US President Determined by Secret Society (?)

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Prof., Sep 21, 2008.

  1. macrumors 601

    Prof.

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago
    #1
    My mom and I were just driving home from dinner and she was telling me about a convo she was having with one of her friends and she told me that he/she told her that the US President is determined by a Secret Society. When I asked her who told her she refuse to tell me the identity of the man/woman. All she told me was he/she is "very knowledgeable" in this area. Maybe he/she has some connections? If this has some truth to it, it would explain how Bush got in twice.

    What are your thoughts?
     
  2. macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    If so, that secret society is awfully callous.
     
  3. macrumors 603

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #3
    Conspiracy theorists believe there is a shadow u.s government that control the 'public' u.s government. So, in affect, the current u.s administration are merely 'puppets'.

    The shadow government choses who becomes president and has its own agenda that filters through the puppet government that the world sees.

    If you like that sort of stuff, listen to Coast to Coast AM - http://www.coasttocoastam.com

    Also, google "Alex Jones".
     
  4. macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #4
    They suck at it if they do!

    But I doubt it....a lack of facts to back the claim up....other then "that guy knows a lot" etc
     
  5. thread starter macrumors 601

    Prof.

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago
    #5
    I tried to get her to tell me the whole convo but she ignored me lol:rolleyes:
     
  6. macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #6
    It's definitely a secret society that decides the president.

    They meet every four years and are comprised of a very small percentage of the US population that are actually able to vote.

    Nobody knows who they vote for but many know their names.
     
  7. macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #7
    Well, actually it's not so secret, but it is small (538 members to be exact), and they do meet every 4 years. We call it the Electoral College, and we vote to determine who the 538 are supposed to be. They are almost always publicly pledged to a particular candidate, and most often vote for that candidate, but there are very few penalties for those who change their mind, so in essence it is a small society that decides who our president will be.
     
  8. macrumors G3

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #8
    I still dont understand the purpose of this at all. I know it has something to do with making sure individual states get their say, but last time i checked states are comprised of people, and it should be the PUBLIC deciding this instead of getting screwed over like elections past.

    Enlighten me if my understanding is flawed however, its fun to learn.
     
  9. macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #9
    I was giving a sarcastic response referring to the stock standard US citizen - you guys meet every four years, nobody knows who you specifically voted for and the results decide who's going to be the pres for the next four years.
     
  10. Moderator emeritus

    EricNau

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #10
    Yes, it's true. ...And not just that, but there actually not humans - they're lizard people!

    :rolleyes:
     
  11. macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #11
    Didn't I see this on an episode of the X-Files?
     
  12. macrumors 601

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    Platte
    #12
    If somebody makes the statement that Congress is more powerful than the president, then that is actually in the design of our government. We never wanted a King so there are checks and balances and the main enforcer of that is Congress.

    If one attibutes a lot of power to the Fortune 500, or small business, or both, or to the economy as to how it affects voting, I can also go with that.

    But the idea of some secret person who runs it all may describe some countries, but the the United States.
     
  13. macrumors 601

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    Platte
    #13
    Do they vote for our Senators, members of the House, Governors, and Justices?

    I didn't think so.

    If anybody thinks the President is as powerful as they taught some people in elementary school, then I think I will stick to the lizard people theory. :)
     
  14. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    #14
    Yes, it's all true, but I can't reveal any more.
     
  15. macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #15
    Re-read the title. It's about the US President being chosen by a secret society, where did I ever imply that the president had more powers, or what about what I said was factually incorrect?

    The EC chooses our president, we chose the EC, and there's very little in the way of penalties for "faithless electors."

    The EC could get together and pick someone completely off the wall, but that has yet to happen. Of course if we keep managing to nominate people of the caliber we've seen in recent elections, I'm not so sure letting the EC pick whomever they want would be a bad thing.
     
  16. macrumors 601

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    Platte
    #16
    I agree with your facts about the electoral college and I know that the people don't directly vote for the president but the electors have very rarely gone another way besides the popular vote of their region. It's just something that would make sense to me if that there were a secret society that powerful I would assume they would probably control the Congress and the Judicial races as well as other elections.

    There are certainly countries where one person, or a very small group run everything but those are dictatorships and we are not one. But even a secret society that isn't the electoral college choosing the president would be scary if that were true.

