The American Election
- Thread starter speed
- Start date
A little Google divination predicts...
Results 1 - 10 of about 11,500,000 for "Hillary Clinton".
Results 1 - 10 of about 4,330,000 for "Barack Obama".
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,850,000 for "Ron Paul".
Despite cutting Hillary's results by 50% for past popularity, it still looks like the Feminist is in. I'm sorry.
The future of America?
More economic instability, and more agenda-driven support and encouragement from other countries (as they continue to strengthen their own alliances) when it comes to War with Iran.
Lastly, as if that weren't already enough, probably lots more privacy concerns.
#30 United States (2.0)
[1.6-2.0] Extensive surveillance societies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_International#Privacy_index
Results 1 - 10 of about 11,500,000 for "Hillary Clinton".
Results 1 - 10 of about 4,330,000 for "Barack Obama".
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,850,000 for "Ron Paul".
Despite cutting Hillary's results by 50% for past popularity, it still looks like the Feminist is in. I'm sorry.
The future of America?
More economic instability, and more agenda-driven support and encouragement from other countries (as they continue to strengthen their own alliances) when it comes to War with Iran.
Lastly, as if that weren't already enough, probably lots more privacy concerns.
#30 United States (2.0)
[1.6-2.0] Extensive surveillance societies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_International#Privacy_index
For the GOP Nomination: McCain (I must be psychic)
For the Democratic candidate: Gonna go with Clinton
For the general election, McCain will win. My prediction.
Another four years of Republican rule under a military-lovin' president is exactly the opposite of what we need right now.
For the Democratic candidate: Gonna go with Clinton
For the general election, McCain will win. My prediction.
Another four years of Republican rule under a military-lovin' president is exactly the opposite of what we need right now.
BlackMetalWhiteGuy
Manly Man!
This is the only forum I've seen in which it was referred to as the American Election.
Anyway, I went to the polls on Tuesday to vote for Obama, but I wasn't allowed to because only Republicans and Democrats are allowed to vote in the primaries, and only for their own party members.
Anyway, I went to the polls on Tuesday to vote for Obama, but I wasn't allowed to because only Republicans and Democrats are allowed to vote in the primaries, and only for their own party members.
WeAreTheLastMen
Metacom
McCain vs. Hilary. Now, if you actually look at their voting records (ontheissues.org) you'll find there's not much difference between them, especially with regard to foreign policy (i.e. Iran, Pakistan). Neither one has shown much interest in defending human rights, although they've both tried to appear as though they do (McCain passed a bill saying that the army must adhere to its interrogation manual, which was meaningless, seeing as how the army just rewrote that manual and is refusing to let anyone see the new version). Hilary has also said things to the effect that she may continue Bush's precedent of overriding Congress "when necessary", and McCain swore not to - but who can say? Either way, we're pretty much fucked. Obama wasn't any different either, though, so don't beat yourselves up (unless it's over Edwards).
honestly, I don't believe that it'll make a significant difference who gets elected president. Power rests in the hands of the rich elite, pretty much exclusively. Those who come into power and do not belong to the rich elite will soon join it. Thus the government serves the interests of the rich elite, as much as it can get away with it. Sometimes the "people" get something done, but that's the exception, not the rule.
So...whoever gets elected, it won't make a big difference. My only concern is the draft. Thanks to our wonderful system, although this will affect me, I'm arbitrarily not allowed to voice my opinion. It would sting just a little if I got shot in Iraq because of some motherfucker I wasn't allowed to vote against...
So...whoever gets elected, it won't make a big difference. My only concern is the draft. Thanks to our wonderful system, although this will affect me, I'm arbitrarily not allowed to voice my opinion. It would sting just a little if I got shot in Iraq because of some motherfucker I wasn't allowed to vote against...
BlackMetalWhiteGuy
Manly Man!
The same goes for both of the other forums that I post on, but the topic always seems to default to "the election" and the fact that it's American seems to be implied.
The most surprising thing of all is that this thread continues to thrive, this despite it's overtly political nature and of course that the original post itself, has clearly not met those ridged yet admirable, standards previously established and upheld by the speed-derek-justin regime.
Yes.
There's much to discuss. In many ways, the election is a microcosm of America and its underlying ethos or philosophy if one will.
Obama, who I think has an excellent shot at winning after tonight, is clearly the candidate of the young and disenfranchised. His message is one of simplicity, emotion and hope. His speeches are exceedingly simple; his followers are all young, disenfranchised, liberal, or black; his policies are unclear: he's against Iraq, for the blue collar worker, and has interesting, yet foundationally neo-liberal economic ideas.
