Americans ONLY: Do you really care who foreigners think we should elect President?
- Thread starter szbert
- Start date
They have nice beer though!!fixit said:
Here's a true story. My pal, a world class chemical engineer who designs industrial processing plants had worked on hydrogen plant for a company in Bavaria, he had dealt with the prospective company principals, and everything was in order to commence construction. One evening watching horse racing I asked him about it. He told me that the deal was off, and had been scuppered by an American bigwig in the company, who said that he wasn't going to do business with leather wearing beer swilling racists. The name of the company in America? Jacob's Engineering. Can anyone find a connection?
Noch ein bier bitte.
I dropped out of the political process some years ago as I concluded I don't actually live in a democracy anyway.
The U.S. is slightly better off in that regard since at least folks over there have some choice - even if that choice is very limited.
Britons basically can only elect a political Party that follows U.S. policy. We have Conservatives (linked to Republicans), Liberals and the so-called Labour Party (linked to Democrats). But since we invested so little in an independent military, we are so obliged to the U.S. for national defence that political parties here don't dare oppose any U.S. line. So, like it or lump it, whether it be Bill Clinton or George Bush who forms a policy in Washington, our parties will simply jump to the whistle.
I should also add that Europe also determines much of our policies, especially industrial. But Britain certainly isn't a democracy - democracy being a form of government that's subject to the wishes and desires of the people. The people ain't involved.
The U.S. has a choice on domestic policy but not foreign policy. If you happen to oppose the war in Iraq, whether you vote for Kerry or Bush, forget it. Virtually all foreign policy in America is probably decided by generals and military advisers. The Presidents seem to have different domestic agendas. But the point is, a vast section of the American electorate is left unrepresented. There are no referendums on crucial issues, just decisions taken by an elite.
So, to conclude, we need to build democracies in the West before democracy can be exported to the Middle East. Phrases such as "freedom and democracy" is basically so much ******** and the west seems to be as stagnant and bureaucratic as the USSR was under Chernenko.
Think about it.
The U.S. is slightly better off in that regard since at least folks over there have some choice - even if that choice is very limited.
Britons basically can only elect a political Party that follows U.S. policy. We have Conservatives (linked to Republicans), Liberals and the so-called Labour Party (linked to Democrats). But since we invested so little in an independent military, we are so obliged to the U.S. for national defence that political parties here don't dare oppose any U.S. line. So, like it or lump it, whether it be Bill Clinton or George Bush who forms a policy in Washington, our parties will simply jump to the whistle.
I should also add that Europe also determines much of our policies, especially industrial. But Britain certainly isn't a democracy - democracy being a form of government that's subject to the wishes and desires of the people. The people ain't involved.
The U.S. has a choice on domestic policy but not foreign policy. If you happen to oppose the war in Iraq, whether you vote for Kerry or Bush, forget it. Virtually all foreign policy in America is probably decided by generals and military advisers. The Presidents seem to have different domestic agendas. But the point is, a vast section of the American electorate is left unrepresented. There are no referendums on crucial issues, just decisions taken by an elite.
So, to conclude, we need to build democracies in the West before democracy can be exported to the Middle East. Phrases such as "freedom and democracy" is basically so much ******** and the west seems to be as stagnant and bureaucratic as the USSR was under Chernenko.
Think about it.
szbert said:
If something significant happens such as Roe v. Wade being overturned, there might be serious discussion of secession. The power centers of the U.S. are located in those blue states. The blue states are the wealthiest in the nation. Wealthy cities like SF,LA, NYC are overwhelmingly liberal.limerickman said:
Which is why I don't think Bush can push things too far. The next four years will be interesting to watch. How will Bush balance the "payback" owed to the evangelicals without pushing the pendulum too far?
The good news for the blue states is that a lot of legislation is passed at the state level anyway. So its entirely possible that the blue states can continue to have a liberal social structure in place and the red states ban abortion, gay rights etc. Unfortunately, it is difficult to have a "union" when states are deeply divided on values.
The next four years will be very interesting indeed.
