OT: Your election
londonguy
Breathe, breathe in the air
I envy you guys, whilst you may think both are as bad as each other in some or most respects, you at least appear to have a choice in what they seemingly stand for, at least from what I can see reported over here. Correct me if I am wrong?
Over here we can choose between Dumb and Dumber and they both keep swopping places and what they stand for depending on which way the wind blows. Wankers.
Anyway, I heard that either Obama are Romney are pro immigration. Is that so and which one is it?
I am watching with keen interest. We had a live feed from Vegas this morning, it was midnight over there and it was doing my frigging head in being so near and yet so far.
Over here we can choose between Dumb and Dumber and they both keep swopping places and what they stand for depending on which way the wind blows. Wankers.
Anyway, I heard that either Obama are Romney are pro immigration. Is that so and which one is it?
I am watching with keen interest. We had a live feed from Vegas this morning, it was midnight over there and it was doing my frigging head in being so near and yet so far.
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
40 comments
Let me just give a more 'social' view of the state of our election system.
Most Americans are idiots when it comes to understanding the slightest bit about how our government, our economy, our businesses, our foreign policies, our education system, etc., all work. We have no clue. Instead, we spend our time listening to politicians and the media, who cater to our stupidity, and engage in constant political gamesmanship, without actually saying anything or doing anything.
And we blame all the bad stuff on our politicians, instead of ourselves. We're morons. We're more concerned about "enemies" and "opponents" than figuring out how to make things better. So we spend our time blaming "the other side" with moronic name calling and "he said, we said" games. It's disgusting.
And the vast majority of Americans have no clue what a good leader is. We'll elect someone to the highest office based on nothing more than the fact they gave an awesome speech, or the color of their skin, or the fact they agree with us on an issue they have absolutely no control over.
We believe whatever we want to believe, but none of us does the slightest bit or research on issues. We're idiots.
Luckily, who gets elected often doesn't matter nearly as much as we want to believe. Once people get into office, reality hits them, and often their ridiculous ideas and ideals go out the window.
Anyway, election day is tomorrow, not today, and my guess is it might be a while before they can project a winner. It's an incredibly tight race, so there's probably gonna be counting going on most of the night, and it might end up taking a few days. So don't hold your breath.
The US spends 33% more per student on education than the UK. Yes, that's 33 freakin' percent. And as a result of that spending we rank below the UK in math and science.
Now, one of the most common ads on TV here is teachers complaining about not enough money being spent on education. The same teachers who are never evaluated on performance. Ever.
We're freakin' morons.
Those rankings are bullshit. I'm not saying out education system is good, it's deeply flawed, but international rankings are too.
Surprisingly, little has been been mentioned of immigration in this election campaign. Much less than 4 years ago.
The question was asked in one of the debates...but the answers were blah, blah, blah, beat around the bush, no clear cut answer.
Romney's father was born in Mexico and his wife's father is from Wales. So I don't think he is as hard-line as some conservatives wish on immigration. He seems to support a less restrictive stance on skilled math and science workers too. So I'm not sure if either candidate varies too much on the issue of immigration.
The only real difference between the democrats and republicans is their social ideology. Otherwise they all spend money that isn't theirs on the things they want to see advanced. They either blatantly raise taxes or they try to get around raising taxes by calling them fees. They all pretty much suck.
Its no surprise the USA has taken steps back in world prominence. We haven't had a good leader, effective with both domestic and foreign issues for many, many decades. This election is truly between two terrible choices.
The impact of new appointees can last 30 to 50 yrs. And you can't change them every 2 - 6 yrs.
You're wrong. :)
Seriously, the only philosophical difference between the two parties is the road to enslavement that they want to travel down. The conservatives think the most effective way is to control people's minds and behavior, telling them what to do, how to believe, etc. The liberals, on the other hand, prefer a more intellectually honest approach; they just take your money, making you work for them and support their aims.
If you consider that a choice, well, OK, then you may be right, we have more "choice" than you. I personally don't think a "choice" between enslaving my mind or body is that big a benefit.
Glad to see some reasonable points on this thread. The irritating thing about this election is the vilification of Obama. Totally irrational. You think Romney is marginally better than Obama? Defensible position. I disagree, but a case can be made. I think Obama is a boring technocrat who will do better than Romney if elected. Why? Not because Romney is that bad. It is because the Republican Party has gone seriously nuts.
Romney is going to pander to the wackos in his party that don't even understand basic biology (or worse, DO understand biology but pander to their most brain dead constituents). Romney might be a "meh" candidate if there was no tea party. But as long as he has to pander to those wack jobs.
And if you think the tea party morons are libertarian, you haven't been paying attention. If the are libertarians why aren't the talking like Gary Johnson? Johnson wants govt out of our lives. A respectable and sensible position. I think there are a few things the govt does well, and wouldn't go as far as Johnson. But -- sorry to say -- the tea party ain't going in the same direction as Johnson. Doubt me? If you go a tea party and ask about prayer in school, legalizing (with sensible regulation) drugs, gay marriage, etc. I can tll you what answers you will get. I can also tell you what answers you will get if you ask about some real economic issues. I don't think you'll be seeing the stars of our educational system.
How anybody with a brain can vote for an idiot like Akin or West or Mourdock or Broun or ... escapes me. Are there bad Dems? Of course. But Repubs now were stupid as a badge of honor. The stupid (and those feigning stupid) are the folks Romney is going to pander to to get reelected in 2016.
Damn iPad.
Now back to talkin' 'bout sweet sweet vag. For starters, carolynne, seeing that you are both sexy and can see sense in this election makes you even hotter.
And Drac my man, you see the big issue! Stay strong! But lighten up a bit... Help Juice write some verses for his good book.