Clinton is the establishment candidate. One we know, who knows the system. She's smart, tough, and loves painting things in absolutist good v. evil, aristotelian logic terms. She's obviously pro-neo-liberal economically, following a more traditionalist stance than Obama. In fact, she's pretty much a practical status quo candidate despite being a woman, and a widely reviled one. Those voting for her seem to be white women, wealthier, and strangely asian and hispanic (perhaps because they know Hillary, or are afraid a black man is unelectable.
Huckabee is a charming religious idealogue, with traditionalist politics and philosophy. He's funny, and has a sentimental moral message. His politics are optimistic and conservative. His supporters are all traditionalist conservatives, especially the poorer fundamentalist southern christians, and the once proud psuedo-macho male conservatives.
And McCain is the biggest conundrum. A seemingly senile maverick, who wants his cake (suddenly following Bush foreign policy, and immigration policy) and eat it to (his criticism of supply side economics, corporate keynesian economics, and his own go-it-alone not follow the party line conservatism). Clearly, he appeals to like-minded individualists and non-idelogical conservatives, as well as moneyed republicans scared of Huckabee, and not willing to get behind the lost cause that was the Mormon automaton named Romney.
So, it is interesting. If Obama or CLinton wins, it marks a major shift in stereotypes in America. CLinton is more or less a male candidate in message, demeanor, etc. Her feminity has been lost in the process to become a political figure (much like Thatcher), and she's incredibly forceful and establishment-minded. Obama is black in skin tone only. He;s a well-educated populist, with rather traditionalist economic and social ideas wrapped in the unadorned cloak of optimism and hope. McCain is the outsider, who sold his soul to get in; and found, he was despised by those inside once he did. Huckabee is the southern preacher, who doesnt have much of a chance, but shows just how secular much of the country really is (many parts are clearly highly religious), and how serious they take policy and politics.
Truly, I am surprised how little actual political or economic change will probably occur with any of the four candidates (Obam and CLinton have very similar policy platforms; and McCains is essentially his own personalized version of Bush's). However, I do think the fact that a black man, and a woman could become president (or a Baptist preacher if he had a chance), shows the drastic change that has occurred in our society in terms of stereotype or perception. If either is elected, it wont really be a watershed moment politically or economically. As De Tocqueville commented in Democracy in America, we Americans tend to play follow the group--we want to fit in-- and become egregiously docile and compliant to the wishes of this majority group. And that is pathetic... To me, the only sensible candidate is Ron Paul. He has a thorough command of American ideals, of America's economic problems, and how to fix them. But yes, he's an outsider, and says what people dont care to hear. Sheep, fit for slaughter we are, willing to be led by a suave populizing minority, or a shrill combatitive woman, an old Machiavellian maverick, or a sentimental southern preacher, to the dustbins of history. Ready to become the next United Kingdom, of little importance, deference, and a thorough willingness to acquiesce to non-traditional thought and peoples and governmental control.
PS: I dont know why I wrote this post late on Saturday night (?), and I sure didnt intend to. Hm...I might as well continue.
I can say I would prefer Obama out of these four main candidates, with McCain coming in at no.2. Honestly, I'm disappointed in all four of them. If Obama does win on change (which is clearly much needed), I still will be very disappointed as his message was so incredibly simple-minded and populist, I almost vomited after each one of his Joel Osteen-like sermons. Seriously, Ron Paul, although perhaps too naively libertarian for my taste, has some excellent and much needed ideas. His stance on the Fed and banking is quite excellent.
Finally, politics is and has been in the domain of philosophy forever, until it was banished to the cobwebs of the dank footnoted dungeon of humanities, in the furthest reaches of those wonderfully technical and profit-savvy research institutions we somehow call universities. I mean, really, Aristotle wrote Politics (excellent by the way), Plato the Republic. Hegel provided the foundation for the German state, if not European nationalism. And even today, recent philosophers from Baudrillard, Foucault and Sarte, to Noam Chomsky and Rorty, to Charles Taylor and even Eco, were political, and considered politics a major part of their philosophy.
I was mostly being facetious since I've had threads closed in the past for much less (infringement wise).
If this were posted say, 12-18 months ago, it wouldn't have lasted an hour without removal or ridicule.
You're right however, the important question becomes, How did forum participation degrade to this level in the first place? Perhaps, excessive ruling really only served as a deterrent to insightful discussion. I've argued this I think about a year and a half ago; I should dig up that discussion.
Justin S.
Member
The paranoia and pervading all-imcompassing sense of victimization and martyrdom Judas consistently displays with every single post, is far too interesting and amusing to lock down. Such an interesting character.
If you had actually read my response to WeAreInFlames in it's entirety, it should have been apparent to you that I am supporting of posts like these, however embarrassing to the poster.
If however, your hypocritical ways are at the root of frustration and disdain, that might be something to discuss with a councilor. <3
Norsemaiden
barbarian
Norsemaiden
barbarian
Ted Kennedy has something to say about Osama bin Laden's electoral success
Last edited by a moderator:
