USA Politics

Genghis Khan

Genghis Khan

Ancient Mariner
Almost a year will pass before USA and the world see a new president in America.  Still it is not to early to hope for a winner.  As a Canadian, I will have no say in the matter but still hope for a change in parties.  I think USA needs new opinions on foreign policy, the environment, and national security.  One of the best aspects of the election is that Bush will no longer be president.  There is still a chance that the Republicans may win.  (Hopefully not). 

If you check out the Middle East opinions, the Republicans still favour the war in Iraq.  They'll never learn! 

Here is what I like about John Edwards platform: "Would repeal oil company subsidies". 

On the issue of abortion, the former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani states that it is "a woman's right to choose. At the same time, says he hates abortion, and would appoint new judges sympathetic to anti-abortion movement. Supports Supreme Court decision to uphold a ban on partial birth abortion."  Am I the only one who thinks this is as contradictory as it gets?

I don't like the fact that all Democrats support the Patriot Act.

If you want more... The opinions of Reps and Dems on various issues.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

As a registered Republican, I am disappointed that Ron Paul has little chance of winning.  The good news is that he is perhaps influencing the other Republican candidates and reminding them that the Republican Party is supposed to be the party of freedom, not war and big government.  My fearless prediction is that Mitt Romney will narrowly win the Republican nomination, and then defeat Hillary Clinton in a landslide.  Not necessarily what I'm hoping for, but what I think will happen. 
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

@Genghis Khan: Thanks, interesting!

To be quite frank, I'm comparing the Democrats now, and I hardly see any differences.
I guess it will be the charisma factor from now on.

Reading the profiles I think that the candidates are pretty clear in their views on the country they live in. But I haven't read enough yet about ideas on foreign politics, also not in these profiles, to judge well enough who would be the best (according to my own views).

I like Obama the most. Somehow I don't like Hillary Clinton that much. To me, she looks like she says things, just to please people. I see more spirit and dedication in Obama.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

While reading most of the Republicans views, I was thinking to myself "ouch, will they never learn?". As for the Democrats, I'd be torn between Obama and Edwards. Obama clearly has the better stances on foreign and international policy, while I believe Edwards to be the better domestic politician.

cornfedhick: If I were you, I wouldn't have "registered Republican" influence my views. If none of the Republican candidates appeal to you, then don't vote for them. Supporting someone "because he is a Republican" is a very narrow-minded attitude.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Perun said:
Supporting someone "because he is a Republican" is a very narrow-minded attitude.
Click to expand...

So true. It all depends on what people do and say, not who they are!

Still, I know that many people like to vote against people, by voting for an opponent. Strategic voting.

In the end two candidates are left, so if these strategic voters will dislike both, they will make the following judgement: "Which one is the worst?"

...and then vote for the lesser evil.
So for strategic voters, in the end it's not who's the best, but who's the worst.

A. The voter sticks to his ideal candidate 100% (and if the candidate doesn't make it, he won't vote for him),
B. The voter votes strategically.

Make thy choice!
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

cornfedhick said:
As a registered Republican, I am disappointed that Ron Paul has little chance of winning.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't like Ron Paul.  I agree with some of the things that he's said, but overall, I don't like his platform of state's rights and reducing federal controls over all aspects of state policy, plus I am not sure it's constitutional.  His personal philosophies are a little scary to me as well.

Also, I think Mitt Romney would get trounced in an election, especially if Edwards is anywhere on the Democratic ticket.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

LooseCannon said:
Mitt Romney
Click to expand...

I can't help laughing when I'm confronted with this name.

*childish mode on*

Mitt Midget. Mitt Dipshit. Mitt Horsebit. Mitt Nitwit.
Mitt Shove It. Mitt Face It. Mitt Eat It. Mitt Beat It.

*childish mode off*
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

At this point and time I am still undecided on who I am going to vote for.  My concerns are the economy Healthcare, the environment and foreign policy.  Nothing has been done in the last 8 years on these issues.  My other big concern is that who ever becomes the next Pres. will have an overload of shit on their hands left by Mr. Bush. 

I think Obama is great.  Edwards looks promising.  Hillary could run the country easily.  None the less, I hope one of the three I mentioned becomes President. ;)
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

char_da_harlot said:
My other big concern is that who ever becomes the next Pres. will have an overload of shit on their hands left by Mr. Bush.
Click to expand...

