US Politics

[CorgiShinobi]

I think we're beginning to see a trend here of the Republican Party picking terrible VPs.

 

Any takers on how long it'll last?

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

I think we're beginning to see a trend here of the Republican Party picking terrible VPs.

 

Any takers on how long it'll last?

Until they get the message. I feel like if they lose this election, they'll seriously consider rebuilding themselves, since their party currently alienates so many groups.

[TheMightyEthan]

That would certainly seem to be the rational thing to do, but how of do political parties (not just Republicans) do the rational thing?

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

That would certainly seem to be the rational thing to do, but how of do political parties (not just Republicans) do the rational thing?

Well, unless they take a more rational stance, they're in danger of losing even more support. You can't get elected without support.

[Little Pirate]

Edit: DAMMIT JACK >:[ Beat me to it... Edited October 24, 2012 by Deanb

[Mister Jack]

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-pn-mourdock-rape-20121023,0,3802264.story

 

Okay, seriously, what the hell is it with republicans and rape lately?

[Mal]

A comment from the article that could be a great counter. I bold the main part. I'm actually surprised that such a comment exist in these articles.

 

I don't understand how so many so-called God-Proclaiming Christians forget that there is another player in these types of situations. I firmly believe that the Great Deciever Satan intends some man to forcibly violate and sexually abuse some woman. Is the child which may result from that devilish act be something that God intended to happen? Evil abounds and that is not what God intended. That goes for the unfortunate results for some women who are raped. True, some women may be able to accept that child of rape and go on to good results in spite of the devilish initial act. I also believe that if the government is ever to force a woman to bear a child of rape, or one with some obvious identifiable defect against her wishes, then the government should provide some help for its support.

 

Though I think I recall that in some Christian views, Satan is himself part of God's plan so eh.

 

Edit: I need to proofread.

Edited October 25, 2012 by MaliciousH

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

That's always been my problem with the misperception of norwegian black metal. The media spread the idea that it was about satanism, which mean it's about Christianity, but actually it was about rejecting things like Christianity in place of paganism or a return to the roots of the area/nature. You only have satan when you have god.

[TheMightyEthan]

Yes, but many Christians can't understand that there are people who honestly don't believe that the Christian God exists, and so if you are speaking out against Christianity then you must be in league with Satan. That's why they also will say that atheists love Satan or hate God. When they hear someone say "I don't believe in God" they think they're using believe similarly to when someone says "I don't believe in abortion," ie that it's a bad thing, not that it actually does not exist.

[Mister Jack]

If you're a millionaire or billionaire. Never, ever do this. Never say "I'll donate five million dollars to needy inner city children, but only if this other guy meets my conditions." It's clearly a ploy to make him look bad when he doesn't acquiesce, but all it really does is make you look like a dickhead for offering a charitable donation and then holding it hostage. Edited October 26, 2012 by Mister Jack

[TheFlyingGerbil]

Is the world's view of your candidates an issue that's addressed at all in the US? Did it register how embarrassing Bush was to your country? He definitely had a negative impact on how the world saw America(ns) which I think Obama has done a lot to redress.

[TheMightyEthan]

It's barely addressed. Many people care, but many others just say "Fuck what they think." I'm sure there's a not-insignificant number of people who would vote for Romney precisely because the rest of the world doesn't like him.

[deanb]

IIRC Kenya absolutely adores Bush. I know the rest of the world sees him as a bit of a buffoon, but his administration really ramped up support for Africa. Even gifted America some cows to help after 9/11.

 

I'm kind of between surprised/not-surprised that global view of candidates isn't taken into account at all, or certainly something not pushed by the respective campaign. Wasn't one of the talks on foreign policy? Or is that just related to the Libya bombings? I'm amazed there was no follow up on Romney taking issue with the London Olympics (while in London, who does that?) which we of course then absolutely aced. Could certainly have some spin put on it like "Romney is unable to foretell how a scheme will pan out, things he preemptively calls disasters turn out to be pretty damn good. p.s he doesn't think obamacare is any good"

 

As for Trump I think that's shitty to do when it's game trailers in return for Facebook likes. $5million in return for command over a president is on a whole other scale. Of course that's the kind of diabolical plan that only a brain controlling squirrel could come up with.

[TheMightyEthan]

I kind of hope Obama will do it just so the whole thing blows up in Trump's face. His giant, orange face.

[deanb]

http://www.texastrib...raw-warning-ag/

 

I'm not entirely sure on the purpose/ramifications of this, but thought it'd probably mean something to US folks.

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

http://youtu.be/MB9oxZzA4zg

Can't stop laughing.

[CorgiShinobi]

On the whole "what other countries think" matter, I don't think it should matter.

