Us President - Obama or McCain

[Scotsman]

For me it has to Barack

McCain is a replica of Bush - same policies and ideology

The election of am African American President would add to the legacy of the great Martin Luther King

Thoughts?

[LiverpoolHibs]

For me it has to Barack

McCain is a replica of Bush - same policies and ideology

The election of am African American President would add to the legacy of the great Martin Luther King

Thoughts?

Really?

I wonder if Obama would ever come out with something along the lines of,

“I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today – my own government.”

[Sylar]

Obama seems the safer option - not so much in a "Obama vs McCain" argument, but an "Obama vs eventually Palin" argument - that woman is a ****ing nut! :bitchy:

[davym7062]

somebody will shoot obama if he wins imo:brickwall

[Winston Ingram]

Don't like that McCain. He acts like he's got a chip on his shoulder













:duck:

[Hibbyradge]

Obama seems the safer option - not so much in a "Obama vs McCain" argument, but an "Obama vs eventually Palin" argument - that woman is a ****ing nut! :bitchy:

:agree:

Stepford Wife.

[PC Stamp]

The ongoing "war" against terrorism is costing the USA an absolute fortune and merely adding to their current economic woes at an alarming rate.

Obama is perhaps just what they need to restore their credibility on the world stage. He'll be expected to act on facilitating the USA's exit from Iraq in fairly quick time and as a result reduce the mammoth financial haemorrhaging that their Iraq presence is causing. It will also perhaps allow the Iraqis the opportunity to finally attempt to sort themselves out in the post Saddam era.

Obama for me comes across as a bit of a modern day version of John F Kennedy. He is a clever guy who has very clear thoughts and visions for his country.

Sadly though, those in the murky corridors of power in the USA don't appear to like that in a leader and one can only hope that if elected, the same fate doesn't befall Obama as befell JFK.

[NYHibby]

The election of am African American President would add to the legacy of the great Martin Luther King

I'm going to have to have to disagree with you on that. Linking anything that an african-american (or someone of mixed race in Obama's case) does to King's legacy just trivializes what King did himself and minimizes the work that others did. Its not like Obama has any connection to King other than the color of his skin.

Also, I don't think that King would have wanted people to vote for a president solely on his race.

[hibbytam]

The ongoing "war" against terrorism is costing the USA an absolute fortune and merely adding to their current economic woes at an alarming rate.

Obama is perhaps just what they need to restore their credibility on the world stage. He'll be expected to act on facilitating the USA's exit from Iraq in fairly quick time and as a result reduce the mammoth financial haemorrhaging that their Iraq presence is causing. It will also perhaps allow the Iraqis the opportunity to finally attempt to sort themselves out in the post Saddam era.

Obama for me comes across as a bit of a modern day version of John F Kennedy. He is a clever guy who has very clear thoughts and visions for his country.

Sadly though, those in the murky corridors of power in the USA don't appear to like that in a leader and one can only hope that if elected, the same fate doesn't befall Obama as befell JFK.

I have fears that the comparison may prove all too true.

Really, there (should be) no choice between the two, but unfortunately the sensible don't seem to run america. See bush, bush and yet more bush.

[GhostofBolivar]

I don't care who wins as long as that witch Palin is put up against a wall and shot afterwards.

I can deal with her thinking that dinosaurs are a big test from God to see how much we believe. I can deal with her attitude to enviromentalism thinking the best thing to do is to drill for oil everywhere and hope for the best. I can put up with her thinking that being able to see Russia is the same as being able to understand Russia. These things are just rank stupidity and I am already well used to this. Alistair Darling is my MP after all.

That she hunts bears as a hobby makes me wish extreme ill upon her. A hideously painful and untreatable form of leprosy would be ideal. For the bear is first among animals and should not be hunted by mere men.

But what really made me hate the very air she breathes; what made me develop a form of Pavlovian tourette's whenever I hear her name is the rape kit thing (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/21/palin.rape.exams/)

I can't begin to comprehend how that must feel to someone on the receiving end. Weeks of trying to put your life back together then a bill through the post of $1000 for the cost of gathering forensic evidence from your body. Maybe Alaskans feel that rape itself isn't enough of a violation.

It's bad enough that very, very few reported rapes end in conviction (6% of cases in England and Wales) without the authorities - and a female mayor, no less - wilfully putting obstacles in the way. And the worst thing, the very worst thing about this is that it's directed against the poor. They lack the money or insurance to pay for it and are thus, far less likely to report the crime. It's about as cynical a way of getting the crime rate down (if no-one reports it, it doesn't happen) I can imagine.

But hey, she's got nice legs and looks great in glasses so she must be nice.

:grr::fuming::timebomb::soapbox::chop:

[--------]

I don't care who wins as long as that witch Palin is put up against a wall and shot afterwards.

I can deal with her thinking that dinosaurs are a big test from God to see how much we believe. I can deal with her attitude to enviromentalism thinking the best thing to do is to drill for oil everywhere and hope for the best. I can put up with her thinking that being able to see Russia is the same as being able to understand Russia. These things are just rank stupidity and I am already well used to this. Alistair Darling is my MP after all.

That she hunts bears as a hobby makes me wish extreme ill upon her. A hideously painful and untreatable form of leprosy would be ideal. For the bear is first among animals and should not be hunted by mere men.

The bears have mystic powers - she'll pay dearly for that.

Trust me. :devil:


But what really made me hate the very air she breathes; what made me develop a form of Pavlovian tourette's whenever I hear her name is the rape kit thing (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/21/palin.rape.exams/)

I can't begin to comprehend how that must feel to someone on the receiving end. Weeks of trying to put your life back together then a bill through the post of $1000 for the cost of gathering forensic evidence from your body. Maybe Alaskans feel that rape itself isn't enough of a violation.

It's bad enough that very, very few reported rapes end in conviction (6% of cases in England and Wales) without the authorities - and a female mayor, no less - wilfully putting obstacles in the way. And the worst thing, the very worst thing about this is that it's directed against the poor. They lack the money or insurance to pay for it and are thus, far less likely to report the crime. It's about as cynical a way of getting the crime rate down (if no-one reports it, it doesn't happen) I can imagine.

But hey, she's got nice legs and looks great in glasses so she must be nice.

:grr::fuming::timebomb::soapbox::chop:



The worry is that since most Americans carry their brains between their legs, the rape kit business and the fact that she looks like a Desperate Housewife might very well swing the election her way.

I mean, we're talking Bubba and Jolene here. Anything that keeps Bubba out of jail's OK by him, and Jolene will always stand by her man - even when his nickname's the Tooth Fairy.....

[Betty Boop]

Mc Cain is a nasty little man who spent years blocking all attempts to find and rescue the hundreds or thousands of Vietnam MIA military personnel who were still in prison camps and mud holes in that area.

His "little person" stature is obvious to anyone who wants to take a close look at him.

His spoiled brat temper is well earned. He's a spoiled brat by nature.

Typical phoney, Bush/Republican asshole.

Just the kind of person the stupid American people want for President.

How pathetic.:grr:

[--------]

i have the impression that Joe B shaded the Veep debate - mainly because he was actually answering the questions he was being asked - Palin was giving what appeared to be prepared responses which at times had little relevance to the questions.

If Biden can just restrain his tendency to repeat himself, maybe eventually it may get through even to Bubba and Jolene that Alaskan Barbie maybe isn't the best person to be carrying the briefcase with the big red button....

[CraigK]

Hopefully Obama but i fear that Palin may swing it for the Republicans. :brickwall

[LiverpoolHibs]

i have the impression that Joe B shaded the Veep debate - mainly because he was actually answering the questions he was being asked - Palin was giving what appeared to be prepared responses which at times had little relevance to the questions.

If Biden can just restrain his tendency to repeat himself, maybe eventually it may get through even to Bubba and Jolene that Alaskan Barbie maybe isn't the best person to be carrying the briefcase with the big red button....

Yep, but it's a worrying insight into the American psyche that the biggest concern for the Biden camp running up to the debate was him appearing too knowledgeable and competent.

[--------]

Well he don't want to appear to be bullying the bimbo.... :devil:

[Expecting Rain]

I hope that for the sake of the continuation of the existence of the human race Obama becomes the new president!:paranoid:

[The Green Goblin]

I like Obama because he seems to have some degree of mental intelligence and his ideas and policies reflect this. I have 2 concerns though.

First, both campaigns have expressed unwavering support for Israel, (as anyone who wants to win the U.S election must do) and are therefore unlikely to bring anything new to the situation in the middle east. Obama might be the more likely one to bring some small changes to U.S foreign policy, but I still have my doubts.

Second, even if Obama won the election, I would be afraid for his safety, as many people are, and with good reason, such is the `threat` he poses to the corrupt Washington establishment, and I would not be surprised if Biden is president within 12-18 months of the election.

I hope I am wrong on both counts.

GG

[NYHibby]

Yep, but it's a worrying insight into the American psyche that the biggest concern for the Biden camp running up to the debate was him appearing too knowledgeable and competent.

The biggest concern wasn't that he would appear "too knowledgeable". It was that he would come across as arrogant and condescending. We like to like our leaders. People aren't going to vote for you if you're a complete jerk. Example: Al Gore

Coming across as arrogant and condescending is not what you want to do if you're campainging on improving our image to the rest of the world. Could you image if Biden was having a joint press conference with Gordon Brown and he pulled an "Al Gore sigh" while Brown was talking?

[--------]

The biggest concern wasn't that he would appear "too knowledgeable". It was that he would come across as arrogant and condescending. We like to like our leaders. People aren't going to vote for you if you're a complete jerk. Example: Al Gore

Coming across as arrogant and condescending is not what you want to do if you're campainging on improving our image to the rest of the world. Could you image if Biden was having a joint press conference with Gordon Brown and he pulled an "Al Gore sigh" while Brown was talking?


Mate, I wouldn't blame the guy if he fell asleep and started snoring while Brown was talking - have you heard Brown in full flow?

What concerns me (among a whole lot of other things like Alaskan Barbie suddenly having access to an unlimited supply of H-bombs and deciding to go off on a whale hunt with them) is that the actual issues don't seem to be at all important - all that commentators seem to be asking about is image and perception.

Don't ask whether Palin has the faintest clue what she's talking about - she's a woman and she looks nicer than JB and who the hell cares if McCain's been contradicting himself and lying in his teeth since he had his first nappy changed....

[Lucius Apuleius]

Working with a load of Alabaman, Louisianan and Texan rednecks, they reckon their is absolutely no way Obama will ever make it to the White House. Probably posturing, but who knows. They all hate him with a vengance.

[julz]

I dont know much about their policies but Obama simply because he represents change. A good change. A change the world needs to see America making.

[JimBHibees]

Working with a load of Alabaman, Louisianan and Texan rednecks, they reckon their is absolutely no way Obama will ever make it to the White House. Probably posturing, but who knows. They all hate him with a vengance.

All to do with his policies no doubt. :confused:

[LiverpoolHibs]

The biggest concern wasn't that he would appear "too knowledgeable". It was that he would come across as arrogant and condescending. We like to like our leaders. People aren't going to vote for you if you're a complete jerk. Example: Al Gore

Coming across as arrogant and condescending is not what you want to do if you're campainging on improving our image to the rest of the world. Could you image if Biden was having a joint press conference with Gordon Brown and he pulled an "Al Gore sigh" while Brown was talking?

Yes, apparently over all other concerns.

And Sarah Palin is likeable?

[LiverpoolHibs]

I dont know much about their policies but Obama simply because he represents change. A good change. A change the world needs to see America making.

I rather like this excerpt from a recent John Pilger article,

"Bush may be on his way out, but the Republicans have built an ideological machine that transcends the loss of electoral power - because their collaborators are, as the American writer Mike Whitney put it succinctly, "bait-and-switch" Democrats, of whom Obama is the prince.

Those who write of Obama that "when it comes to international affairs, he will be a huge improvement on Bush" demonstrate the same wilful naivety that backed the bait-and-switch of Bill Clinton - and Tony Blair. Of Blair, wrote the late Hugo Young in 1997, "ideology has surrendered entirely to 'values' . . . there are no sacred cows [and] no fossilised limits to the ground over which the mind might range in search of a better Britain . . ."

Eleven years and five wars later, at least a million people lie dead. Barack Obama is the American Blair. That he is a smooth operator and a black man is irrelevant. He is of an enduring, rampant system whose drum majors and cheer squads never see, or want to see, the consequences of 500lb bombs dropped unerringly on mud, stone and straw houses."

[lobster]

I rather like this excerpt from a recent John Pilger article,

"Bush may be on his way out, but the Republicans have built an ideological machine that transcends the loss of electoral power - because their collaborators are, as the American writer Mike Whitney put it succinctly, "bait-and-switch" Democrats, of whom Obama is the prince.

Those who write of Obama that "when it comes to international affairs, he will be a huge improvement on Bush" demonstrate the same wilful naivety that backed the bait-and-switch of Bill Clinton - and Tony Blair. Of Blair, wrote the late Hugo Young in 1997, "ideology has surrendered entirely to 'values' . . . there are no sacred cows [and] no fossilised limits to the ground over which the mind might range in search of a better Britain . . ."

Eleven years and five wars later, at least a million people lie dead. Barack Obama is the American Blair. That he is a smooth operator and a black man is irrelevant. He is of an enduring, rampant system whose drum majors and cheer squads never see, or want to see, the consequences of 500lb bombs dropped unerringly on mud, stone and straw houses."

Bang on, even if we like to delude ourselves that things really could be better under Obama. With the state of the US at present they need Houdini FFS. Doesnt really matter who gets in they are hamstrung by the sheer incompetence and downright evil of their predecessor. The USA is now financially as well as morally bankrupt

BTW who are the 6 rednecks who voted for McCain? Naw! :grr:

[NYHibby]

Yes, apparently over all other concerns.

And Sarah Palin is likeable?

Yes, to a large number of American voters. Especially compared to Bidden.


BTW who are the 6 rednecks who voted for McCain? Naw! :grr:

I'm one of those rednecks. I'm also the only on this thread who can really vote in this election.

[lobster]

Yes, to a large number of American voters. Especially compared to Bidden.



I'm one of those rednecks. I'm also the only on this thread who can really vote in this election.

Better off wi' an oven chip than McCain for President
Forgive them lord they know not what they do :pray:

[LiverpoolHibs]

Yes, to a large number of American voters. Especially compared to Bidden.

Are you one of them?

[--------]

I rather like this excerpt from a recent John Pilger article,

"Bush may be on his way out, but the Republicans have built an ideological machine that transcends the loss of electoral power - because their collaborators are, as the American writer Mike Whitney put it succinctly, "bait-and-switch" Democrats, of whom Obama is the prince.

Those who write of Obama that "when it comes to international affairs, he will be a huge improvement on Bush" demonstrate the same wilful naivety that backed the bait-and-switch of Bill Clinton - and Tony Blair. Of Blair, wrote the late Hugo Young in 1997, "ideology has surrendered entirely to 'values' . . . there are no sacred cows [and] no fossilised limits to the ground over which the mind might range in search of a better Britain . . ."

Eleven years and five wars later, at least a million people lie dead. Barack Obama is the American Blair. That he is a smooth operator and a black man is irrelevant. He is of an enduring, rampant system whose drum majors and cheer squads never see, or want to see, the consequences of 500lb bombs dropped unerringly on mud, stone and straw houses."


That is a cracking quote, LH. Any chance of a reference to the whole article/essay/book?

And it's true that NYHibby is indeed the only contributor to this thread so far who can vote in this election.

It's also true that the outcome of the election - in other words how he and his fellow-Americans use their votes - will determine the life and death of millions of people on this planet who can't vote in it?

But then WE can hardly complain - Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown have reduced us to being no more the Igor to America's Dr Frankenstein....

[Hank Schrader]

That is a cracking quote, LH. Any chance of a reference to the whole article/essay/book?

Was going to ask the same myself, excellent post by LH.:agree:

[LiverpoolHibs]

That is a cracking quote, LH. Any chance of a reference to the whole article/essay/book?

And it's true that NYHibby is indeed the only contributor to this thread so far who can vote in this election.

It's also true that the outcome of the election - in other words how he and his fellow-Americans use their votes - will determine the life and death of millions of people on this planet who can't vote in it?

But then WE can hardly complain - Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown have reduced us to being no more the Igor to America's Dr Frankenstein....


Was going to ask the same myself, excellent post by LH.:agree:

http://www.newstatesman.com/media/2008/07/pilger-obama-afghanistan-news

There you go.

[NYHibby]

And it's true that NYHibby is indeed the only contributor to this thread so far who can vote in this election.

It's also true that the outcome of the election - in other words how he and his fellow-Americans use their votes - will determine the life and death of millions of people on this planet who can't vote in it?

But then WE can hardly complain - Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown have reduced us to being no more the Igor to America's Dr Frankenstein....

I think we're all over blowing the importance of this election. I personally don't buy all this "most important election of our lifetimes" stuff that the media is pushing. They say that every election. The American political system is set up in such a way that the outcome of whoever wins is not going to be that different. Our system does not have the swings that yours does. The bigger difference is if the party who wins the white house also wins control of congress and maintains it. Internationally we'd be in basically the same situation even if Al Gore won. Examples: Authorization for the Iraq war was passed with the majority of democrats voting for it. You could also use example from Clinton's presidency for a Gore presidency's argument for going into Iraq. Every US president since FDR has deployed US troops overseas resulting in the loss of life.

Actually I'm working this very moment on a paper and a presentation on if the British prime ministership is evolving into an American style presidency. It won't be done for some time though.

[NYHibby]

By the way, I'm going to be mailing in my Pennsylvania ballot soon (I don't vote where I'm currently living). If people here are interested, I'll post a picture of it. I know my Chinese friend was fascinated by it.

[H1bs6H3arts2 FC]

For me it has to Barack

McCain is a replica of Bush - same policies and ideology

The election of am African American President would add to the legacy of the great Martin Luther King

Thoughts?

You missed out the option of 'neither' !!!

The guy is just a puppet - look at his Foreign Policy, he wants to leave Iraq & focus on Afghanistan (a country that has never been conquered militarily) - untill the next US President associates Foreign Policy with domestic economics, terrorism & poverty at home will increase.

Have you heard of Ron Paul - if not look up some of his speaches on Youtube. This man speaks sense (and has done consistently for decades) yet the British main stream press have never mentioned him ??!!!

In my opinion Obama will win & nothing will change - I only hope the people of the US get so pi**ed off they demand change !!!

[LiverpoolHibs]

I think we're all over blowing the importance of this election. I personally don't buy all this "most important election of our lifetimes" stuff that the media is pushing. They say that every election. The American political system is set up in such a way that the outcome of whoever wins is not going to be that different. Our system does not have the swings that yours does. The bigger difference is if the party who wins the white house also wins control of congress and maintains it. Internationally we'd be in basically the same situation even if Al Gore won. Examples: Authorization for the Iraq war was passed with the majority of democrats voting for it. You could also use example from Clinton's presidency for a Gore presidency's argument for going into Iraq. Every US president since FDR has deployed US troops overseas resulting in the loss of life.

Actually I'm working this very moment on a paper and a presentation on if the British prime ministership is evolving into an American style presidency. It won't be done for some time though.

Yep, agree with all of that.

You haven't answered if you find Palin likeable though. :greengrin

[LiverpoolHibs]

By the way, I'm going to be mailing in my Pennsylvania ballot soon (I don't vote where I'm currently living). If people here are interested, I'll post a picture of it. I know my Chinese friend was fascinated by it.

:agree: I'd be interested in seeing that.

[JimBHibees]

I think we're all over blowing the importance of this election. I personally don't buy all this "most important election of our lifetimes" stuff that the media is pushing. They say that every election. The American political system is set up in such a way that the outcome of whoever wins is not going to be that different. Our system does not have the swings that yours does. The bigger difference is if the party who wins the white house also wins control of congress and maintains it. Internationally we'd be in basically the same situation even if Al Gore won. Examples: Authorization for the Iraq war was passed with the majority of democrats voting for it. You could also use example from Clinton's presidency for a Gore presidency's argument for going into Iraq. Every US president since FDR has deployed US troops overseas resulting in the loss of life.

Actually I'm working this very moment on a paper and a presentation on if the British prime ministership is evolving into an American style presidency. It won't be done for some time though.

Your too late it has already happened. :greengrin

[LiverpoolHibs]

You missed out the option of 'neither' !!!

The guy is just a puppet - look at his Foreign Policy, he wants to leave Iraq & focus on Afghanistan (a country that has never been conquered militarily) - untill the next US President associates Foreign Policy with domestic economics, terrorism & poverty at home will increase.

Have you heard of Ron Paul - if not look up some of his speaches on Youtube. This man speaks sense (and has done consistently for decades) yet the British main stream press have never mentioned him ??!!!

In my opinion Obama will win & nothing will change - I only hope the people of the US get so pi**ed off they demand change !!!

Paul's a fascinating politician, and one who is occasionally spot-on.

I find his stance on gun-ownership, abortion, tax, social security, immigration and health care more than a wee bit distasteful, however.

[H1bs6H3arts2 FC]

Paul's a fascinating politician, and one who is occasionally spot-on.

I find his stance on gun-ownership, abortion, tax, social security, immigration and health care more than a wee bit distasteful, however.

I don't know enough about his views on these issues - can you fill me in on these ?....and how do the 2 main candidates think on these issues ??

I still think the current problems in the economy are a result of printing money with no controls & spending trillions on empire building in the guise of UN interventions. Surely some of the trillions spent on defence could be redirected to help the poor (of which there are many in the US) - the same can be said for Britain - Glasgow has the poorest areas in Europe including the former eastern block, which should not be the case considering we are suppost to be one of the richest countries in Europe.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I don't know enough about his views on these issues - can you fill me in on these ?....and how do the 2 main candidates think on these issues ??

I still think the current problems in the economy are a result of printing money with no controls & spending trillions on empire building in the guise of UN interventions. Surely some of the trillions spent on defence could be redirected to help the poor (of which there are many in the US) - the same can be said for Britain - Glasgow has the poorest areas in Europe including the former eastern block, which should not be the case considering we are suppost to be one of the richest countries in Europe.

He's a rabid constitutionalist hence his unswerving support for gun ownership. He is very anti-abortion and anti-universal healthcare, essentially wants to abolish social security and progressive income tax. And he is fanatically anti-immigration.

[Sergio sledge]

I think we're all over blowing the importance of this election. I personally don't buy all this "most important election of our lifetimes" stuff that the media is pushing. They say that every election. The American political system is set up in such a way that the outcome of whoever wins is not going to be that different. Our system does not have the swings that yours does. The bigger difference is if the party who wins the white house also wins control of congress and maintains it. Internationally we'd be in basically the same situation even if Al Gore won. Examples: Authorization for the Iraq war was passed with the majority of democrats voting for it. You could also use example from Clinton's presidency for a Gore presidency's argument for going into Iraq. Every US president since FDR has deployed US troops overseas resulting in the loss of life.

Actually I'm working this very moment on a paper and a presentation on if the British prime ministership is evolving into an American style presidency. It won't be done for some time though.

Agree with all of that.

It is looking very likely that Obama will get the Presidency, and Democrats will win a large proportion of the house, so there might be some more noticable changes with this election. Obama however is all style and no substance IMHO, McCain is Bush MkIII. Both as bad options as each other, for different reasons.

Off on a tangent, but I got back from Florida at the weekend, and watched some of the election coverage over there, and was shocked to see that the vast majority of adverts and broadcasts were all about slagging off the other person, and not about focusing on their own policies. Evidenced by the adverts put out about Obama's links to a former terrorist, despite Obama having renounced the guys past (before the election or nominations) and only worked on a charity organisation with him, and also McCains involvement with financial irregularities 20 years ago, despite McCain admitting previously (before the election and nominations) that it was the biggest mistake of his life and apologising for it. The ad's were basically "Look at him, he's so bad, you shouldn't vote for him because he's so bad." Rather than being "Vote for me because I will do this, this and this..." I really hope this sort of thing doesn't become more prevalent in Britain. Also, there were loads of adverts by different companies/firms/lobby groups etc. supporting one or the other candidate, which we thankfully don't see over here.

[H1bs6H3arts2 FC]

He's a rabid constitutionalist hence his unswerving support for gun ownership. He is very anti-abortion and anti-universal healthcare, essentially wants to abolish social security and progressive income tax. And he is fanatically anti-immigration.

to be honest i don't know enough about the whole process in the US but from watching RP compared to BO & JM - he makes alot more sense.

is anti-immigration that bad, what will happen in Britain when unemplyment rises to record levels & we can't send home our EU workers ?? Even at present we have Immigrant workers enjoying high levels of disposable income when your average family is struggling to pay the mortgage & fuel bills.

[Eurohibees]

Felt that the Obama Vs Clinton was an embarresment after a while and after all the hype that McCain would get it not that i would want that... love his oven chips mind you

[Nakedmanoncrack]

Off on a tangent, but I got back from Florida at the weekend, and watched some of the election coverage over there, and was shocked to see that the vast majority of adverts and broadcasts were all about slagging off the other person, and not about focusing on their own policies. Evidenced by the adverts put out about Obama's links to a former terrorist, despite Obama having renounced the guys past (before the election or nominations) and only worked on a charity organisation with him, and also McCains involvement with financial irregularities 20 years ago, despite McCain admitting previously (before the election and nominations) that it was the biggest mistake of his life and apologising for it. The ad's were basically "Look at him, he's so bad, you shouldn't vote for him because he's so bad." Rather than being "Vote for me because I will do this, this and this..." I really hope this sort of thing doesn't become more prevalent in Britain. Also, there were loads of adverts by different companies/firms/lobby groups etc. supporting one or the other candidate, which we thankfully don't see over here.

No surprise really as there's nothing between them in terms of policy, they may very occasionally have different ways of acheiving the same aims but that's about as different as they get. As usual there is no choice merely the illusion of choice, a very narrow selection between two factions of the same business party.

[Haymaker]

Obama might change the colour of the white house but he wont change the direction

[NYHibby]

Yep, agree with all of that.

You haven't answered if you find Palin likeable though. :greengrin

She's like twenty years older than me.



Off on a tangent, but I got back from Florida at the weekend, and watched some of the election coverage over there, and was shocked to see that the vast majority of adverts and broadcasts were all about slagging off the other person, and not about focusing on their own policies. Evidenced by the adverts put out about Obama's links to a former terrorist, despite Obama having renounced the guys past (before the election or nominations) and only worked on a charity organisation with him, and also McCains involvement with financial irregularities 20 years ago, despite McCain admitting previously (before the election and nominations) that it was the biggest mistake of his life and apologising for it. The ad's were basically "Look at him, he's so bad, you shouldn't vote for him because he's so bad." Rather than being "Vote for me because I will do this, this and this..." I really hope this sort of thing doesn't become more prevalent in Britain. Also, there were loads of adverts by different companies/firms/lobby groups etc. supporting one or the other candidate, which we thankfully don't see over here.

Part of that you experienced is because you were in Florida, a swing state. States that are firmly for one candidate or the other will not have that many TV ads run in them. Negative ads have serve a purpose. Negative points about a candidate need to be pointed out. This should be the job of the media to look into these things. However, in some cases the media fails at this (for reasons like being afraid to be accused of being racist if they say anything negative). Then the other candidates have to point these things out.

I personally think that the connection with the weatherman terrorist should be addressed. Ayers has killed more people than any politician. The charity has been described by some as an effort for extreme reeducation. You have to wonder why Obama continues to associate with these kind of people. This is just as bad, if not worse, as if McCain was hanging out with Bin Laden before he was an terrorist.

[GhostofBolivar]

She's like twenty years older than me.



Part of that you experienced is because you were in Florida, a swing state. States that are firmly for one candidate or the other will not have that many TV ads run in them. Negative ads have serve a purpose. Negative points about a candidate need to be pointed out. This should be the job of the media to look into these things. However, in some cases the media fails at this (for reasons like being afraid to be accused of being racist if they say anything negative). Then the other candidates have to point these things out.

I personally think that the connection with the weatherman terrorist should be addressed. Ayers has killed more people than any politician. The charity has been described by some as an effort for extreme reeducation. You have to wonder why Obama continues to associate with these kind of people. This is just as bad, if not worse, as if McCain was hanging out with Bin Laden before he was an terrorist.

If you believe that, then I have some wonderful magic beans I'd like to show you...

[NYHibby]

I meant personally killed not indirectly killed.

Although, Ted Kennedy is rumored to have killed several people with his car...

[LiverpoolHibs]

She's like twenty years older than me.

Eh? What does that matter? You can't find people twenty years older than you likeable?


Part of that you experienced is because you were in Florida, a swing state. States that are firmly for one candidate or the other will not have that many TV ads run in them. Negative ads have serve a purpose. Negative points about a candidate need to be pointed out. This should be the job of the media to look into these things. However, in some cases the media fails at this (for reasons like being afraid to be accused of being racist if they say anything negative). Then the other candidates have to point these things out.

I personally think that the connection with the weatherman terrorist should be addressed. Ayers has killed more people than any politician. The charity has been described by some as an effort for extreme reeducation. You have to wonder why Obama continues to associate with these kind of people. This is just as bad, if not worse, as if McCain was hanging out with Bin Laden before he was an terrorist.


I meant personally killed not indirectly killed.

Although, Ted Kennedy is rumored to have killed several people with his car...

That is just laughable.

[GhostofBolivar]

I meant personally killed not indirectly killed.

Although, Ted Kennedy is rumored to have killed several people with his car...

1. There's no real distinction between Dubya, St Tony and the soldiers who've done their dirty work. They are personally responsible for Iraq, therefore they are personally responsible for the dead. And do you really want to start arguing that about Mao, Stalin and Hitler? They were politicians, no?

2. This is an election where one candidate was shot down while dropping bombs on Hanoi during his 23rd mission over Vietnam. We don't know how many casualties McCain's bombs caused, but I'm pretty sure it meets your definition of 'personally killed'.

[SlickShoes]

to be honest i don't know enough about the whole process in the US but from watching RP compared to BO & JM - he makes alot more sense.

is anti-immigration that bad, what will happen in Britain when unemplyment rises to record levels & we can't send home our EU workers ?? Even at present we have Immigrant workers enjoying high levels of disposable income when your average family is struggling to pay the mortgage & fuel bills.

Why cant we ship out the scottish people that refuse to work, claim benefits and do nothing with there life?

If i had a high amount of disposible income and an immigrant family is on the breadline whats the difference? Why cant immigrant families be average families too?

[NAE NOOKIE]

The trouble with American politics is that you only have two parties with any chance of winning. One is very right wing and the other is right wing.

Thank goodness things arn't like that in the United Kingd .... Oh never mind !!!

[Badger0762]

NY - I too am going to be voting but not for a continuation of the clusterxxxx policies of the Republican Party. They seem to take the line of lets free the world from oppression as long as it will do us some good, push democracy when their own house is not in order - Florida 2004. Do you believe that the war in Iraq is valid? Read the 9/11 commission report if so. McCain will continue all of this crap.

Palin stands for everything I hate about this country - highly religious to the point of forcing it down people's throats (I believe in a person's right to practice a religion but for f's sake keep it to yourself), pro-life even if it was the girls uncle who raped her, pro-guns, the Iraq War is a "task from God", clueless about the world and only got a passport 2 years ago......etc etc etc I could go on for hours or am I just taking in too much from the "liberal" CNN? I should really watch Fox News more I guess. You think Palin would be good to step into McCain's shoes after he gets cancer for the 5th time - "God help us all" (when in Rome and all that).

Politics over here is a complete joke. If you (NY) want to go into Ayers then you also need to look into McCain's past too to be fair no? What about his links to racists and former KKK members (can look up the names again if you wish) or his interference in financial scandals from a while back too (again I can dig up the facts) :yawn::blah:. Neither should matter too much unless they have the same ideologies which they do not. It should be about who is fit to run the country and who's policies will get us out of the crapholle we find ourselves in now. However, as usual what the election will be based on is the smears and popularity contest.

The only thing I really like about Obama is that he wants to use diplomacy to start to improve the US standing in the world. Get people to realise that the US is not the centre of the world and that they are being left behind by the likes of Europe as a whole and China. Whether this is all rhetoric is another question but at least it appears to be a step in the right direction. McCain will continue with the policies of and belief that the US is the greatest country in the world. The US is the greatest country in the world for Americans - live with your head in the sand and pretend all is well.

I have lived over here for 4 and a half years now and we are in the midst of trying to move back to Scotland - great timing I know. I cannot wait to get back to the sectarianism, obiesity and drugs (cc David Murray) - hold on.......:devil:

Sorry - rant over. NY vote, and we will agree to differ, after all, all that matters is that we stick it up the **** on the 19th :agree:.

[Badger0762]

The trouble with American politics is that you only have two parties with any chance of winning. One is very right wing and the other is right wing.

Thank goodness things arn't like that in the United Kingd .... Oh never mind !!!


Exactly right Bovril but the big problem is that they think the Democrats are lefties!! They don't really understand socialism or communism - just think they are bad and swear words!! McCain was even quoted as saying he would not sit down with the leaders of Spain, a NATO partner, due to the socialist government. Nuff said.

[ancienthibby]

It's really not much of a choice is it??

I see no point in Obama in being elected. Apart from the fact that I think he is still too weak and inexperienced, I fear that the dark forces that do exist within the US establishment already have their well-prepared plans just itching to take him out. It's sad, but true.

Then there's the war-mongering McCain who can do so much damage on his own. Then there's his age and the problem of his deputy. Lovely lady and good Christian believer, but boy does it scare me that the powers of the Western world COULD be under her control!!

[Betty Boop]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I Sums up John McCain, George Bush on crack! :grr:

[NYHibby]

Crap, I just typed a lengthy responce to BGhibs and lost it all when trying to post it. I really don't care enough to retype the whole thing.

I will say that Obama claiming to use "diplomacy to start to improve the US standing in the world" is just a smokescreen to distract voters. Did you see Obama's comments in the last debate about Pakistan? He basically said that he is very willing to completely disregard Pakistan's sovereignty if they don't do exactly what he wants them to do. How is bombing Pakistan or sending US soldiers across their broader without Pakistani approval going to improve the world's view of America? How is disregarding other nation's sovereignty whenever you see fit any better than what Bush has done? For that matter, how is what Obama is threatening any different from what Germany did in Belgium in 1914?

[NYHibby]

Your too late it has already happened. :greengrin

At this point, I disagree. To try to sum a twenty page paper in a few sentences: the position of British Prime Minister is much more powerful than that of US President. If you think that Blair acquired more power than the prime minister traditionally has, it is illogical to say that he was becoming presidential. Blair was able to use the media in a vaguely US fashion to be able to over shadow other cabinet members in a way that made it seem that collegial nature of the Westminster model had changed. Similar point with Thatcher.

Richard Heffernan wrote some interesting stuff on this. I read an journal article of his entitled "Why the Prime Minister cannot be a President" last night.

[NYHibby]

Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal that I found interesting.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122360618747721991-lMyQjAxMDI4MjEzMDYxMDA2Wj.html

[richard_pitts]

somebody will shoot obama if he wins imo:brickwall

Blazing saddles anyone? :greengrin

Anyone but the Republicans...:bitchy:

[Badger0762]

Crap, I just typed a lengthy responce to BGhibs and lost it all when trying to post it. I really don't care enough to retype the whole thing.

I will say that Obama claiming to use "diplomacy to start to improve the US standing in the world" is just a smokescreen to distract voters. Did you see Obama's comments in the last debate about Pakistan? He basically said that he is very willing to completely disregard Pakistan's sovereignty if they don't do exactly what he wants them to do. How is bombing Pakistan or sending US soldiers across their broader without Pakistani approval going to improve the world's view of America? How is disregarding other nation's sovereignty whenever you see fit any better than what Bush has done? For that matter, how is what Obama is threatening any different from what Germany did in Belgium in 1914?

I would have been interested to read your full post - especially surrounding Palin.

Understand where you are coming from and I am in 2 minds. If they had reliable intel on OBL and could take him out if it meant an immediate strike then they would do it which was my take on what was being said. Killing OBL just revenge or do they actually think this will disable AQ? Personally I think there are a number of people who would and could easily step into his shoes. However if your were to go through the Pakistani gov someone within that gov would tip OBL off and he gets away again. The Bush admin is presently doing what BO talked about doing leading to confrontations with the US. Will McCain's tactic on this be different of is BO just being honest? Not a trick question I just don't know. You have picked one instance in what BO has said and seem to have chosen to ingore the rest of his talk about diplomacy but I have not heard anything from McCain that relates to an improved foreign policy and relations.

[Badger0762]

Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal that I found interesting.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122360618747721991-lMyQjAxMDI4MjEzMDYxMDA2Wj.html

Very unbiased article :blah:.

SOX - This was set up to stop the Accounting issues surrounding Enron, the "cooking of the books" and the so called audit companies that allowed them to do what they want, to ensure that the controls to which the CFO signs off on the numbers are accurate. The regulations arguably did not go far enough to track the investment policies undertaken which is a lot of what we are looking at now. It does not regulate salaries, investments or company policy (to an extent).

As usual too much talk and not enough action. Whoever gets in has a complete mess to deal with.

[GhostofBolivar]

Philadelphia's sports fans in outstanding response (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_blog/2008/10/sarah-palin-boo.html) :thumbsup:

[Hanny]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/election_2008/electoral_count.html

Not looking good for the red state fans.

Mon the Dems :agree:

[NYHibby]

Some people wanted me to post what my absentee ballot looks like so here it is. I vote in my hometown, not where I am currently living.

It was too big to fit into my scaner all at once.
http://img139.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img002dr6.jpg
http://img386.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img003bn7.jpg

I guess its pretty different from what you guys are used to.

[NYHibby]

Philadelphia's sports fans in outstanding response (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_blog/2008/10/sarah-palin-boo.html) :thumbsup:

Philly fans boo everyone, including Santa Claus.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Philly fans boo everyone, including Santa Claus.

You never put your ballot up on here, NY. I assume it's too late?

[NYHibby]

You never put your ballot up on here, NY. I assume it's too late?

I did in my post above. Its the two links to the scan of it.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I did in my post above. Its the two links to the scan of it.

Hahaha, how the deuce did I miss that!?

Cheers, very interesting. Too much to hope Ralph Nader got yor vote? :wink::greengrin

[NYHibby]

http://www.bigfootnessie08.com (http://www.bigfootnessie08.com/)

[shaun.lawson]

Obama. In the debate two nights ago, I thought he looked as Presidential as could be. Whereas McCain looked like the President of an Icelandic bank.

However, credit where it's due: pretty classy stuff from both in this clip, donch'a think?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/17/obama-mccain-new-york-al-smith-dinner

[lyonhibs]

If we can cut through all the analysis, policies, Vote for Change (after all Obama, CHANGE doesn't specify what your healthcare or foreign policy is, although I suspect he may win on the back of the old "repeat the same thing to simple minds over and over and they eventually accept it as inevitable" tactic, the back-stabbing, the out-of-wedlock pregnancies (not that I give a ****, but way to go Right Wing Republican mum!!) here's why I'd have to say Obama + Biden.

Sarah Palin only got her passport TWO YEARS AGO!!!???

Am I the only one terrified by that??? :dunno:

[GlesgaeHibby]

If we can cut through all the analysis, policies, Vote for Change (after all Obama, CHANGE doesn't specify what your healthcare or foreign policy is, although I suspect he may win on the back of the old "repeat the same thing to simple minds over and over and they eventually accept it as inevitable" tactic, the back-stabbing, the out-of-wedlock pregnancies (not that I give a ****, but way to go Right Wing Republican mum!!) here's why I'd have to say Obama + Biden.

Sarah Palin only got her passport TWO YEARS AGO!!!???

Am I the only one terrified by that??? :dunno:

She's a hopeless nutter and the thought of any americans prepared to let her get even a sniff off power by electing McCain is unbelievably crazy.

Her interviews expose her lack of intelligence and knowledge on pSlitics and current affairs, she couldn't even name what newspapers she regularly reads FFs

[Betty Boop]

If we can cut through all the analysis, policies, Vote for Change (after all Obama, CHANGE doesn't specify what your healthcare or foreign policy is, although I suspect he may win on the back of the old "repeat the same thing to simple minds over and over and they eventually accept it as inevitable" tactic, the back-stabbing, the out-of-wedlock pregnancies (not that I give a ****, but way to go Right Wing Republican mum!!) here's why I'd have to say Obama + Biden.

Sarah Palin only got her passport TWO YEARS AGO!!!???

Am I the only one terrified by that??? :dunno: There will be no change in the US unequivocal support for Israel, therefore there will be no peace in the Middle East. Obama has made his position clear, very disappointing IMO.:bitchy:

[Hanny]

If we can cut through all the analysis, policies, Vote for Change (after all Obama, CHANGE doesn't specify what your healthcare or foreign policy is, although I suspect he may win on the back of the old "repeat the same thing to simple minds over and over and they eventually accept it as inevitable" tactic, the back-stabbing, the out-of-wedlock pregnancies (not that I give a ****, but way to go Right Wing Republican mum!!) here's why I'd have to say Obama + Biden.

Sarah Palin only got her passport TWO YEARS AGO!!!???

Am I the only one terrified by that??? :dunno:

I'm terrified by her full stop. No surprise she was one of the 75% of Americans with no passport.

[The Green Goblin]

There will be no change in the US unequivocal support for Israel, therefore there will be no peace in the Middle East. Obama has made his position clear, very disappointing IMO.:bitchy:


Agree 100%.:agree:

GG

[Betty Boop]

Says it all when "Joe the Plumber" is a big part of the US election!:greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

Obama is ahead by 12 points. (http://uk.reuters.com/article/usPoliticsNews/idUKTRE49J0LF20081023)

Of course, there is little between the parties but that is the consequence of democracy. Both parties are trying to woo the same voters. Thier policies therefore, will naturally be as populist as they can be, which inevitably means they will be similar in general approach.

The public gets what the public wants, although I accept that the public wants what it's told to want by Rupert Murdoch and his ilk.

I do think it is an important election, however. It would be incredibly significant if the USA elect a black president, something most countries in the west, including our own, haven't managed yet.

JFK took the USA to the moon. I wonder what Obama will do.

[Dashing Bob S]

I think Obama will need to be five percent poll points ahead to win the election. I reckon the 'Bradley factor' will come in to play, where people say they will vote for him because he's black and they don't want to appear racist, but many will abstain or vote McCain.

In 'liberal' California, the popular black LA mayor, Tom Bradley, ran for either Governorship or a senate seat in California. He was hot favourite and massively ahead in the polls. He lost.

Obama might suffer the same fate, and that's why his camp are working hard on voter registration.

[Hibrandenburg]

Unfortunately IMHO the US is crammed full of 2 types of racist.


Type 1: Those who actively follow racist beliefs.

Type 2: Those who're not intelligent enough to know they're racist.

Type 1 will vote McCain coz there's no way they'd vote for a black man and type 2 won't vote and won't be sure why.

Sadly this will be enough for the Reps to get back in :bitchy:

[JimBHibees]

I think Obama will need to be five percent poll points ahead to win the election. I reckon the 'Bradley factor' will come in to play, where people say they will vote for him because he's black and they don't want to appear racist, but many will abstain or vote McCain.

In 'liberal' California, the popular black LA mayor, Tom Bradley, ran for either Governorship or a senate seat in California. He was hot favourite and massively ahead in the polls. He lost.

Obama might suffer the same fate, and that's why his camp are working hard on voter registration.

Totally agree this could swing big time on polling night. It would be possibly the most depressing result ever (well as depressing as Dubya getting in twice:greengrin) if McCain and the halfwit won. Obama at least appears to suggest some optimism for the future though as suggested his slavish support of Israel is hopefully an electioneering gimmick rather than what will actually happen.