True, th US is a Representative Republic. Only now, it seems it will drift more towards Oligarchy. Rule by the "landed" or "monied". Buisiness lobbyist's get heard, not avg. citizens. As it stands, lobbyist's/buisinessmen write the legislation , especially now. Look at Cheney's energy task force mtg. He invoked "exec. priv." so that he would'nt have to divulge the fact that energy companies & lobbyist's drew up the document. It was like a christmas shopping list. Add to that the fact that bush has gutted the clean air act. Makes me want to retch.Carrera said:
Certainly are no intelligent Irish judging from grammatical errors in the above quoted section.FredC said:
Sure, some people stand to gain from the Bush victory who would have lost out under Kerry. Pakistan, China and Russia were all hoping for a Bush victory. China stands to further trade with the U.S. and export more of its goods - which will boost the Chinese economy. Pakistan won't be pressured so much over trying to flush out Bin Laden (something Kerry wanted to push through). Russia shares this feeling that there needs to have a kind of Christian crusade against Islamic fundamentalism - which is why Putin didn't want a Kerry victory.
The losers are probably Britain and especially the Middle East. Bush seems unable to think of any strategy in the Middle East apart from military intervention so many people believe global terrorism will spread as a result, over the next decade. The only main success Bush has had so far seems to be in Afghanistan (in my view) with women being less repressed and some re-building of the infrastructure. Plus, the terror training camps have been disabled.
So, China, Pakistan and Russia seem happy but Europe is far from content with the result.
The losers are probably Britain and especially the Middle East. Bush seems unable to think of any strategy in the Middle East apart from military intervention so many people believe global terrorism will spread as a result, over the next decade. The only main success Bush has had so far seems to be in Afghanistan (in my view) with women being less repressed and some re-building of the infrastructure. Plus, the terror training camps have been disabled.
So, China, Pakistan and Russia seem happy but Europe is far from content with the result.
LottomagicZ4941 said:
As a matter of interest, a few points about 'irrelevant bucket or Euro-Peon nations'.iknowtest said:
EU size: 480 million (280 million US?)
Equals the US in exports
Contributes 50% of the worlds foreign aid (way way way more than the US)
Is the only organisation of its type in the world, allowing multiple (25) governments to self rule and to focus on common aims and objectives.
And at war 50 years ago, not bad progression I'd say being as the the European Coal and Steel Community was only formed in 1951.
And by the way, Switzerland is not in the EU - although it is part of our continent...
And by the way again (for the rednecks) Switzerland is a country in the Alps (large mountain range, popular with EuroPeon skiiers), Sweden is very much more northerly and is probably the most advanced social and environmental structures/policies on the planet. We are indeed proud...
Still you could be proud of errrr Texas? 'Cos its got oil.
Or Las Vegas, ' cos its soo tasteful
Or the south, 'cos of its human rights record
Or your legal system, which lets people off with murder when its PC to do so
Or your fantastic sense of humour - world renowned!
Or your representatives on these forums who have the ability to rationalise and analyse world events....
;0)
Ssushi
(Sarcasm mode: off)
PS Just for you iknowtest sarcasm means 'A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule'
We'll explain irony next time your hickbill feck!
Interesting topic for a poll! Not everyone else in the world cares about the US election, which explains why I've browsed a few responses, but haven't taken the time to read everyone's replies. (Don't worry - I didn't vote on this poll, coz we don't want foreigners corrupting this poll or the election).
I'm new to this forum. I first took a look because of my interest in cycling. Somehow the relevance of the Soapbox eludes me. Have you noticed how few people make up the respondents? The same names just keep coming back over and over, and the same minority keep hiding behind their anonymity to respond with meaningless aggresiveness. I'm sure this won't offend the reasonable majority, but the guilty will probably respond, (and everyone will again see who they are). For the record, I live in Australia.
I'm new to this forum. I first took a look because of my interest in cycling. Somehow the relevance of the Soapbox eludes me. Have you noticed how few people make up the respondents? The same names just keep coming back over and over, and the same minority keep hiding behind their anonymity to respond with meaningless aggresiveness. I'm sure this won't offend the reasonable majority, but the guilty will probably respond, (and everyone will again see who they are). For the record, I live in Australia.
Iknowtest is one of those annoying Jerry Falwell, Pat Buchanan, David Duke, KKK loving far right wingers that embarass conservatives.iknowtest said:
Similar threads
