Stupid question.
How come elections tend to always be like 49%/51% but not something spectacular like 70%/30%?
It feels to me like its programmed so that one tendency never have too much power.
What gives?
Illusion of opposition
>>2939699Do you have stats to back that up? Because I have lived long enough to recall various elections and the results went from 47-53 to 82-19
Have you seen the Russian elections ? Or china and north korea ? :^)
>>2939699It's called managed democracy. Whether the vote totals are manipulated to make it seem more competitive, or if it's an exact science of advertising and PR that splits the electorate into 2 near equal camps, who knows.
Because the ruling class are very adept at deciding what both the Left-leaning and Right-leaning prolecattle should believe. And they distribute those ideas so that both sides are more or less evenly matched. Eg, there's no reason why rightists should oppose high taxes on wealthy elites, especially as rightoids consider them all to be either evil Jews or corrupt NWO. Similarly, there's no reason for leftists to be "soft on crime". No communist country was ever soft on crime and the biggest victims of crime are proletarians.
Nevertheless via propaganda, academia and media, the ruling class makes the proles take up positions that aren't even consistent according to their own beliefs. They do this JUST enough to make sure there's an even split in society.
That even split then makes it easy for them to manipulate elections and make sure whichever govt they currently want gets into power. Remember all parties are controlled by the ruling class, when they currently need Dems in power, they brought Obama, when they currently need Reds in power they brought Trump.