10-17-2013, 07:14 PM | #101 | |
Noted homosexual
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,091
|
Quote:
I just realized that when I said not on the right I alienated like 90% of Americans... EDIT: Boston has very few homicides for a city of six hundred thousand.
__________________
|
|
10-18-2013, 04:09 AM | #102 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
No what I meant is that he's extremely bad at the job of being president. His politicking is shite. Granted it's a horrible situation but he squanders what little political capital he gets and struggles with basic tactical play. He's just not a great leader.
|
10-18-2013, 12:24 PM | #104 | |
Archbishop of Banterbury
|
Yes but being bad at politicking means he can't get things he wants done (and indeed he's so bad he ends up causing opposition to things he wants purely by wanting them). His intentions and policies are thus mostly irrelevant.
When the Presidential election thread was still up I was only in support of Obama because Romney in particular was so bad. From the perspective of someone inclined to vote left wing in a country already left of yours, the US would probably be in a better state had you elected McCain (or Clinton) in 2008.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
10-18-2013, 05:40 PM | #105 |
Silver LO
|
But then Palin would have been an old man's heart attack away from the Oval Office, and that's scary.
|
10-27-2013, 04:57 AM | #106 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
So in a shocking and unpredictable turn of events which has shocked everyone with how unpredictable it all is, America spies on other countries. This is fairly personally resonant with people like Angela Merkel who grew up under the Stasi and now the French and German governments want no spying deals like the US has with the UK and others. These deals, provide a 100% no spying on each other pinkie promise guarantee, so are naturally highly sought after, in the same way that gold, oil and blue smarties are.
I assume I'm not the only one who said "well, duh", and moved on with my life when this became news? |
10-27-2013, 04:59 AM | #107 |
大事なのは自分らしいくある事
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Determined
Posts: 5,840
|
Yeah, I read about Canada doing the same in a newspaper a while back. That was my reaction, too.
Does the populace as a whole really consider spying such a big deal? I considered making a thread about it, but couldn't be bothered. |
10-27-2013, 05:00 AM | #108 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
I would have thought that people who remember living in East Germany probably care a bit, but this is all a bit hopelessly naive of her really.
|
10-27-2013, 08:33 AM | #109 | |
Archbishop of Banterbury
|
It's in the public eye now and thus she's required to appear angry about it. I mean no, America, spying on your allies is not acceptable. But it's also not really surprising that the US government does.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
10-27-2013, 08:45 AM | #110 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
|
10-27-2013, 08:46 AM | #111 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
+1 to the "Everyone spies on everyone. They just appear super-incensed to the public to maintain image, take the piss out of their allies for getting caught with their espionage pants down, etc." pile.
__________________
|
10-27-2013, 11:07 PM | #112 |
Noted homosexual
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,091
|
It's not surprising and I feel like Merkel expected that something like this would happen, she just has to look angry at this because it is a serious breach of German national sovereignty regardless of how expected it was.
I would love it if this actually led to interesting things happening between the US and EU but I know it won't because we are both to dependent on each other to really do much beyond berate ambassadors and hold conferences.
__________________
|
12-30-2013, 08:19 AM | #113 | ||
Archbishop of Banterbury
|
Quote:
The second thing I should clarify is my response to you saying "prefer that states make more decision than the federal government." This is a typical part of the American denial that it is authoritarian. State governments are, are the name implies, GOVERNMENTS - allowing them to legislate on things does not make you one jot less authoritarian than if you let the federal government legislate on things. This is the key piece of doublethink that lets America claim the bold lie that it's a nation that believes in freedom over authoritarian rule. The obvious comparison is how it's still authoritarian if we let the UK government legislate all over our rights even if we ensure the EU can't go it. The third thing I should clarify is that devotion to a single strong leader isn't really a hallmark of fascism either so much as Nazism - the Italian (ie the original) fascists were Republicans initially, until they realised that the monarchy was so popular that this stance was losing them votes to their socialist rivals. So, onto Concept's guide to American pseudo-fascism;
In short, it's the jump from "government protecting your rights" (which America thinks it has) to "government preventing people from doing things which have no effect on anyone else" (which you actually have a lot of at state level). This concludes Concept's annual anti-US rant. Tune in next week for the anti-Britain edition.
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Concept; 12-30-2013 at 09:13 AM. |
||
12-30-2013, 10:34 AM | #114 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
So to move from massive generalisation to pointless speculation, who are we going to see duking it out for the Presidency in 2016? I can't say I've paid attention to American politics this year but I'm told the Republicans are imploding and that Clinton will probably take the Democratic ticket if she goes for it.
Thoughts from more informed sources? |
12-30-2013, 10:46 AM | #115 | |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Quote:
Republicans are split over who to rally behind as well. They liked Christie (governor of NJ) until he said some things after his state was wrecked by a hurricane. Those comments soured more radical Republicans on him but also some moderate ones who worry, because of the radicals' disaffection and the fact that he appeals to more moderate voters, that he won't be able to beat Clinton. Marco Rubio (???, FL) is another one to watch for. He's basically Republican Obama. (Young, relatively attractive / genial, "with it".) Basically everything the Republicans could have hoped Sarah Palin would have been. Both parties are likely to field a half dozen names for the primaries. It really is a bit too early to tell. Obama was on few radars in 2006. Even in 2007, I think many people thought him less likely to win the ticket than other nominees. We really are just going to have to wait and see.
__________________
|
|
12-30-2013, 10:49 AM | #116 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
I thought Obama was the Republican Obama?
Anyway, thanks for the break down. The names ring a bell in my head but, as I say, I've not been following. I think I can only name about three current State Governors and maybe a dozen in each of the federal chambers. Definitely don't remember who most of Obama's Cabinet is. Should be an interesting race. First woman in the White House (aside from that time Geena Davis did it)? |
12-30-2013, 01:33 PM | #117 | |
Archbishop of Banterbury
|
Was this when he said "hey yeah the federal government did a good job helping out with this hurricane"?
__________________
Quote:
|
|
12-30-2013, 01:38 PM | #118 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
That's the one.
__________________
|
12-30-2013, 05:12 PM | #119 |
Noted homosexual
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,091
|
Warren would never run in 2016, she's too new. Maybe 2020 if the Republicans somehow don't fall apart and manage to pull a win out of America's ass.
__________________
|
12-30-2013, 05:20 PM | #120 |
Not sure if gone...
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Or just lurking.
Posts: 2,709
|
I don't understand why you guys are interested in who's going to be running in two years - there will be nothing but bad choices on both sides and it won't really matter.
|
12-30-2013, 06:07 PM | #121 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
That's American federal politics.
|
12-30-2013, 07:09 PM | #123 |
Not sure if gone...
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Or just lurking.
Posts: 2,709
|
|
12-30-2013, 07:17 PM | #124 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
All of it?
|
12-30-2013, 07:19 PM | #125 |
Not sure if gone...
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Or just lurking.
Posts: 2,709
|
I hesitate to say all of it, just because one-man rules actually can have drastic policy changes, so they're still bad but the politician actually matters then.
|
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|