Alright, so I know a great deal many of you don't live in The United States, but here we have a serious issue with money in politics. The highest court known as the Supreme Court has ruled that money is free speech. As a result the people who are suppose to be regulated by the legislative branch are the major contributors to those politicians' political campaigns. For example, it's not uncommon for somebody on the energy committee to be taking money from large energy corporations. Basically, bribery is legal in the United States and the policy isn't made by the people of the country but those with the most money who are often transnational cooperations. Sad, I know but the establishment isn't going to change. Both parties have a vested interest in the way the system works now. In the United States, thanks to a lot of factors, there only exists 2 parties in the political system with any real power. Often times voting comes down to the question of who is less evil. Basically, what flavor of shit is more tolerable. So, it's not unreasonable to imagine a world where a national presidential campaign comes down to Hitler for the more Conservative party and Stalin for the more liberal lining party. Note that these two parties in reality are actually not that different in ideology. Neither party actually cares about the electorate. It's about the donors, but I'm getting [i]offtopic.[/i] It's also not insane that these parties have picked these people. The way the system is set up something like this actually could happen. So, if you're not from the United States take a moment and imagine you are. Who would you vote for to be the executive leader of your country. Your head of state. The man who can override the legislative branch. The head of the military and so on. Who? Who is a less shitty man for the job and why? And not only tell me why you think so but tell me if you're actually satisfied with the way the political system works in America and if you're not satisfied what can we do about?