only think Josh is arrogant. I genuinely dislike him so so much.
I couldn’t stand Amy, but she had a good point here.
totally agree. I suppose we can file that under the "even a broken clock is right twice a day" idea.
Amy is right that they are not "his votes," but she's still a terrible person.
Her method of speech (talking) I find so annoying I need to fast forward any scene she is in.
same
Boo ya Daddy! Class is ended...
Has anyone notice josh and the president have not talked since the argument in season 3 we killed Yamato. I think josh should be mad at President not Amy
I wonder what Amy would have said if her strategy had resulted in the election of Donald Trump.
Idealism vs realism. Sorry Amy but the reality is, they are his votes.
+shihoblade She's using the fallacy of equivocation around the word "his". Not his votes by right but certainly his in the sense of "will get most of them if the 3rd candidate drops out".
ummmm, Amy is taking the realist stance, they're not the president's votes.
Those votes aren't Bartlet's votes. They're the people's votes.
shihoblade, you have 1 Republican candidate, 1 democratic candidate, and 1 candidate from a 3rd party all running for a specific elective body that has only 1 seat to fill. One of those candidates gets 34% of the total vote, another one gets 33% of the total vote, and the 3rd one gets 32% of the total vote.
Not knowing which person gets how many votes...........what do you say about the outcome?
@@nudist0885 I say that's precisely why more countries should adopt preferential voting systems. Winner takes all is particularly bad at representing the vote.
Not NFL? Sorkin, what you doing?
They have distinct personalities.