    Funny how the party winning the white house changes every 8-12 years on average. I can picture this scenario of one secret society member to another: "Hey, it's your turn to flip that coin." :)
     
  17. macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #17
    [​IMG]
     
  18. macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #18
    The secret society is simply the corporations. They decide who becomes president. Just look at the money trail. millions and millions down the drain for commercials. Most give to both sides creating a win win situation.
     
  19. macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #19
    This is indeed the only truth to the whole "secret society" conspiracy theory. The prez is not selected by the Illuminati, nor by Skull and Crossbones. If anything controls our election, it's corporate money.

    With all due respect to your mom, her friend can't be "very knowledgable" about something that exists only in paranoid novels and movies.
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    #20
    Correct, sadly. The electoral college positions SHOULD be honorary in nature i.e. they simply vote for whomever their constituents voted for. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way and they vote for whomever they feel like. It's stupid system.

    But we all know the Mason's are really the ones in control. ;)

    To the OP, if your mum is driving you around, you're probably not even old enough to vote, much less understand the issues at stake, so what do you care? :p But while we're on the subject, I think the legal voting age in this country should be raised to 25. At 18, you're still a dumb kid, influenced by college life and don't have a clue about how the real world works.
     
  21. macrumors 601

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    Platte
    #21
    1) In the history of Constitutional law, only one time in history in all of the elections, did an elector actually cast a final vote against the region after the region was counted, and in some situations, recounted. This happened in Maine in 1992 where a vote went to Ross Perot. In every single other case of a vote going another way, the final vote was reconsidered or rescinded, before cast, as per powers of electoral college, et. al, and it has worked 99+% percent of the time. Darn that Perot. :)

    That being said, the electoral college should always vote the way of their region and there is a potential for the legal concept of "mistake". In the law of Contracts law, the elector is the master of the offer, and the master of the decision, of their legal oath of responsibility, if done in a timely and reasonable manner, also as per Tort law, and there are checks and balances to our system. It's not a crapshoot the way some TV entertainers pretending to be political scientists make it sound. There have been after the fact discussions, articles, rumor, or alternate conclusions as to who "may" have been a better alternative to voting against the region of that electoral vote caster.

    Obama at this late date has a good popular vote lead, almost insurmountable in context of it being late September, but if done in a popular vote, he would win 52 to 48 percent. Consider on top of this Obama has had a small to medium lead for months and McCain only enjoyed a slight lead for a few days after a convention bounce of popularity which vaporized. Of course, if the dems want to "feel" better, his electoral college projection on these numbers as they fall in the individual states is dozens of points higher in the electoral college making it look like a near landslide. Even if Obama gets 320 electoral votes, he would have still won by a narrower sounding margin in the popular vote.

    2) Dave Mason is totally in control. :)
     
  22. macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #22
    None of us are saying that it's likely that the EC would completely overturn the voters, but there have been faithless electors in many previous elections, although none of them have changed what the voters decided upon, and some were just pure mistakes on the ballots.

    It's possible, however very unlikely that the EC would overturn the popular vote. Mostly, at least in my case, I was just mocking the system, and the notion that the president is controlled and/or selected by a secret society.
     
  23. macrumors 601

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    Platte
    #23
    You are right in your assertion that there have been faithless electors. But there is only evidence of one occurrence, 1992, as per my post above. Again, darn that Ross Perot. :)

    Let's bust conspiracy theories about more than one occurrence. www.presidentelect.org/art_evpvdisagree.html

    It's fun reading since it reminds me of UFO investigations where 95-99% percent of sightings are explained by the UFO believers themselves as hoaxes.

    The common misconception is that there have been 24 confirmed faithless voters in US history. It is akin to calling every UFO sighting that isn't instantly explained as pure proof of UFOs. One has to dig to find the truth in any legal/constitutional issue.

    I believe the vote should be purely popular vote for president/vice president ticket.
     
  24. macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #24
    I'm with you on the popular vote, but there have been more than one occurence of the faithless electors.

     
  25. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    #25
    On the other hand, if you read about some Latin American country where there's a guy running for President, and his brother is governor of the deciding provincia and its police force, his campaign chair for that provincia can stop the counting of votes, and there are cases of the police (run by the brother) hampering the voters, allegations about transporting the ballots, the campaign chair stops the voting, the cousin "calls" the election in the "free" press, and the highest Court in the land says the votes shouldn't be counted, you'd probably think you're reading about some undemocratic police state where the UN should go in and supervise the elections.

    (I lived in Latin America in November of 2000, and the irony was not lost in the Spanish-speaking press)

    Why would anyone need a secret society?
     

Share This Page