[Ivan Drago]

McCain - 'mon the underdog :wink:

[hibsdaft]

i hope Obama wins though I have no expectations from his Presidency.

re: this Bradley effect, it totally doesn't stack up to me when almost half the rest of the population will be telling pollsters that they're voting McCain - to say you're voting McCain doesn't mean anything in itself surely?

more likely to cause an upset imo will be horrendous voting booth queues in the inner cities, dodgy voting machines and most importantly dodgy pollster weighting for the different voter demographics, ie how many of these young Obama supporters are actually going to manage voting (i actually suspect more than they think will).

[hibsdaft]

I dont know much about their policies but Obama simply because he represents change. A good change. A change the world needs to see America making.

do you write his speaches by any chance?

:greengrin

[GhostofBolivar]

On one side you have a communist muslim terrorist who has no experience, but is part of the establishment and is also an uppity ******. He wants to change the world but hasn't told anyone how he's going to do it. On the other stands a maverick who's been part of government for ages and has oodles of experience when it comes to dropping bombs on people, being rich and agreeing with Dubya. And in the middle (but standing on the far, far right. Optical illusion, you see) you have the Wicked Witch of the North who wants to strip mine the planet, give tax breaks to rapists, torture anyone who doesn't have blue eyes and have a really nice manicure and bikini wax while she's at it.

The only people who're absolutely, positively winning this election are those Israelis whose favourite hobbies involve parking tanks on people's houses and shooting four year-olds.

I went to see Mark Thomas on Monday night. Does it show?

[Sir David Gray]

I think it's an extremely tough choice.

I don't think John McCain is the best choice of candidate as he doesn't really inspire much confidence with any speeches that I have heard and I don't like the look of Sarah Palin but at the same time it is extremely worrying that the Iranian government and Hamas have both publicly announced their hope that Barack Obama wins the election.

If I had the choice, I would probably go for Obama but only because the alternative seems slightly less appealing.

[Betty Boop]

I think it's an extremely tough choice.

I don't think John McCain is the best choice of candidate as he doesn't really inspire much confidence with any speeches that I have heard and I don't like the look of Sarah Palin but at the same time it is extremely worrying that the Iranian government and Hamas have both publicly announced their hope that Barack Obama wins the election.

If I had the choice, I would probably go for Obama but only because the alternative seems slightly less appealing.
Why are you worried about that? They probably think there is more chance of negotiating with the USA if Obama is President, rather than McCain who is like Bush on crack! :bitchy:

[LiverpoolHibs]

I think it's an extremely tough choice.

I don't think John McCain is the best choice of candidate as he doesn't really inspire much confidence with any speeches that I have heard and I don't like the look of Sarah Palin but at the same time it is extremely worrying that the Iranian government and Hamas have both publicly announced their hope that Barack Obama wins the election.

If I had the choice, I would probably go for Obama but only because the alternative seems slightly less appealing.

That's a pretty bizarre way of deciding where your sympathies lie!

Anyway, as I've said before, a plague on both their houses. And if there is any kind of assassination, could it please be Sarah Palin...

:pray:

[hibsbollah]

Slightly off topic but does anyone realise the British media has been actively covering this election since the first primaries took place in January? Thats 11 months of pretty continuous coverage on all the news outlets. Every minutiae of the electoral process has been disected, while other foreign countries' election barely get a mention. (I take the point that its the most powerful country on Earth but it still seems excessive). As a comparison, I wonder how many people in this country could even name the leader of countries like Germany, Japan, Spain or Russia?

I would rather Obama won, but as hes bankrolled by the same institutions that always prop up US presidents I dont see it changing many US policies unfortunately.

[--------]

On one side you have a communist muslim terrorist who has no experience, but is part of the establishment and is also an uppity ******. He wants to change the world but hasn't told anyone how he's going to do it. On the other stands a maverick who's been part of government for ages and has oodles of experience when it comes to dropping bombs on people, being rich and agreeing with Dubya. And in the middle (but standing on the far, far right. Optical illusion, you see) you have the Wicked Witch of the North who wants to strip mine the planet, give tax breaks to rapists, torture anyone who doesn't have blue eyes and have a really nice manicure and bikini wax while she's at it.

The only people who're absolutely, positively winning this election are those Israelis whose favourite hobbies involve parking tanks on people's houses and shooting four year-olds.

I went to see Mark Thomas on Monday night. Does it show?



You're a very, very cynical Ghost indeed. :tsk tsk:

But then again, no one ever misread any political situation by being excessively cynical.

Looks very much to me that they're gonnae elect Elmer Fudd and Alaskan Barbie....

.... the Dream Ticket From Hell.

[shamo9]

Obama appears to be winning the psychological battle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TiQCJXpbKg&feature=related) :wink:

:rockin::dj:

[BroxburnHibee]

Obama appears to be winning the psychological battle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TiQCJXpbKg&feature=related) :wink:

:rockin::dj:

That is very strange :no way:

[hibsdaft]

at the same time it is extremely worrying that the Iranian government and Hamas have both publicly announced their hope that Barack Obama wins the election.

almost every population outside the US wants Obama to win. A Democratic Presidency is almost certain to be more respectful and more engaging with the rest of the world, and less arrogant.

if it wasn't for reasons of diplomacy, Brown, Merkel and the rest would all be endorsing him too. as the organisations you mention have nothing to lose in terms of diplomatic ties with the US, they are being candid in their support for Obama in a way that other governments cannot.

if the idea of opening up diplomatic channels with Iran is shocking, its worth pointing out that similar channels already exist between the UK and Iran, and even the UK and the Taliban too.

and btw, Al Qaeda have been endorsing McCain:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4989853.ece

some other amusing 'endorsements from hell':
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/10/the-endorsement.html

:greengrin

[NYHibby]

if it wasn't for reasons of diplomacy, Brown, Merkel and the rest would all be endorsing him too.

A couple of weeks ago, documents were released that said your government was worried what would happen if Obama was elected. If Brown has the same view as the author of the report, he's far from wanting to endorse Obama.


Unfortunately IMHO the US is crammed full of 2 types of racist.

Type 1: Those who actively follow racist beliefs.

Type 2: Those who're not intelligent enough to know they're racist.

Type 1 will vote McCain coz there's no way they'd vote for a black man and type 2 won't vote and won't be sure why.

Sadly this will be enough for the Reps to get back in :bitchy:
You seem to have forgot one.

Type 3: Those who will vote for Obama solely because he's half African-American "coz there's no way they'd vote for a white man" when given the choice. This, of course, is kind of ironic given the situation.

I don't see how this "type" is any better than those who vote for McCain just because he is white.

You're also off base when saying that those who do not vote are racist too. Your two types are really just one time. The second would vote for McCain "and won't be sure why". However, voting based solely on what your gut tells you is not that bad and is noway racist in nature.



re: this Bradley effect, it totally doesn't stack up to me when almost half the rest of the population will be telling pollsters that they're voting McCain - to say you're voting McCain doesn't mean anything in itself surely?

On this Bradley effect, I think your missing the point. People assume things about you based on who you support. I'm sure someone here thinks I'm racist because I don't support Obama. Think about how people view Tories.

Some people are afraid that their support of a white candidate over a black one will cause others to view them as racist. Others want to fit in so they say that support the black one. This is a legitimate theory that you will fit political science professors talking about. It doesn't work the other way. No one worries about being thought of as a racist because they support the black candidate. Double standard type of thing.

[NYHibby]

how many of these young Obama supporters are actually going to manage voting (i actually suspect more than they think will).

Young people in American never vote. There is a article out today saying that young people are voting in much smaller numbers in Florida than was expected (Florida has an early voting system). Just because people say this is an important election, doesn't mean that it will motivate young people to vote. Every election is called the most important one ever, and every election young people don't vote. McCain's support by the elderly is a huge advantage because they can be counted on to vote, plus they are more likely to have money.

As a side note, I read an article that it is irrational to vote. Your benefit from voting is basically zero.

[Hibbyradge]

The Real McCain (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c&feature=related)

[Hank Schrader]

McCain - 'mon the underdog :wink:

The underdog in this case being a clueless, gibbering numpty:wink:

[Sir David Gray]

Why are you worried about that? They probably think there is more chance of negotiating with the USA if Obama is President, rather than McCain who is like Bush on crack! :bitchy:


almost every population outside the US wants Obama to win. A Democratic Presidency is almost certain to be more respectful and more engaging with the rest of the world, and less arrogant.

if it wasn't for reasons of diplomacy, Brown, Merkel and the rest would all be endorsing him too. as the organisations you mention have nothing to lose in terms of diplomatic ties with the US, they are being candid in their support for Obama in a way that other governments cannot.

if the idea of opening up diplomatic channels with Iran is shocking, its worth pointing out that similar channels already exist between the UK and Iran, and even the UK and the Taliban too.

and btw, Al Qaeda have been endorsing McCain:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4989853.ece

some other amusing 'endorsements from hell':
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/10/the-endorsement.html

:greengrin

I had heard that but their endorsement is rather more warped. They only want McCain to win because they believe he will continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and presumably that would enable Al Qaeda to continue to justify terrorist attacks on the USA and the West in general.

Iran and Hamas want Obama to win because they think they will be able to negotiate more successfully with him than they would with McCain, which wouldn't be hard since McCain has described himself as "Hamas' worst nightmare". Whilst I don't think it's wise to have no dialogue with either of them, I certainly don't think there should be any concessions with a government that is IMO the most dangerous threat to world peace and a group of terrorists.

I don't trust either of them as far as I could throw them (Iran in particular) and them endorsing Barack Obama is quite a scary thought especially when it is more than likely that he will win the election.

In saying that, I would still say that I hope Obama wins as I really don't like the thought of Sarah Palin being the second most powerful person in the world, there's something I just don't like about her anytime i've heard her speak.

If she wasn't the Vice Presidential candidate for the Republicans then I may see things a little different.

[hibsdaft]

i can see what you're saying. but maybe you're taking Iran and Hamas the wrong way - its widely accepted that both Iran and Hamas are in a far more powerful position today than before the Iraq war started. maybe if they were as cynical as Al Qaeda they would also want this perpetual war and chaos - which has strengthened their hand domestically and geopolitically - to continue.

imo, both differ from AQ [a lot, but also] in the way that their support is rooted in their local population and their power depends on this support. Obama has the support of 97% of Palistinians, most of whom are ordinary people who just want a bit of peace. so maybe this support for him is just a representation of that?

either way it means nothing - Obama will not be easy for Iran to deal with just because they think he will. if anything he will go out of his way to prove the opposite imo.

[Betty Boop]

I had heard that but their endorsement is rather more warped. They only want McCain to win because they believe he will continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and presumably that would enable Al Qaeda to continue to justify terrorist attacks on the USA and the West in general.

Iran and Hamas want Obama to win because they think they will be able to negotiate more successfully with him than they would with McCain, which wouldn't be hard since McCain has described himself as "Hamas' worst nightmare". Whilst I don't think it's wise to have no dialogue with either of them, I certainly don't think there should be any concessions with a government that is IMO the most dangerous threat to world peace and a group of terrorists.

I don't trust either of them as far as I could throw them (Iran in particular) and them endorsing Barack Obama is quite a scary thought especially when it is more than likely that he will win the election.

In saying that, I would still say that I hope Obama wins as I really don't like the thought of Sarah Palin being the second most powerful person in the world, there's something I just don't like about her anytime i've heard her speak.

If she wasn't the Vice Presidential candidate for the Republicans then I may see things a little different. Some would say America is the most dangerous threat to World Peace!

[Hibbyradge]

I really don't like the thought of Sarah Palin being the second most powerful person in the world, there's something I just don't like about her anytime i've heard her speak.

If she wasn't the Vice Presidential candidate for the Republicans then I may see things a little different.

Her appeal rests on the fact that she looks like she should be in a porn movie.

You know, remove the glasses, shake out the hair...

Porn star. (http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/files/sarah_palin2.jpg)

[Hibrandenburg]

You seem to have forgot one.

Type 3: Those who will vote for Obama solely because he's half African-American "coz there's no way they'd vote for a white man" when given the choice. This, of course, is kind of ironic given the situation.


I don't see how this "type" is any better than those who vote for McCain just because he is white.


The same as type 1 only less likely to play a significant role in the outcome of the election due to them being the minority. Same old same old.


You're also off base when saying that those who do not vote are racist too. Your two types are really just one time. The second would vote for McCain "and won't be sure why". However, voting based solely on what your gut tells you is not that bad and is noway racist in nature.


I would disagree that voting with your gut is a good idea. You may recall that the Germans did that once and look where that got them. If you're going to vote someone to be the most powerful man in the world, then I would hope it was after long and intense deliberation.

Of course not all who don't vote are racist and I never suggested that. But many of those who don't vote will chose not to do so because they are, whether they know it or not.



.

[NYHibby]

In saying that, I would still say that I hope Obama wins as I really don't like the thought of Sarah Palin being the second most powerful person in the world, there's something I just don't like about her anytime i've heard her speak.

The American Vice President is not the second most powerful person in the world. Its not even the second most powerful position in Washington. John Adams said the constitution made the position the "most insignificant position ever devised by man." There are a bunch of Congressmen and Senators with more power.

On this note, I'd argue that your Prime Minister is more powerful than our president, at least in a domestic sense.


Of course not all who don't vote are racist and I never suggested that. But many of those who don't vote will chose not to do so because they are, whether they know it or not

I don't see how you're coming to the conclusion that secretly being racist makes you less likely to vote. Being racist, secretly or not, means that you are more concerned about the outcome. Thus you would be more likely to vote. I'm sure there is a direct relationship being apathetic and not voting. Voters who are racist or sexist would have higher participation rates than the base case.

[Sir David Gray]

The American Vice President is not the second most powerful person in the world. Its not even the second most powerful position in Washington. John Adams said the constitution made the position the "most insignificant position ever devised by man." There are a bunch of Congressmen and Senators with more power.

On this note, I'd argue that your Prime Minister is more powerful, at least in a domestic sense.

OK, fair enough.

I'll change that to "I don't like the thought of Sarah Palin possibly taking over as President should John McCain die during the next four years, which is entirely possible given that he is 72 years old".

[Danderhall Hibs]

OK, fair enough.

I'll change that to "I don't like the thought of Sarah Palin possibly taking over as President should John McCain die during the next four years, which is entirely possible given that he is 72 years old".

:agree: It's horrendous to think that a man of that age could be running the world! He shouldn't be allowed to drive a car at that age never mind be in charge of "the button"

[Betty Boop]

According to BBc news McCain is closing the gap. Big Arnie has chipped in with his comments about Obama's skinny legs! Comedy gold! :bitchy:

[--------]

OK, fair enough.

I'll change that to "I don't like the thought of Sarah Palin possibly taking over as President should John McCain die during the next four years, which is entirely possible given that he is 72 years old".