Fuck yeah! I'm almost excited to have voted for the lesser of two evils.
Plus I can't stand the fucking Mormons. Last time I was in SLC in the winter I almost choked from the pollution. They told me it was smoke and car exhaust trapped in the Salt Lake Valley. But I know it was noxious fumes of sanctimony given off by the temple. Almost enough to make you avoid Park City. Oh yeah, SLC strip clubs suck big fat donkey dongs!!!
The establishment (both left and right) are doing everything at any cost to consolidate power away from the people and to the ruling elite. The both want to be omnipotent 'kings.' As GMD said the only difference is the way to do it. However, I have a bit different take than GMD. The left (mostly) want to do it by giving shit away to their constituency until there's nothing left of value in this country. The right (mostly) just let their constituency take it until there's nothing left.
And the really sad thing is it not that people are too dumb or incapable, most people just do care. Complete utter apathy.
Still I'll take the imperfection that come with moderation any day versus "purer" system which history has weeded for the right reasons. I also have confidence that history is moving in the right direction, and ours is the right system to get that progress in.
Then there is the matter of electronic voting machines, which Bush and his cronies used to steal Ohio in 2004. They ought to be illegal, but they're not and I've read some disturbing stuff about them, how they can basically change someone's vote in some central office.
Of course, none of this considers the ultimate problem with the American system, which is the fact everything is so polarized and no one wants to find any common ground. I read an article in the Wall Street Journal a few years ago that there was some Russian guy who said the USA would split apart in ten years. I wouldn't be surprised, considering how many brain dead religious people there are in this country. One of the books I have been reading lately is called "Better Off Without 'Em" by Chuck Thompson who says the government should basically let the South secede. I can't see that going down without another Civil War, though. And whose to say where that really ends? It might be more than the South that would secede.
Your "education" as to the "Electoral College" (there really isn't one) is seriously flawed. There are quite a few sites where you can learn about it.
Awww, come on Clubber, educate us. Let me get my pencil and paper.
Okay...I'm listening.....
Well, since Clubber won't educate us on the electoral college, let's see if I can provide a tiny bit of insight.
Um, Dan, what the hell are you talking about?
Everyone who votes in your state has a say in the election. How the hell do you think they decide who wins the popular vote so that the Electors in the electoral college know how to vote?
I'm in California. California always votes Democrat for President, so that means all the electoral votes in California tend to go to a Democrat. But so what? It's because the majority of the popular vote tends to run Democrat. Does that mean a Republican vote doesn't count??? Hell no, it counts the same as if there was no electoral college. All it means is that, before the election, the candidates can generally rely on California to vote one way, so they don't focus their efforts on that state. THAT is what pisses people off.
Not much different from having no electoral college, and everyone recognizes "oh, folks in that geographical area tend to vote Democrat, so we don't need to worry about it".
But who the fuck cares? We can still vote any way we want, and all of our votes count. Now if there was an unexpectedly high turnout of Republicans, maybe the popular vote would be Republican. Nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not there's an electoral college.
Yeah, you can get into cases where the final results between electoral college and popular vote don't match up, but that's an exception.
However, there's a REASON for the electoral college. And some would say a bunch of real good reasons for it. In the beginning, the founders thought the Congress alone should determine the President, not the people. For a bunch of reasons, but I'm sure you can understand how some real smart people might not have a lot of faith in the general public voting for such an important office. So they compromised, and made a kind of hybrid system.
The electoral college is NOT the problem. Yeah, you can make a case for tweaking it, but it generally has little to do with the outcome.
Like I said, most people have no clue about how our government operates, and why. There's a reason why there's a Senate and a House of Representatives, and there's a reason why they were designed to have different roles. We are NOT a strict democracy, and there's a reason for it.
You turn on CNN or NBC News or whatever days or weeks before the election, and they throw up this map of the US, showing a bunch of states already colored red or blue. California is always blue, meaning it tends to vote Democrat.
And then the average voting moron looks at that and says "hell, why should I even bother to vote, the Democrats have already won?"
States have been tweaking the intended purpose of the Electoral College.
WHO THE FUCK CARES ?????
Sounds like you've made up your mind you don't like it, so there probably ain't no convincing you it's based on a misconception.
I don't care if Joe Blow campaigns in California. I don't care if he has a concert with freakin' Katy Perry, and shakes hands with the common folk.
What the fuck does that have to do with anything?? Anyone who votes on someone based on the fact that he actually shook your hand, or is cool enough to have Katy Perry at his fundraiser should be taken out and hung for stupidity.
@jerkison40. I'd be surprised at your statement about the states lagging us for Maths and Science. It seems like every week I come across young kids that know diddly squat about science and whose simple arithmitic skills are severly lacking.
@experimental. It's also true over here, they spout BS to get elected and then do fuck all to keep their promises. But what pisses us off is that noone other than a fringe party (UKIP) will pull us out of the EU nor will they give us a referendum on withdrawl as they know we all want out.
@dandydan. This is the 'problem' with first past the post and it's true of the UK as well. There are about 100 seats that only ever swing one way or the other. A minority of people over here like the idea of proportional representation but that idea sucks.
@dougster. The euro is fucked and was a flawed idea from the start. Thanks to Merkel et al they are too stubborn to let the southern countries leave. The far right are now very prominent in Greece, the violence and tension in the counry is incredible. There is a lot of civil unrest throughout Europe.
@che. You make very interesting points. And you are so right on the class issue. If you delve deep into what is happening in France at the moment you will see prime examples of what you said.
Again, thanks for all your replies fellas. I realise it was an OT subject so especially appreciated all the input.
@dougster. PM's question times can be very 'interesting' but sometimes they are just too childish.