That's inevitable, and it will be the reason why the next president -whoever he or she may be- will be incredibly unpopular. To give you an example from Germany, it was governed by the Kohl administration from 1982 to 1998. When Schröder came to power, his administration was crippled by the economic devastation caused by Kohl's poor handling of the reunification, and the Schröder administration became one of the weakest governments -ironically headed by one of the strongest chancellors- this country has had.

(Why does Firefox recognise the "Kohl", but not "Schröder"?  :blink: )
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Kohl is an english term for eye makeup.

And char, you see this already with the approval ratings for Congress.  They're teensy.  It's because half of America hates the Congress because it's Democratic, and half the Democrats hate the Congress because they haven't dealt with George W. the way they want them to.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Perun said:
That's inevitable, and it will be the reason why the next president -whoever he or she may be- will be incredibly unpopular. To give you an example from Germany, it was governed by the Kohl administration from 1982 to 1998. When Schröder came to power, his administration was crippled by the economic devastation caused by Kohl's poor handling of the reunification, and the Schröder administration became one of the weakest governments -ironically headed by one of the strongest chancellors- this country has had.
This is why I dislike inevitability.
(Why does Firefox recognise the "Kohl", but not "Schröder"?  :blink: )Truthfully, I had to google The Kohl Administration to learn more about what you stated.  Interesting to say the least.  It is similar to what is happening now?  Change has many enemies.
Click to expand...

@LC: If you add an S to Kohl you will have a department store. ;)
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

My ideal situation would be this:

Mike Huckabee and Hillary Clinton win the nominations for their respective parties.

Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich join together to run under the "Constitutional" ticket - so named because they seem to be the only candidates who've actually read the US constitution. They differ vastly in their interpretation of it, but they seem to agree on the overall philosophy of what a government should do. Most importantly, they're both the only people who are CONSISTENT in their views. They don't change their messages when it's convenient or expedient.

They get up, say what they believe, and let the people decide whether it's right or wrong. That's how it's SUPPOSED to be.

I know the long shots like Paul and Kucinich will never have a hope in hell of winning, but it's fun to fantasize. The political process in the USA is a joke. A country of 300,000,000 people only having two political parties is the biggest farce in the history of farces.

The process is rigged so that you need MILLIONS of dollars to even seek the nomination for high office, and once there you have to constantly fundraise to get more - this means catering to the lobbyists of the BIG interests. They're essentially the same, Democrats and Republicans. Both are, in the end, beholden to the large corporate interests which fund their campaigns.

It's called the "American Dream" because you have to be asleep to believe it.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Char, the situation in Germany is improving. The current administration has decreased the economic deficit to a minimum and is widely expected to have removed it totally next year. It would be the first surplus since 1989, the last year before reunification; unemployment is also decreasing. It also seems that the economic situation in former East Germany is improving ever so slightly. All these problems started due to Kohl's reunification policy*. I personally think the current German government is the best since the seventies, although it is very unpopular, and will probably not last a second term.


______
*I'm not saying I think the reunification was a bad thing, but I am saying it was handled the worst possible way.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Perun said:
Char, the situation in Germany is improving. The current administration has decreased the economic deficit to a minimum and is widely expected to have removed it totally next year. It would be the first surplus since 1989, the last year before reunification; unemployment is also decreasing.
Click to expand...

18 straight years of government deficits? I know Germany has had huge problems in absorbing the East and no other country has had to deal with anything remotely like that, but jeebus....that's insane! Perun, your grandchildren, sadly, are probably going to be paying for Kohl's mistakes.

I think a government should not be permitted to spend more money than it takes in. But I'm a nut.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

IronDuke said:
18 straight years of government deficits? I know Germany has had huge problems in absorbing the East and no other country has had to deal with anything remotely like that, but jeebus....that's insane! Perun, your grandchildren, sadly, are probably going to be paying for Kohl's mistakes.
Click to expand...

No shit? That's why I supported Schröder in '98.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Iowa caucus is today!

I predict that Huckabee and Edwards will win.

Defy me, I dare you!
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

So it's Obama and Huckabee in Iowa. Maybe someone can enlighten me, but I read that empirically, those who won Iowa and New Hampshire usually also won the entire primaries...
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Indeed, apart from Clinton, who became president and scored very bad in Iowa.

McCain and Giuliani didn’t compete in Iowa.  Huckabee will have a tough time winning from them. He is very religious and most voters in states like California and NY aren’t.

Would someone explain the whole system a bit to me, a European?
To start with: Why is it done state after state?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top