Obama is to me the more palatable of the candidates, if for no other reason than that he appears to be able to articulate two consecutive and connected thoughts to his audience from time to time.

And unlike McCain, he doesn't appear to hae been nipped and tucked and stuck full of Botox to con folks into thinking he's actually likely to survive his first term. I'm sure McCain has a walk-on part in "Night of the Living Dead".

And then, of course, there's Alaskan Barbie the Bear-Killer, the Wicked Witch of the North....

However, I'm too old and cynical to expect Obama to deliver on his promises to "change" politics - sounds much too much like those paragons of the political process John Fitzgerald Kennedy and Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, each in his own way a self-obsessed and self-seeking straw man.

I think I'd go with GhostofBolivar's assessment: "On one side you have a communist muslim terrorist who has no experience, but is part of the establishment and is also an uppity ******. He wants to change the world but hasn't told anyone how he's going to do it. On the other stands a maverick who's been part of government for ages and has oodles of experience when it comes to dropping bombs on people, being rich and agreeing with Dubya. And in the middle (but standing on the far, far right. Optical illusion, you see) you have the Wicked Witch of the North who wants to strip mine the planet, give tax breaks to rapists, torture anyone who doesn't have blue eyes and have a really nice manicure and bikini wax while she's at it. The only people who're absolutely, positively winning this election are those Israelis whose favourite hobbies involve parking tanks on people's houses and shooting four year-olds."

My expectation is that a lot of the folks who have been saying they'll vote for Obama will not do so on the day. McCain and Palin will win by default, and business will continue as usual. If Obama does win, he won't make anything like the difference some folks are thinking he will - no politician ever does.

[Hank Schrader]

Obama is to me the more palatable of the candidates, if for no other reason than that he appears to be able to articulate two consecutive and connected thoughts to his audience from time to time.

And unlike McCain, he doesn't appear to hae been nipped and tucked and stuck full of Botox to con folks into thinking he's actually likely to survive his first term. I'm sure McCain has a walk-on part in "Night of the Living Dead".

And then, of course, there's Alaskan Barbie the Bear-Killer, the Wicked Witch of the North....

However, I'm too old and cynical to expect Obama to deliver on his promises to "change" politics - sounds much too much like those paragons of the political process John Fitzgerald Kennedy and Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, each in his own way a self-obsessed and self-seeking straw man.

I think I'd go with GhostofBolivar's assessment: "On one side you have a communist muslim terrorist who has no experience, but is part of the establishment and is also an uppity ******. He wants to change the world but hasn't told anyone how he's going to do it. On the other stands a maverick who's been part of government for ages and has oodles of experience when it comes to dropping bombs on people, being rich and agreeing with Dubya. And in the middle (but standing on the far, far right. Optical illusion, you see) you have the Wicked Witch of the North who wants to strip mine the planet, give tax breaks to rapists, torture anyone who doesn't have blue eyes and have a really nice manicure and bikini wax while she's at it. The only people who're absolutely, positively winning this election are those Israelis whose favourite hobbies involve parking tanks on people's houses and shooting four year-olds."

My expectation is that a lot of the folks who have been saying they'll vote for Obama will not do so on the day. McCain and Palin will win by default, and business will continue as usual. If Obama does win, he won't make anything like the difference some folks are thinking he will - no politician ever does.

Couldn't put that any better myself Doddie.

On a side issue, some of the bookmakers are offering around 6/1 for a McCain victory. I have yet to convince myself he is that much of an underdog due to the amount of doubt on how the southern states will vote. Could be worth a small stake.

I have a feeling the worst may happen come Tuesday night/Wednesday morning and the thought of McCain/Palin running the USA for four years sends a chill down my spine.:bitchy:

[Hibbyradge]

Obama is to me the more palatable of the candidates, if for no other reason than that he appears to be able to articulate two consecutive and connected thoughts to his audience from time to time.

And unlike McCain, he doesn't appear to hae been nipped and tucked and stuck full of Botox to con folks into thinking he's actually likely to survive his first term. I'm sure McCain has a walk-on part in "Night of the Living Dead".

And then, of course, there's Alaskan Barbie the Bear-Killer, the Wicked Witch of the North....

However, I'm too old and cynical to expect Obama to deliver on his promises to "change" politics - sounds much too much like those paragons of the political process John Fitzgerald Kennedy and Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, each in his own way a self-obsessed and self-seeking straw man.

I think I'd go with GhostofBolivar's assessment: "On one side you have a communist muslim terrorist who has no experience, but is part of the establishment and is also an uppity ******. He wants to change the world but hasn't told anyone how he's going to do it. On the other stands a maverick who's been part of government for ages and has oodles of experience when it comes to dropping bombs on people, being rich and agreeing with Dubya. And in the middle (but standing on the far, far right. Optical illusion, you see) you have the Wicked Witch of the North who wants to strip mine the planet, give tax breaks to rapists, torture anyone who doesn't have blue eyes and have a really nice manicure and bikini wax while she's at it. The only people who're absolutely, positively winning this election are those Israelis whose favourite hobbies involve parking tanks on people's houses and shooting four year-olds."

My expectation is that a lot of the folks who have been saying they'll vote for Obama will not do so on the day. McCain and Palin will win by default, and business will continue as usual. If Obama does win, he won't make anything like the difference some folks are thinking he will - no politician ever does.


I agree with your remarks, Doddie.

I just highlighted one part because if an African American is elected as President of the USA, politics will have changed.

[Betty Boop]

Slightly off topic but does anyone realise the British media has been actively covering this election since the first primaries took place in January? Thats 11 months of pretty continuous coverage on all the news outlets. Every minutiae of the electoral process has been disected, while other foreign countries' election barely get a mention. (I take the point that its the most powerful country on Earth but it still seems excessive). As a comparison, I wonder how many people in this country could even name the leader of countries like Germany, Japan, Spain or Russia? :agree: Unbelievable the amount of coverage by the British media, while the Glenrothes By-Election hardly gets a mention. I know its not on the same scale, but it is still important.

[NYHibby]

And unlike McCain, he doesn't appear to hae been nipped and tucked and stuck full of Botox to con folks into thinking he's actually likely to survive his first term. I'm sure McCain has a walk-on part in "Night of the Living Dead".

However, I'm too old and cynical to expect Obama to deliver on his promises to "change" politics - sounds much too much like those paragons of the political process John Fitzgerald Kennedy and Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, each in his own way a self-obsessed and self-seeking straw man.

McCain's face's appearance is due to the skin cancer he had a couple of years ago. Way to be sensitive. On the other hand, his wife looks like she's had some work done.

I heard today that there is a statically 83.3% chance that a man of McCain's age will live another 4 years. You'd have to lower that a little since the presidency is more stressful than most jobs.

Agree on your second point. Like I said on a previous page, there is not going to be much of a different on end results with either person. The rhetoric maybe a little different but they're going to do largely the same thing. The ability of the next president, or any president, to act is restricted.



On a side issue, some of the bookmakers are offering around 6/1 for a McCain victory. I have yet to convince myself he is that much of an underdog due to the amount of doubt on how the southern states will vote. Could be worth a small stake.

I would be kind of borderline about taking those odds. I'd look for something more like 8/1 or 10/1. I'd put Obama odds at winning to be about 75 to 80%.


I just highlighted one part because if an African American is elected as President of the USA, politics will have changed.

Nothing is going to change just because an half African-American is elected president. The year is 2008, not 1950. America is not as racist as some here are suggesting. Beside, Obama is running on a race-neutral platform. He's not going to have the political capital to do anything radical.

[NYHibby]

By the way, can some of the people here post Wednesday morning/early afternnon their reaction to the result? I'm having a discussion Wednesday morning (my time) with a British politics professor about the outcome. I'd like to have a sense of what the average Scotsman/European thinks.

[--------]

Couldn't put that any better myself Doddie.

On a side issue, some of the bookmakers are offering around 6/1 for a McCain victory. I have yet to convince myself he is that much of an underdog due to the amount of doubt on how the southern states will vote. Could be worth a small stake.

I have a feeling the worst may happen come Tuesday night/Wednesday morning and the thought of McCain/Palin running the USA for four years sends a chill down my spine.:bitchy:


I suppose if McCain/Palin win, the worst case scenario is that McCain sees out his first term, but decides against running for a second. Palin then gets the nomination as sitting Veep, and is elected. Then she stands for her second term, and wins. McCain/Alaskan Barbie for the next 12 years? There's a prospect.

I apologise if my comments on McCain's appearance have offended anyone. I wasn't aware that that was the reason for his rather bizarre appearance. However, I understand that skin cancer (and all sorts of other cancers) are particularly prevalent in that part of Iraq which has twice been bombarded by US forces using depleted uranium shells and bombs? So I guess I'll be as sensitive to a guy who's consistently backed that bombing as he's been to the victims.

[NYHibby]

I was just joking. Wasn't actually offended

[hibsdaft]

By the way, can some of the people here post Wednesday morning/early afternnon their reaction to the result? I'm having a discussion Wednesday morning (my time) with a British politics professor about the outcome. I'd like to have a sense of what the average Scotsman/European thinks.

NYH, a couple of questions for you:

- what times do thing kick off over there, i am at a loose end wed and thinking of doing a late one on tomorrow to watch all this unfold as i usually quite enjoy an election night. am i right in thinking that it california's voting that will end last and that that will be 10pm CA time, at which exit polls will first be released? what happens after that?

- if you don't mind me asking are you American yourself and if so how did you become a Hibs supporter? or are you a student over there doing a masters or something?

cheers

[NYHibby]

NYH, a couple of questions for you:

- what times do thing kick off over there, i am at a loose end wed and thinking of doing a late one on tomorrow to watch all this unfold as i usually quite enjoy an election night. am i right in thinking that it california's voting that will end last and that that will be 10pm CA time, at which exit polls will first be released? what happens after that?

See here: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/poll.closing/

All the times listed there are EST so add 5 hours. Alaska is last at 1 AM EST. Exit polls aren't release until voting ends in a state. They used to release them earlier but that changed after the media's problems in 2000. Its takes a couple hours to be able to call who won the close states. By 1 AM, we should have an idea who won, unless it comes down to one or two states that are super close. In that case, it could be wednesday morning or later when they count absentee ballots.

There is not a whole lot to watch before the first polls close or the first hour or two after they close. The different media groups will then start to call states for one person as results come in. For example, New York state will be called for Obama a couple of minutes after polls close. But in Ohio or Florida, they'll wait hours until a high enough % of the vote is reported. You could probably sleep until 1:30 AM GMT, watch until 6 or 7 AM, go back to sleep, and catch all of the highlights.

I think CNN's website is the best to get results. They give county by county results so you can see if the results that have been reported are from urban or rural areas (assuming you know the geography of the state in question).



- if you don't mind me asking are you American yourself and if so how did you become a Hibs supporter? or are you a student over there doing a masters or something?

cheers

I am an American. Earlier in the thread I posted pictures of my ballot. I became a Hibs supporter when I was a student in Edinburgh, but have since moved back to America. I'm considering moving back to Scotland in the future when I qualify for HSMP or if I go back to grad school. I guess its kind of ironic that I'm opposed to Obama's social policies yet I'm considering moving to socialist Scotland.

[Hank Schrader]

According to BBC news McCain is closing the gap. Big Arnie has chipped in with his comments about Obama's skinny legs! Comedy gold! :bitchy:

You would think that bringing in that brainless Austrian ****muppet to try and boost the Republican vote would have the opposite effect and actually improve Obamas chances of winning.:dizzy:

[Hank Schrader]

By the way, can some of the people here post Wednesday morning/early afternnon their reaction to the result? I'm having a discussion Wednesday morning (my time) with a British politics professor about the outcome. I'd like to have a sense of what the average Scotsman/European thinks.

Will do my best to post my reaction on here for you:wink:

[HibsMax]

This "dumb" American is voting for Obama.

I will be VERY surprised if he doesn't win.

[Hibrandenburg]

I don't see how you're coming to the conclusion that secretly being racist makes you less likely to vote. Being racist, secretly or not, means that you are more concerned about the outcome. Thus you would be more likely to vote. I'm sure there is a direct relationship being apathetic and not voting. Voters who are racist or sexist would have higher participation rates than the base case.

Again there was no mention of secret racism in my post. There are many who are racist and don't realise it and they could swing the vote. Different thing all together.

[HibsMax]

I'm sure people would pigeon hole me as a racist...I call Chinese take-out a chinky after all :wink: but I have no problem voting for Obama tomorrow.

I don't know the numbers, maybe someone found them and put them in this thread somewhere (I didn't read the whole thing) but I believe that only something like 30-40% of eligible voters actually get off their ***** and vote in the first place. Funny, it seems like EVERYONE has an opinion but not everyone votes. I dunno about you but I am of the opinion that if you don't vote then you don't really have much right to complain about the government. Inaction is not an option.

[hibsdaft]

See here: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/poll.closing/

All the times listed there are EST so add 5 hours. Alaska is last at 1 AM EST. Exit polls aren't release until voting ends in a state. They used to release them earlier but that changed after the media's problems in 2000. Its takes a couple hours to be able to call who won the close states. By 1 AM, we should have an idea who won, unless it comes down to one or two states that are super close. In that case, it could be wednesday morning or later when they count absentee ballots.

There is not a whole lot to watch before the first polls close or the first hour or two after they close. The different media groups will then start to call states for one person as results come in. For example, New York state will be called for Obama a couple of minutes after polls close. But in Ohio or Florida, they'll wait hours until a high enough % of the vote is reported. You could probably sleep until 1:30 AM GMT, watch until 6 or 7 AM, go back to sleep, and catch all of the highlights.

I think CNN's website is the best to get results. They give county by county results so you can see if the results that have been reported are from urban or rural areas (assuming you know the geography of the state in question).

cheers for that bud, most helpful. i really am looking forward to tonight i have to say, i love an election night me :greengrin

can't decide whether to watch it on the telly or listen to it all in the kitchen on the radio where my PC is set up though! hmmm..............


I guess its kind of ironic that I'm opposed to Obama's social policies yet I'm considering moving to socialist Scotland.

don't worry you may be waking up in socialist USA tomorrow if you believe some :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

Interview. (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg)

In her own words. (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zeMypXCUWMw)

Matt Damon. (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FSFyXweglLI)

[Hibs90]

Right, I really don't understand the whole election process so will somebody be able to tell me a rough time the next president will be able announced?

[NYHibby]

Right, I really don't understand the whole election process so will somebody be able to tell me a rough time the next president will be able announced?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Electoral_College

It could be anytime from 9PM EST to after 3AM. So add 5 hours to that to get GMT. No one really knows when we'll know. It depends on how close the election is.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Right, I really don't understand the whole election process so will somebody be able to tell me a rough time the next president will be able announced?