 

Even with how globalized politics has become, where particular national leaders can essentially become world leaders, it's still a troubling concept. That Country A is about to elect a leader, so Countries Q-Z favor Candidate 1 over Candidate 2. I mean, is it not suppose to be the self-interest of the nation rather than the self-interest of foreign world powers?

 

Would you want America in your politics? Whichever candidate I favor for, say South Korea, isn't going to have a direct affect on me. All I could say is that Candidate B doesn't seem like such a dick and maybe he/she should be in power, whatever his/her policies are to the citizens.

 

EDIT:

TL;DR

Considering how little voters tend to know about politics aside from picking a president (and a few bills), I don't think picking a leader thousands of miles away would fair better.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Atomsk88

[Mister Jack]

I was never a fan of Ryan or his policies but the more I learn about this guy the more he strikes me as a real prick.

[TheMightyEthan]

@Atom: I agree with most of what you said. The only reason I think it should matter at all is that the President is going to have to interact with other nations and if those other nations all hate him that will harm America in trying to deal with them.

[Mister Jack]

Joss Whedon offers his 2 cents.

 

[Thursday Next]

On the whole "what other countries think" matter, I don't think it should matter.

 

Even with how globalized politics has become, where particular national leaders can essentially become world leaders, it's still a troubling concept. That Country A is about to elect a leader, so Countries Q-Z favor Candidate 1 over Candidate 2. I mean, is it not suppose to be the self-interest of the nation rather than the self-interest of foreign world powers?

 

Would you want America in your politics? Whichever candidate I favor for, say South Korea, isn't going to have a direct affect on me. All I could say is that Candidate B doesn't seem like such a dick and maybe he/she should be in power, whatever his/her policies are to the citizens.

 

EDIT:

TL;DR

Considering how little voters tend to know about politics aside from picking a president (and a few bills), I don't think picking a leader thousands of miles away would fair better.

 

If you're going to dedicate a whole debate to foreign policy then you need to recognise that how foreigners perceive you is pretty important in how foreign policy goes. Bush for example could not have been a Dove even if he'd wanted too, the other foreign powers would have seen him as another Bush and immediately taken a Hawkish footing with him.

 

Point being that while you shouldn't necessarily elect a guy just because the rest of the world likes him, you should probably take notice when most of the population of the planet are so strongly for / against something.

Edited October 30, 2012 by Thursday Next

[Hot Heart]

http://xkcd.com/1127/large/

Holywhatthemyeyes!

[Mister Jack]

Romney has been releasing some tv ads in Ohio that are more than just the usual misleading you find in politics: they're flat out lies. They've been called out on this several times by the press but their strategy now is obviously "Just say whatever we can think of to make Obama sound bad and hope we rein in enough suckers who don't bother to verify anything."

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

Yeah, they're totally desperate. I think it's pretty clear that they're seeing the numbers and are scared for their lives.

[CorgiShinobi]

On the whole "what other countries think" matter, I don't think it should matter.

 

Even with how globalized politics has become, where particular national leaders can essentially become world leaders, it's still a troubling concept. That Country A is about to elect a leader, so Countries Q-Z favor Candidate 1 over Candidate 2. I mean, is it not suppose to be the self-interest of the nation rather than the self-interest of foreign world powers?

 

Would you want America in your politics? Whichever candidate I favor for, say South Korea, isn't going to have a direct affect on me. All I could say is that Candidate B doesn't seem like such a dick and maybe he/she should be in power, whatever his/her policies are to the citizens.

 

EDIT:

TL;DR

Considering how little voters tend to know about politics aside from picking a president (and a few bills), I don't think picking a leader thousands of miles away would fair better.

 

If you're going to dedicate a whole debate to foreign policy then you need to recognise that how foreigners perceive you is pretty important in how foreign policy goes. Bush for example could not have been a Dove even if he'd wanted too, the other foreign powers would have seen him as another Bush and immediately taken a Hawkish footing with him.

 

Point being that while you shouldn't necessarily elect a guy just because the rest of the world likes him, you should probably take notice when most of the population of the planet are so strongly for / against something.

Sure, but on what grounds? Actual policy or perception? On what criteria is each individual nation showing their preferred candidate?

 

It's not so cut and dry, and truth be told it's not as though there aren't any nations that "get along," but actually have some disdain. Which country leaders was it earlier this year where they were getting along, but when the meeting was over and the microphone was still on, one of them started talk trash about the other when that person left the room?

 

The way I see it, most foreign nations don't want another American Republican president when Obama can still have a second term. Why? Cause Bush was just that bad.

 

EDIT: My prediction for this election now?

 

We're going to have technical difficulties and won't know the next president the day of. We're takin' this circa 2000!

Edited October 30, 2012 by Atomsk88