Could be conclusive alot earlier, but by 5am - unless it's very close or there's more thievery on the go. :greengrin

Despite my best efforts I'm finding myself getting sucked into this charade.

[GC]

Has anyone else here noticed in this campaign how much media coverage Pailin has had?

Obama's running mate, Bidden, I think his name is, hardly anything from him, head down and job done, Palin on the other hand is all over the news.

She is only running as vice-president and she has had as much if not more coverage than McCain, The world schould be scared if she gets anywhere near power.

[Hibbyradge]

Has anyone else here noticed in this campaign how much media coverage Pailin has had?

Obama's running mate, Bidden, I think his name is, hardly anything from him, head down and job done, Palin on the other hand is all over the news.

She is only running as vice-president and she has had as much if not more coverage than McCain, The world schould be scared if she gets anywhere near power.

Bidden is there as a make weight. He is, rightly, an irrelevance.

Palin was brought in as a supposed electoral asset for McCain. She is the first woman to run for VP. She looks pretty tidy and she's a total loose cannon.

Can you see why the press might be interested in her? :wink:

[GC]

Bidden is there as a make weight. He is, rightly, an irrelevance.

Palin was brought in as a supposed electoral asset for McCain. She is the first woman to run for VP. She looks pretty tidy and she's a total loose cannon.

Can you see why the press might be interested in her? :wink:

I get why they are interested in her, I just don't understand why she has not been ripped apart by the.

How anyone could possibly vote this woman into any sort of power is beyond me.

Loose cannon is an understatement.

[lucky]

I'm just back from campaigning in New Hampshire and race is still an issue. However the number of young people and African -American votes who have registered to vote should mean that there will be change. This election is like nothing I have ever been involved with. The Americans want change. When it comes to workers right they are non existent. The Labor movement over there have high hopes that not only will Obama win they will also get 60 senators which will allow the changes that they seek to get through the senate. Here's hoping.

[HibsMax]

I'm just back from campaigning in New Hampshire and race is still an issue. However the number of young people and African -American votes who have registered to vote should mean that there will be change. This election is like nothing I have ever been involved with. The Americans want change. When it comes to workers right they are non existent. The Labor movement over there have high hopes that not only will Obama win they will also get 60 senators which will allow the changes that they seek to get through the senate. Here's hoping.

You would be lucky to see a black person in New Hampshire....even more so if you traveled a little west to Vermont. That's not a racist comment, just an observation from living a couple of miles from NH for the last 5 or so years.

[Hibrandenburg]

You would be lucky to see a black person in New Hampshire....even more so if you traveled a little west to Vermont. That's not a racist comment, just an observation from living a couple of miles from NH for the last 5 or so years.

Just done a trip from New York to San Francisco via Ontario and the Black Hills and the extent of subconcious racism in the mid west made me quite sad.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I'm just back from campaigning in New Hampshire and race is still an issue. However the number of young people and African -American votes who have registered to vote should mean that there will be change. This election is like nothing I have ever been involved with. The Americans want change. When it comes to workers right they are non existent. The Labor movement over there have high hopes that not only will Obama win they will also get 60 senators which will allow the changes that they seek to get through the senate. Here's hoping.

A self-proclaimed socialist who supports New Labour and Barack Obama, what is the world coming to. :wink:

[Tazio]

Obama is president.

History is made.

[HibsMax]

you're welcome. ;)

[capitals_finest]

God bless America!

[hibsdaft]

thank **** for that.

[H18sry]

Sorry to say but I do not think he will make it to the Whitehouse or see out his term, some white supremacy will see him assassinated unfortunately. the clowns over their will not stand for a Black Muslim in charge of there Nation.

[Betty Boop]

Sorry to say but I do not think he will make it to the Whitehouse or see out his term, some white supremacy will see him assassinated unfortunately. the clowns over their will not stand for a Black Muslim in charge of there Nation.
Obama is not a Muslim.

[H18sry]

Sorry to say but I do not think he will make it to the Whitehouse or see out his term, some white supremacy will see him assassinated unfortunately. the clowns over their will not stand for a Black Muslim in charge of there Nation.


Obama is not a Muslim.


Sorry I had heard he was but on further research it shows that it was his grandfather who was a practising Muslim.

But I stand by what I said earlier I do not think he will last.

[Betty Boop]

Sorry I had heard he was but on further research it shows that it was his grandfather who was a practising Muslim.

But I stand by what I said earlier I do not think he will last. A myth perpretated by guys like these! http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=vpUrnZHc0I4&feature=related :greengrin

[Hibbie_Cameron]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnbNgPMdvOs

Enjoy

[Loobrush]

Still very dubious that any real change will happen (look at Tony Blair for example), but there is no doubt in my mind he is FAR better than McCain and the mental republican camp. :thumbsup:

[Hibbyradge]

Still very dubious that any real change will happen (look at Tony Blair for example), but there is no doubt in my mind he is FAR better than McCain and the mental republican camp. :thumbsup:

Tony Blair brought many significant and long lasting changes to the UK.

Reinstatement of Union Rights at GCHQ

Unemployment slashed

Higher living standards

Devolution in Scotland and Wales

Devolution in London

Introduction of the minimum wage

Depoliticised the Bank of England

More Gay/Lesbian Rights

Civil Partnership Act

Contributed massively to peace in Northern Ireland.

[--------]

Sorry to say but I do not think he will make it to the Whitehouse or see out his term, some white supremacy will see him assassinated unfortunately. the clowns over their will not stand for a Black Muslim in charge of there Nation.


He's not a Black Muslim. Malcolm X was a Black Muslim. Muhammad Ali was a Black Muslim. The Nation of Islam (Black Muslims) is at present led by Louis Farrakhan and if there had been any whisper of a connection between him or the Nation and Obama, the Republicans would have had it spread all over the press like lightning and it would have killed Obama stone dead politically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_of_Islam

However, I think there IS a genuine danger that white extremists will go after him. Looking at the spread of votes states-wise, it would appear that if they did nothing else, McCain and Palin certainly managed to get out the Klucker, the Red-neck and the Gun-nut votes out very successfully.

Bubba and Jolene will not be happy bunnies this morning..... :cool2:

[GhostofBolivar]

He's not a Black Muslim. Malcolm X was a Black Muslim. Muhammad Ali was a Black Muslim. The Nation of Islam (Black Muslims) is at present led by Louis Farrakhan and if there had been any whisper of a connection between him or the Nation and Obama, the Republicans would have had it spread all over the press like lightning and it would have killed Obama stone dead politically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_of_Islam

However, I think there IS a genuine danger that white extremists will go after him. Looking at the spread of votes states-wise, it would appear that if they did nothing else, McCain and Palin certainly managed to get out the Klucker, the Red-neck and the Gun-nut votes out very successfully.

Bubba and Jolene will not be happy bunnies this morning..... :cool2:

Pretty sure that's still present tense there :wink:

But just think how much more effective Obama would have been at getting the vote out if the Nation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5VxvF7DaCw) had been on his side :greengrin

[Loobrush]

Tony Blair brought many significant and long lasting changes to the UK.



Can't disagree with that. I worded my post wrong, what I meant was Obama comes across as something new and hopeful when compared to the last years of republican rule. This was what Blair appeared to be in 97 after 20 years of the Tories. However I don't think he was all that different to the tories when it came down to it. Just hope Obama doesn't turn out to be the same sort of thing.

[H18sry]

He's not a Black Muslim. Malcolm X was a Black Muslim. Muhammad Ali was a Black Muslim. The Nation of Islam (Black Muslims) is at present led by Louis Farrakhan and if there had been any whisper of a connection between him or the Nation and Obama, the Republicans would have had it spread all over the press like lightning and it would have killed Obama stone dead politically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_of_Islam

However, I think there IS a genuine danger that white extremists will go after him. Looking at the spread of votes states-wise, it would appear that if they did nothing else, McCain and Palin certainly managed to get out the Klucker, the Red-neck and the Gun-nut votes out very successfully.

Bubba and Jolene will not be happy bunnies this morning..... :cool2:


Obama is not a Muslim.


Sorry I had heard he was but on further research it shows that it was his grandfather who was a practising Muslim.

But I stand by what I said earlier I do not think he will last.

As my apology pointed out, :wink:

[hibsdaft]

Reinstatement of Union Rights at GCHQ

pretty random that one :confused:

[lucky]

A self-proclaimed socialist who supports New Labour and Barack Obama, what is the world coming to. :wink:

Self-proclaimed socialist--don't think ever been self proclaimed but generally my views are socialist

Never been a New Labour supporter always been a Labour party member and activist.

As for Obama he is probably the most left leaning President in US history and I'm proud to have played a small part knocking on doors talking to fellow trade unionist in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. But whats the alternative to my views more of Thatcherism and the dismantling of the world by Bush style politics.
Whilst I respect all views there is more politics in the real world than around university. When you have live through Regan, Thatcher, Bush snr, Major and Bush jnr and Blair to lesser extent or their equivalents then you will realise that some time you have compromise your ultimate goals for small steps towards it.

[hibsdaft]

i think the comparisons with Blair are fairly apt. despite my own cynicism i can't help feeling much like i did the day after Blairs win in 97 and its a nice feeling.

the main difference this time though is the economic challenges that now exist, and the fact the economic orthodoxy that has ruled since Thatcher and that Blair adhered to strongly has now been seriously discredited - economic change is now actually recognised to be necessary and it will be up to Obama to set out these changes in partnership with the rest of the world.

this is a historic moment and it allows a real opportunity for positive change should Obama have the nerve for it - everything he could hope for is now in place to allow it now (congress majorities etc) so its up to him.

[--------]

Pretty sure that's still present tense there :wink:

So it is. Just. :agree:

But just think how much more effective Obama would have been at getting the vote out if the Nation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5VxvF7DaCw) had been on his side :greengrin


Effective executive action - the sign of good government. :agree:

[Hibbyradge]

pretty random that one :confused:

Why is that random?

It was highly significant.

[hibsdaft]

is that the big spying place (you know what i mean) you're talking about?

how many people work there about 3000?

doesn't seem that significant to me what am i missing?

[lyonhibs]

Now for action.

Here's hoping America isn't run by a group of insular, half-wits as it has been for - well - at least 8 years now.

Watch the Matt Damon interview - my opinion of The Alaskan Barbie pretty much summed up.

[JimBHibees]

Tony Blair brought many significant and long lasting changes to the UK.

Reinstatement of Union Rights at GCHQ

Unemployment slashed

Higher living standards

Devolution in Scotland and Wales

Devolution in London

Introduction of the minimum wage

Depoliticised the Bank of England

More Gay/Lesbian Rights

Civil Partnership Act

Contributed massively to peace in Northern Ireland.

Bizarrely read an article at the weekend that Blair has made over £12m in the last year in his gladhanding and speechmaking tours. Absolutely unbelieveable to be honest.

[Hibbyradge]

is that the big spying place (you know what i mean) you're talking about?

how many people work there about 3000?

doesn't seem that significant to me what am i missing?

Yes, GCHQ at Cheltenham.

Thatcher took away their right to be in a Trade Union. The whole Trade Union and Labour movement was in uproar.

The size of it is irrelevant. It was a very important symbol.

[Nakedmanoncrack]

Bizarrely read an article at the weekend that Blair has made over £12m in the last year in his gladhanding and speechmaking tours. Absolutely unbelieveable to be honest.

Yes, read that as well, £12 million earned since leaving office, more than six times his previous lifetime income. And he still managed to fit in his role as a peace envoy, what a man.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Self-proclaimed socialist--don't think ever been self proclaimed but generally my views are socialist

Never been a New Labour supporter always been a Labour party member and activist.

As for Obama he is probably the most left leaning President in US history and I'm proud to have played a small part knocking on doors talking to fellow trade unionist in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. But whats the alternative to my views more of Thatcherism and the dismantling of the world by Bush style politics.
Whilst I respect all views there is more politics in the real world than around university. When you have live through Regan, Thatcher, Bush snr, Major and Bush jnr and Blair to lesser extent or their equivalents then you will realise that some time you have compromise your ultimate goals for small steps towards it.

It was meant to be a bit of a joke but hey-ho. And I'm not sure what you're getting at with your 'more politics in the real world than around university' comment...

I'm not sure that this is a step (small or otherwise) anywhere. You can talk about the lesser of two evils but I could certainly never compromise my beliefs to the extent of voting for a man who has given tacit support for military involvemnt in Iran and the breaches of national sovereignty in Pakistan and Syria - and indicated such incursions will/may be stepped up (somehow seeing no contradiction between this and the denunciation of Russian involvement in South Ossetia and Abkhazia), backed the Patriot Act, wants to see the huge expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe, has given absolute support to Israel's Zionist policies - including increased military funding and a stone-wall assertion that Jerusalem should remain undivided in Israeli hands, diverting troops from one unwinnable war (wahey!) to another unwinnable war (oh...), voted for perpetuating wire-tap legislation and is indelibly tied to a economic system which has (and will continue to) widen the gap between rich and poor and supports the War on Drugs in South America with all the atrocities that are part and parcel of it.

Forgive me if I'm not currently mocking up an 'I Heart Obama' t-shirt.

At what point does making yourself electable segue into a desire to maintain the status quo? I'd say there are a few Labour M.P.s who could answer that...

[LiverpoolHibs]

After watching this...

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=7IshiClQqCM

...I'll never criticise our national news coverage again.

Unbelievable.

[GhostofBolivar]

After watching this...

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=7IshiClQqCM

...I'll never criticise our national news coverage again.

Unbelievable.

Especially not after last night. Watching the BBC wind up that *£$%ing !"*$% monkey John Bolton (former US Ambassador to the UN and all-round right-wing *&^&%) was priceless. Between Rajesh Mirchandani asking actual questions and Simon Schama - who was clearly plastered - rolling around I thought Bolton was going to explode.

Top marks to the beeb.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Especially not after last night. Watching the BBC wind up that *£$%ing !"*$% monkey John Bolton (former US Ambassador to the UN and all-round right-wing *&^&%) was priceless. Between Rajesh Mirchandani asking actual questions and Simon Schama - who was clearly plastered - rolling around I thought Bolton was going to explode.

Top marks to the beeb.

Ha, yeah. But I couldn't actually bring myself to watch it after about half an hour of John Bolton.

And Schama continuing his strange transformation in to some kind of weird Victorian libertine/rake.

[Nakedmanoncrack]

''Barack Obama, the US president-elect, has begun building the foundations of his administration by reportedly selecting his chief-of-staff, as people around the world continued to celebrate his election victory.
Rahm Emanual, regarded among the Washington political elite as a master strategist, has accepted the key post, Democratic sources said on Wednesday.
The move is Obama's first political act since he swept to victory in the presidential election a day earlier.
Emanual who, like Obama, is from Chicago, helped mastermind the Democrats' capture of the House of Representatives from the Republicans two years ago.
Rob Reynolds, Al Jazeera's Washington correspondent, said Emanual was seen "as a tough politician with strong links to Israel."

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/11/2008115213559631602.html

All change then.

[Betty Boop]

''Barack Obama, the US president-elect, has begun building the foundations of his administration by reportedly selecting his chief-of-staff, as people around the world continued to celebrate his election victory.
Rahm Emanual, regarded among the Washington political elite as a master strategist, has accepted the key post, Democratic sources said on Wednesday.
The move is Obama's first political act since he swept to victory in the presidential election a day earlier.
Emanual who, like Obama, is from Chicago, helped mastermind the Democrats' capture of the House of Representatives from the Republicans two years ago.
Rob Reynolds, Al Jazeera's Washington correspondent, said Emanual was seen "as a tough politician with strong links to Israel."

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/11/2008115213559631602.html

All change then.
Aye same old! :bitchy:

[PapillonVert]

Palin was brought in as a supposed electoral asset for McCain. She is the first woman to run for VP. She looks pretty tidy and she's a total loose cannon.

All over bar the shouting now, but in the interests of historical accuracy, the first woman VP candidate was Democrat Geraldine Ferraro in 1984. Walter Mondale's running mate.

:wink:

[Hibbyradge]

All over bar the shouting now, but in the interests of historical accuracy, the first woman VP candidate was Democrat Geraldine Ferraro in 1984. Walter Mondale's running mate.

:wink:

Cheers.

In that case, Palin is the first Porn Star to run for VP.

First female Porn Star, that is. :greengrin

[LiverpoolHibs]

It was meant to be a bit of a joke but hey-ho. And I'm not sure what you're getting at with your 'more politics in the real world than around university' comment...

I'm not sure that this is a step (small or otherwise) anywhere. You can talk about the lesser of two evils but I could certainly never compromise my beliefs to the extent of voting for a man who has given tacit support for military involvemnt in Iran and the breaches of national sovereignty in Pakistan and Syria - and indicated such incursions will/may be stepped up (somehow seeing no contradiction between this and the denunciation of Russian involvement in South Ossetia and Abkhazia), backed the Patriot Act, wants to see the huge expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe, has given absolute support to Israel's Zionist policies - including increased military funding and a stone-wall assertion that Jerusalem should remain undivided in Israeli hands, diverting troops from one unwinnable war (wahey!) to another unwinnable war (oh...), voted for perpetuating wire-tap legislation and is indelibly tied to a economic system which has (and will continue to) widen the gap between rich and poor and supports the War on Drugs in South America with all the atrocities that are part and parcel of it.

Forgive me if I'm not currently mocking up an 'I Heart Obama' t-shirt.

At what point does making yourself electable segue into a desire to maintain the status quo? I'd say there are a few Labour M.P.s who could answer that...

And we can now add appointing a hawk as his Chief of Staff to the list...

[Tomsk]

Especially not after last night. Watching the BBC wind up that *£$%ing !"*$% monkey John Bolton (former US Ambassador to the UN and all-round right-wing *&^&%) was priceless. Between Rajesh Mirchandani asking actual questions and Simon Schama - who was clearly plastered - rolling around I thought Bolton was going to explode.

Top marks to the beeb.

I cut out before all that happened, but from what I did see I thought Christopher Hitchins was top-notch. I kept thinking to myself, if you don't want to get invited to Sarah Palin's victory party, Chris, you're going the right way about it.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I cut out before all that happened, but from what I did see I thought Christopher Hitchins was top-notch. I kept thinking to myself, if you don't want to get invited to Sarah Palin's victory party, Chris, you're going the right way about it.

I'm not Hitchen's biggest fan but this...

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=PrFgX83OsEY

...is superb.

"If you gave Jerry Falwell an enema, you could've buried him in a matchbox."

Magic. :greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

Having watched the reaction to Obama's victory yesterday, what concerns me ever so slightly about the whole thing is that it appears to me that a large amount of people (particularly African Americans) voted for Obama primarily because he is black.

Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the significance of him being elected and I also understand why so many black people of a certain age feel so strongly about having a black president. A lot of them were around 40 odd years ago when they didn't have the right to vote and they were segregated from white people in many aspects of public life so obviously 40 years on, for them to have an African American in the White House is a big deal but i'm not convinced that voting for someone mainly because you are desperate to have an African American President is the right reasons for voting.

I'm not particularly bothered about his domestic policies, however I have read his foreign policy objectives and on the surface of it, I agree with MOST of what Obama says he stands for. I just hope that he can carry those policies out and keeps to his word.

[Arch Stanton]

Having watched the reaction to Obama's victory yesterday, what concerns me ever so slightly about the whole thing is that it appears to me that a large amount of people (particularly African Americans) voted for Obama primarily because he is black.


And i guess all the southern states voted for McCain because of his inspirational qualities? It seems to me that the most victimised black people in America were outvoted.

I personally was particularly struck by the fact the crowd in Chicago was predominantly white and well educated middle class.

[Hibbyradge]

Having watched the reaction to Obama's victory yesterday, what concerns me ever so slightly about the whole thing is that it appears to me that a large amount of people (particularly African Americans) voted for Obama primarily because he is black.



That's definitely not true.

Obama was the best candidate by miles.

He was eloquent and offered hope.

He brought young people into politics.

MCCain was linked to Bush.

The Republicans got the blame for the financial crisis.

McCain had Sarah Palin.

McCain said that America was on a sound financial footing.

And a million other reasons.

Obama got elected despite the fact that he is black.

[Removed]

That's definitely not true.

Obama was the best candidate by miles.

He was eloquent and offered hope.

He brought young people into politics.

MCCain was linked to Bush.

The Republicans got the blame for the financial crisis.

McCain had Sarah Palin. (allegedly :wink:)

McCain said that America was on a sound financial footing.

And a million other reasons.

Obama got elected despite the fact that he is black.

Agree with all of the above but IMO it didn't matter who the Republicans candidate was, the Bush legacy meant that they never stood a chance.

[LiverpoolHibs]

It was meant to be a bit of a joke but hey-ho. And I'm not sure what you're getting at with your 'more politics in the real world than around university' comment...

I'm not sure that this is a step (small or otherwise) anywhere. You can talk about the lesser of two evils but I could certainly never compromise my beliefs to the extent of voting for a man who has given tacit support for military involvemnt in Iran and the breaches of national sovereignty in Pakistan and Syria - and indicated such incursions will/may be stepped up (somehow seeing no contradiction between this and the denunciation of Russian involvement in South Ossetia and Abkhazia), backed the Patriot Act, wants to see the huge expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe, has given absolute support to Israel's Zionist policies - including increased military funding and a stone-wall assertion that Jerusalem should remain undivided in Israeli hands, diverting troops from one unwinnable war (wahey!) to another unwinnable war (oh...), voted for perpetuating wire-tap legislation and is indelibly tied to a economic system which has (and will continue to) widen the gap between rich and poor and supports the War on Drugs in South America with all the atrocities that are part and parcel of it.

Forgive me if I'm not currently mocking up an 'I Heart Obama' t-shirt.

At what point does making yourself electable segue into a desire to maintain the status quo? I'd say there are a few Labour M.P.s who could answer that...

As you're online lucky, could I get a reply to this? (It took a while!) :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

:bitchy:

http://uk.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=93438&videoChannel=75

[JimBHibees]

:bitchy:

http://uk.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=93438&videoChannel=75

How that tw&t is still in power I will never know. Is there any wonder that there is so much racism in Italy with that corrupt clown running the show.

[LiverpoolHibs]

:bitchy:

http://uk.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=93438&videoChannel=75

I reserve a special level of hatred for Silvio Berlusconi.

[Sir David Gray]

That's definitely not true.

Obama was the best candidate by miles.

He was eloquent and offered hope.

He brought young people into politics.

MCCain was linked to Bush.

The Republicans got the blame for the financial crisis.

McCain had Sarah Palin.

McCain said that America was on a sound financial footing.

And a million other reasons.

Obama got elected despite the fact that he is black.

Having read several facts and figures in relation to the US election, i'm willing to accept that Obama being an African American had no significant bearing on him becoming the next President. However I am still of the belief that a lot of African American people voted for Obama primarily because he is black.

As I said in my previous post, I can understand this attitude, especially amongst the 50+ black voters who can remember the time when their parents/grandparents did not have the vote and they were segregated from white people and were just generally treated as sub-human.

For the USA to have a black president just 4 decades after that was still happening is an incredible turnaround and I do understand the significance.

However, when you strip down the facts, his victory doesn't seem as great as it does at first glance.

Despite record levels of investment in his election campaign, outspending his rival by almost 2/1, apart from the last two victories for Bush, Barack Obama's margin of victory is no greater, in terms of votes cast, than any other US election since Jimmy Carter defeated Gerald Ford in 1976 by less than 2 million votes.

In fact John McCain won the most amount of states (21) of any losing candidate since Ford won 27 in '76.

That's despite Obama's promises of change.
Despite him being a great speaker.
Despite his rival being widely seen as another George Bush, possibly the most disliked world leader in recent history.
Despite Sarah Palin.
Despite the world financial crisis.
Despite all the deaths that have occurred in Iraq & Afghanistan.

[hibsdaft]

all this obsession with race is kind of inevitable this week, given the historic significance of Obama's victory, but its a side show really. this election was about the economy - Bush drove it into the ground, and McCain represented more of the same. so Obama won.

[Hibrandenburg]

One survey put the black vote at 96% for Obama and 60% of the white vote for McCain, so i feel to say that "race played no outcome in the result" is somewhat off the truth.

[HibsMax]

Having read several facts and figures in relation to the US election, i'm willing to accept that Obama being an African American had no significant bearing on him becoming the next President. However I am still of the belief that a lot of African American people voted for Obama primarily because he is black.
I don't have any facts or figures, and nothing to back this up with but I will bet my left AND right nut that there were more than a few African Americans who voted for the first time in their lives because Obama was on the ticket.

[HibsMax]

One survey put the black vote at 96% for Obama and 60% of the white vote for McCain, so i feel to say that "race played no outcome in the result" is somewhat off the truth.

lies, damned lies and statistics. ;)

African Americans make up a small portion of the overall US population so 96% doesn't necessarily represent that large a number.

But I am not arguing with you, I agree, I think that race did play a small part.

What I think played a much larger part is the ******ing mess this country is in after the last 8 years.

[NYHibby]

As I said in my previous post, I can understand this attitude, especially amongst the 50+ black voters who can remember the time when their parents/grandparents did not have the vote and they were segregated from white people and were just generally treated as sub-human.

For the USA to have a black president just 4 decades after that was still happening is an incredible turnaround

I think this has been claimed a couple of times in this thread and gone unchallenged. African-American were given the right to vote in 1870 by the 15th amendment. This was almost 50 years before white women could vote. Now there were efforts to limit their access by things like literacy tests, but African-Americans have been voting freely in many places for 138 years. Its also not like the whole country was segregated either.


I don't have any facts or figures, and nothing to back this up with but I will bet my left AND right nut that there were more than a few African Americans who voted for the first time in their lives because Obama was on the ticket.

I haven't seen any numbers, but no one would argue that participation (and just overall interest) by African-American wasn't up significantly in this election. The share of their votes going to the Democratic candidate may have been roughly the same, but there would have been less total African-American votes cast if Bidden was running for president, for example.


all this obsession with race is kind of inevitable this week, given the historic significance of Obama's victory, but its a side show really. this election was about the economy - Bush drove it into the ground, and McCain represented more of the same. so Obama won.

Agree with this. Obama would have had to be completely imcompentent and run the worst campaign ever to lose this election. Almost any Democrat could have beat whoever the Republicans ran. Republican, fairly or not, were blamed for the economic problems. Of course the President doesn't have a whole lot of formal power in economic matters. Its been the democrats in congress who have had the power to prevent and solve the current situation.

[Peevemor]

lies, damned lies and statistics. ;)

African Americans make up a small portion of the overall US population so 96% doesn't necessarily represent that large a number.

But I am not arguing with you, I agree, I think that race did play a small part.

What I think played a much larger part is the ******ing mess this country is in after the last 8 years.

I saw an analysis in a paper yesterday which said 85% of the black vote went for Obama together with 70% of the jewish vote. It also had more than 50% of those who voted as voting for the first time.

These were the most remarkable (literally) figures.

Where exactly these figures came from I don't know.

[Betty Boop]

ABC news are reporting that Obama has chosen Hilary Clinton to be his Secretary of State.

[LiverpoolHibs]

ABC news are reporting that Obama has chosen Hilary Clinton to be his Secretary of State.

*Shudders*

Another good John Pilger article on Obamamania...

http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=511

Beware Of The Obama Hype. What 'Change' In America Really Means.

My first visit to Texas was in 1968, on the fifth anniversary of the assassination of president John F Kennedy in Dallas. I drove south, following the line of telegraph poles to the small town of Midlothian, where I met Penn Jones Jr, editor of the Midlothian Mirror. Except for his drawl and fine boots, everything about Penn was the antithesis of the Texas stereotype. Having exposed the racists of the John Birch Society, his printing press had been repeatedly firebombed. Week after week, he painstakingly assembled evidence that all but demolished the official version of Kennedy’s murder.

This was journalism as it had been before corporate journalism was invented, before the first schools of journalism were set up and a mythology of liberal neutrality was spun around those whose “professionalism” and “objectivity” carried an unspoken obligation to ensure that news and opinion were in tune with an establishment consensus, regardless of the truth. Journalists such as Penn Jones, independent of vested power, indefatigable and principled, often reflect ordinary American attitudes, which have seldom conformed to the stereotypes promoted by the corporate media on both sides of the Atlantic. Read American Dreams: Lost and Found by the masterly Studs Terkel, who died the other day, or scan the surveys that unerringly attribute enlightened views to a majority who believe that “government should care for those who cannot care for themselves” and are prepared to pay higher taxes for universal health care, who support nuclear disarmament and want their troops out of other people’s countries.

Returning to Texas, I am struck again by those so unlike the redneck stereotype, in spite of the burden of a form of brainwashing placed on most Americans from a tender age: that theirs is the most superior society in the history of the world, and all means are justified, including the spilling of copious blood, in maintaining that superiority.

That is the subtext of Barack Obama’s “oratory”. He says he wants to build up US military power; and he threatens to ignite a new war in Pakistan, killing yet more brown-skinned people. That will bring tears, too. Unlike those on election night, these other tears will be unseen in Chicago and London. This is not to doubt the sincerity of much of the response to Obama’s election, which happened not because of the unction that has passed for news reporting from America since 4 November (e.g. "liberal Americans smiled and the world smiled with them") but for the same reasons that millions of angry emails were sent to the White House and Congress when the “bailout” of Wall Street was revealed, and because most Americans are fed up with war.

Two years ago, this anti-war vote installed a Democratic majority in Congress, only to watch the Democrats hand over more money to George W Bush to continue his blood fest. For his part, the "anti-war" Obama never said the illegal invasion of Iraq was wrong, merely that it was a “mistake”. Thereafter, he voted in to give Bush what he wanted. Yes, Obama’s election is historic, a symbol of great change to many. But it is equally true that the American elite has grown adept at using the black middle and management class. The courageous Martin Luther King recognised this when he linked the human rights of black Americans with the human rights of the Vietnamese, then being slaughtered by a liberal Democratic administration. And he was shot. In striking contrast, a young black major serving in Vietnam, Colin Powell, was used to “investigate” and whitewash the infamous My Lai massacre. As Bush’s secretary of state, Powell was often described as a “liberal” and was considered ideal to lie to the United Nations about Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Condaleezza Rice, lauded as a successful black woman, has worked assiduously to deny the Palestinians justice.

Obama’s first two crucial appointments represent a denial of the wishes of his supporters on the principal issues on which they voted. The vice-president-elect, Joe Biden, is a proud warmaker and Zionist. Rahm Emanuel, who is to be the all-important White House chief of staff, is a fervent "neoliberal" devoted to the doctrine that led to the present economic collapse and impoverishment of millions. He is also an “Israel-first” Zionist who served in the Israeli army and opposes meaningful justice for the Palestinians – an injustice that is at the root of Muslim people’s loathing of the United States and the spawning of jihadism.

No serious scrutiny of this is permitted within the histrionics of Obamamania, just as no serious scrutiny of the betrayal of the majority of black South Africans was permitted within the “Mandela moment”. This is especially marked in Britain, where America’s divine right to “lead” is important to elite British interests. The once respected Observer newspaper, which supported Bush’s war in Iraq, echoing his fabricated evidence, now announces, without evidence, that “America has restored the world’s faith in its ideals”. These “ideals”, which Obama will swear to uphold, have overseen, since 1945, the destruction of 50 governments, including democracies, and 30 popular liberation movements, causing the deaths of countless men, women and children.

None of this was uttered during the election campaign. Had it been allowed, there might even have been recognition that liberalism as a narrow, supremely arrogant, war-making ideology is destroying liberalism as a reality. Prior to Blair’s criminal warmaking, ideology was denied by him and his media mystics. “Blair can be a beacon to the world,” declared the Guardian in 1997. “[He is] turning leadership into an art form.”

Today, merely insert “Obama”. As for historic moments, there is another that has gone unreported but is well under way – liberal democracy’s shift towards a corporate dictatorship, managed by people regardless of ethnicity, with the media as its clichéd façade. “True democracy,” wrote Penn Jones Jr, the Texas truth-teller, “is constant vigilance: not thinking the way you’re meant to think and keeping your eyes wide open at all times.”

[Betty Boop]

*Shudders*

Another good John Pilger article on Obamamania...

http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=511

Beware Of The Obama Hype. What 'Change' In America Really Means.

My first visit to Texas was in 1968, on the fifth anniversary of the assassination of president John F Kennedy in Dallas. I drove south, following the line of telegraph poles to the small town of Midlothian, where I met Penn Jones Jr, editor of the Midlothian Mirror. Except for his drawl and fine boots, everything about Penn was the antithesis of the Texas stereotype. Having exposed the racists of the John Birch Society, his printing press had been repeatedly firebombed. Week after week, he painstakingly assembled evidence that all but demolished the official version of Kennedy’s murder.

This was journalism as it had been before corporate journalism was invented, before the first schools of journalism were set up and a mythology of liberal neutrality was spun around those whose “professionalism” and “objectivity” carried an unspoken obligation to ensure that news and opinion were in tune with an establishment consensus, regardless of the truth. Journalists such as Penn Jones, independent of vested power, indefatigable and principled, often reflect ordinary American attitudes, which have seldom conformed to the stereotypes promoted by the corporate media on both sides of the Atlantic. Read American Dreams: Lost and Found by the masterly Studs Terkel, who died the other day, or scan the surveys that unerringly attribute enlightened views to a majority who believe that “government should care for those who cannot care for themselves” and are prepared to pay higher taxes for universal health care, who support nuclear disarmament and want their troops out of other people’s countries.

Returning to Texas, I am struck again by those so unlike the redneck stereotype, in spite of the burden of a form of brainwashing placed on most Americans from a tender age: that theirs is the most superior society in the history of the world, and all means are justified, including the spilling of copious blood, in maintaining that superiority.

That is the subtext of Barack Obama’s “oratory”. He says he wants to build up US military power; and he threatens to ignite a new war in Pakistan, killing yet more brown-skinned people. That will bring tears, too. Unlike those on election night, these other tears will be unseen in Chicago and London. This is not to doubt the sincerity of much of the response to Obama’s election, which happened not because of the unction that has passed for news reporting from America since 4 November (e.g. "liberal Americans smiled and the world smiled with them") but for the same reasons that millions of angry emails were sent to the White House and Congress when the “bailout” of Wall Street was revealed, and because most Americans are fed up with war.

Two years ago, this anti-war vote installed a Democratic majority in Congress, only to watch the Democrats hand over more money to George W Bush to continue his blood fest. For his part, the "anti-war" Obama never said the illegal invasion of Iraq was wrong, merely that it was a “mistake”. Thereafter, he voted in to give Bush what he wanted. Yes, Obama’s election is historic, a symbol of great change to many. But it is equally true that the American elite has grown adept at using the black middle and management class. The courageous Martin Luther King recognised this when he linked the human rights of black Americans with the human rights of the Vietnamese, then being slaughtered by a liberal Democratic administration. And he was shot. In striking contrast, a young black major serving in Vietnam, Colin Powell, was used to “investigate” and whitewash the infamous My Lai massacre. As Bush’s secretary of state, Powell was often described as a “liberal” and was considered ideal to lie to the United Nations about Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Condaleezza Rice, lauded as a successful black woman, has worked assiduously to deny the Palestinians justice.

Obama’s first two crucial appointments represent a denial of the wishes of his supporters on the principal issues on which they voted. The vice-president-elect, Joe Biden, is a proud warmaker and Zionist. Rahm Emanuel, who is to be the all-important White House chief of staff, is a fervent "neoliberal" devoted to the doctrine that led to the present economic collapse and impoverishment of millions. He is also an “Israel-first” Zionist who served in the Israeli army and opposes meaningful justice for the Palestinians – an injustice that is at the root of Muslim people’s loathing of the United States and the spawning of jihadism.

No serious scrutiny of this is permitted within the histrionics of Obamamania, just as no serious scrutiny of the betrayal of the majority of black South Africans was permitted within the “Mandela moment”. This is especially marked in Britain, where America’s divine right to “lead” is important to elite British interests. The once respected Observer newspaper, which supported Bush’s war in Iraq, echoing his fabricated evidence, now announces, without evidence, that “America has restored the world’s faith in its ideals”. These “ideals”, which Obama will swear to uphold, have overseen, since 1945, the destruction of 50 governments, including democracies, and 30 popular liberation movements, causing the deaths of countless men, women and children.

None of this was uttered during the election campaign. Had it been allowed, there might even have been recognition that liberalism as a narrow, supremely arrogant, war-making ideology is destroying liberalism as a reality. Prior to Blair’s criminal warmaking, ideology was denied by him and his media mystics. “Blair can be a beacon to the world,” declared the Guardian in 1997. “[He is] turning leadership into an art form.”

Today, merely insert “Obama”. As for historic moments, there is another that has gone unreported but is well under way – liberal democracy’s shift towards a corporate dictatorship, managed by people regardless of ethnicity, with the media as its clichéd façade. “True democracy,” wrote Penn Jones Jr, the Texas truth-teller, “is constant vigilance: not thinking the way you’re meant to think and keeping your eyes wide open at all times.”
Great article LH, I see there has been a box set released of John Pilger's best documentaries, might buy myself one as a wee Crimbo present. :greengrin PS Didn't know Pilger was 69!

[--------]

*Shudders*

Another good John Pilger article on Obamamania...

http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=511

Beware Of The Obama Hype. What 'Change' In America Really Means.

My first visit to Texas was in 1968, on the fifth anniversary of the assassination of president John F Kennedy in Dallas. I drove south, following the line of telegraph poles to the small town of Midlothian, where I met Penn Jones Jr, editor of the Midlothian Mirror. Except for his drawl and fine boots, everything about Penn was the antithesis of the Texas stereotype. Having exposed the racists of the John Birch Society, his printing press had been repeatedly firebombed. Week after week, he painstakingly assembled evidence that all but demolished the official version of Kennedy’s murder.

This was journalism as it had been before corporate journalism was invented, before the first schools of journalism were set up and a mythology of liberal neutrality was spun around those whose “professionalism” and “objectivity” carried an unspoken obligation to ensure that news and opinion were in tune with an establishment consensus, regardless of the truth. Journalists such as Penn Jones, independent of vested power, indefatigable and principled, often reflect ordinary American attitudes, which have seldom conformed to the stereotypes promoted by the corporate media on both sides of the Atlantic. Read American Dreams: Lost and Found by the masterly Studs Terkel, who died the other day, or scan the surveys that unerringly attribute enlightened views to a majority who believe that “government should care for those who cannot care for themselves” and are prepared to pay higher taxes for universal health care, who support nuclear disarmament and want their troops out of other people’s countries.

Returning to Texas, I am struck again by those so unlike the redneck stereotype, in spite of the burden of a form of brainwashing placed on most Americans from a tender age: that theirs is the most superior society in the history of the world, and all means are justified, including the spilling of copious blood, in maintaining that superiority.

That is the subtext of Barack Obama’s “oratory”. He says he wants to build up US military power; and he threatens to ignite a new war in Pakistan, killing yet more brown-skinned people. That will bring tears, too. Unlike those on election night, these other tears will be unseen in Chicago and London. This is not to doubt the sincerity of much of the response to Obama’s election, which happened not because of the unction that has passed for news reporting from America since 4 November (e.g. "liberal Americans smiled and the world smiled with them") but for the same reasons that millions of angry emails were sent to the White House and Congress when the “bailout” of Wall Street was revealed, and because most Americans are fed up with war.

Two years ago, this anti-war vote installed a Democratic majority in Congress, only to watch the Democrats hand over more money to George W Bush to continue his blood fest. For his part, the "anti-war" Obama never said the illegal invasion of Iraq was wrong, merely that it was a “mistake”. Thereafter, he voted in to give Bush what he wanted. Yes, Obama’s election is historic, a symbol of great change to many. But it is equally true that the American elite has grown adept at using the black middle and management class. The courageous Martin Luther King recognised this when he linked the human rights of black Americans with the human rights of the Vietnamese, then being slaughtered by a liberal Democratic administration. And he was shot. In striking contrast, a young black major serving in Vietnam, Colin Powell, was used to “investigate” and whitewash the infamous My Lai massacre. As Bush’s secretary of state, Powell was often described as a “liberal” and was considered ideal to lie to the United Nations about Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Condaleezza Rice, lauded as a successful black woman, has worked assiduously to deny the Palestinians justice.

Obama’s first two crucial appointments represent a denial of the wishes of his supporters on the principal issues on which they voted. The vice-president-elect, Joe Biden, is a proud warmaker and Zionist. Rahm Emanuel, who is to be the all-important White House chief of staff, is a fervent "neoliberal" devoted to the doctrine that led to the present economic collapse and impoverishment of millions. He is also an “Israel-first” Zionist who served in the Israeli army and opposes meaningful justice for the Palestinians – an injustice that is at the root of Muslim people’s loathing of the United States and the spawning of jihadism.

No serious scrutiny of this is permitted within the histrionics of Obamamania, just as no serious scrutiny of the betrayal of the majority of black South Africans was permitted within the “Mandela moment”. This is especially marked in Britain, where America’s divine right to “lead” is important to elite British interests. The once respected Observer newspaper, which supported Bush’s war in Iraq, echoing his fabricated evidence, now announces, without evidence, that “America has restored the world’s faith in its ideals”. These “ideals”, which Obama will swear to uphold, have overseen, since 1945, the destruction of 50 governments, including democracies, and 30 popular liberation movements, causing the deaths of countless men, women and children.

None of this was uttered during the election campaign. Had it been allowed, there might even have been recognition that liberalism as a narrow, supremely arrogant, war-making ideology is destroying liberalism as a reality. Prior to Blair’s criminal warmaking, ideology was denied by him and his media mystics. “Blair can be a beacon to the world,” declared the Guardian in 1997. “[He is] turning leadership into an art form.”

Today, merely insert “Obama”. As for historic moments, there is another that has gone unreported but is well under way – liberal democracy’s shift towards a corporate dictatorship, managed by people regardless of ethnicity, with the media as its clichéd façade. “True democracy,” wrote Penn Jones Jr, the Texas truth-teller, “is constant vigilance: not thinking the way you’re meant to think and keeping your eyes wide open at all times.”


Thanks, LH.

That says what I've been thinking and trying to put into some form of words since the election.

:agree:

[LiverpoolHibs]

Great article LH, I see there has been a box set released of John Pilger's best documentaries, might buy myself one as a wee Crimbo present. :greengrin PS Didn't know Pilger was 69!

Is that the 'Heroes: Documentaries 1970-2007'? That looks fantastic.


Thanks, LH.

That says what I've been thinking and trying to put into some form of words since the election.

:agree:

Likewise. He never fails to properly articulate things that I can't quite get hold of. Can't beat him.

[Mibbes Aye]

Proverbial tin hat on, but do people have a problem with Hillary? If so, why? I like her a lot. I admit up front that part of that is based on Emma Thompson's interpretation of her in 'Primary Colors' but so what?

[Betty Boop]

]Is that the 'Heroes: Documentaries 1970-2007'? That looks fantastic.[/B]


Likewise. He never fails to properly articulate things that I can't quite get hold of. Can't beat him. :agree: Thats the one.

[--------]

Proverbial tin hat on, but do people have a problem with Hillary? If so, why? I like her a lot. I admit up front that part of that is based on Emma Thompson's interpretation of her in 'Primary Colors' but so what?


I susect that HC would have been less open to manipulation and more radical than Obama will be. She's still part of the American political establishment - part of the business-driven oligarchy Pilger writes about, but perhaps a little more intransigent, a little less of a figurehead?

Obama is clearly a "Tony Blair" figure - all appearance, little substance, designed and chosen to sell the unacceptable to an unwary and unthinking electorate.

Blair lied and conned the UK into participating in an illegal and unjustified war in Iraq, and then escalated that war so that we're now fighting an unwinnable war in Afghanistan.

Obama will do the same to keep the US in the same illegal and unwinnable wars. And Gordo the Adipose will take us along every step of the way.