American 2008 Election

[Voar Tok 4]

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy

Interesting, to be honest I have also thought Obama was out of touch with most Americans and indeed black Americans, being wealthy, liberal and it would also seem elitist.quote>

Although, this applies to most politicians, Hillary said it, so I'll quote her.

"I was taken aback by the demeaning remarks Senator Obama made about people in small-town America," she said on Saturday.

"Senator Obama's remarks are elitist and are out of touch. They are not reflective of the values and beliefs of Americans, certainly not the Americans that I know."quote>

The Americans that she knows, as is true for most politicians, are the elitist and out of touch people of America.  If it wasn't for their staff, they'd have no real idea what the average American is like.  Obama screwed up this time.  Hillary screwed up in the past with her whole accent thing.  McCain goes off about telling people that their jobs aren't coming back.  None of the bunch are particularly bright.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Because let's face it, it's not important that you tell people the truth. It's important that you tell people what they want to hear. After all, if the truth is inconvenient and hurts, people will tend to deny it or rationalize it away and being honest will work against you since people don't want to hear it.

quote>

And that is a major problem.  How is anyone supposed to deal with issues when they can't even state what the issues are?

I can't be the only person who is tired of political games and wordplay and wants see people actually doing something to deal with the issues.

Originally posted by: Voar Tok

 Obama screwed up this time.  Hillary screwed up in the past with her whole accent thing.  McCain goes off about telling people that their jobs aren't coming back.  None of the bunch are particularly bright.quote>

Well, their jobs aren't coming back.  The manufacturing sector in America is not going to recover in my lifetime, probably not in yours.

Fact is, it is cheaper for companies to manufacture goods overseas than it is to manufacture goods in the USA.  That is not going to change until things "balance out" which will mean some combination of lowering our standard of living and raising the standard of living in other places.

But no one wants to hear that.  They would rather stick their fingers in their ears and go "la, la, la" than try to figure out a way to cope it the situation.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek ...

But no one wants to hear that.  They would rather stick their fingers in their ears and go "la, la, la" than try to figure out a way to cope it the situation.quote>

 

You ain't kiddin!

GM and the Japanese car companies are opening plants in China; GM expects to sell over 1 million cars there in 2008. Auto manufacturing jobs aren't coming back, at least until we make a better electric car here. China can kill us on cheap do-dads but lags far behind on high tech. This will not last either. 

Politically speaking, McCain is turning out to be the only one I trust to say what needs to be said, but he is still the lesser of evils as presidential candidates usually are. We need moderation more than a radical shift in policy IMO. 

[Frankie_Grove 32]

Originally posted by: SkiGeekWell, their jobs aren't coming back.  The manufacturing sector in America is not going to recover in my lifetime, probably not in yours.

Fact is, it is cheaper for companies to manufacture goods overseas than it is to manufacture goods in the USA.  That is not going to change until things "balance out" which will mean some combination of lowering our standard of living and raising the standard of living in other places.quote>

The manufacturing sector of the US has shifted to the sun-belt region - where cleaner, newer, modernized factories can be built with relative ease. Kia, Hyundai, Ford, BMW, Toyota, etc. have all relocated enormous facilities in Georgia, Alabama, Texas, and Mississippi.

Now, if you are referring to the Rust Belt, then I agree, no return is insight. The blame should be placed in Labour Unions -- they did serve some purpose long ago, but now its only good at scaring industry out of the Northeast and Midwest.

Obama's recent comments about rural and small town Pennsylvanians was very disturbing -- however I do not expect it to effect his numbers in the polls; He was actually taking a stab at Pennsylvania's Republicans.

I'll tell you one thing though - I can't wait for the Democrats to make up their mind, I'm tired of seeing ads and tired of seeing their constant BS on the news (and the real election isn't 'til November!).

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

According to latest polls, McCain can beat Obama. [link]

Granted, they are within the margin of error, but the movement is trending McCain's way.

[belfastuniguy 18]

To be honest I'm now somewhat split on who I would vote for...I have been a Hillary supporter and if not her then McCain despite his distasteful pro-war stance and his commitment to 100 hundreds in Iraq if needed, though I understand he is changing his tune on that aspect.

However his lack of understanding of economic issues is a great concern for me, I'm not American but the American economy impacts on me as it does for billions. Obama to me is still coming across as inexperienced and lacking in ability and Hillary seems weakened by the Clinton-Obama fight..

I'm just not sure anyone....I would like to see the democrats to decide as soon as possible, but doubt that will happen till after Pennsylvania. Speaking from an international perspective Obama and Clinton are the better candidates as I doubt McCain will do much to repair America's image, which is important even if some in America don't care. I think the democrats would be better for the economy as well as international image and I would like to see Hillary as President..but I would not just switch to Obama automatically if she doesn't get it. He needs to do a lot to convince me he would make a good President after the early PR coup and euphoria.

Can any of out Americans give us an impression of what they are seeing or hearing in relation to the decision?? I understand some will be strong supporters of a certain candidate, what I'm looking for is the views you hear from friends or work mates. I find it interesting to hear what average Americans are thinking.

[Frankie_Grove 32]

There was a recent poll that stated that a large portion of Obama's supporters would defect to McCain if Hillary got the nomination; like wise some of Hillary's supporters said they would defect to McCain if Obama got the nomination.

McCain is popular among Independents, which in reality is where the elections are won. I do like the fact that McCain is a lot more Centrist/Moderate than most Republicans - which in my opinion is better than having someone who is to the extreme right or extreme left of the political plane.

I still find it difficult to support Obama, and I'm not even sure what his supporters know that I don't. He seems to be supporting a radical change, something that is bound to cause issues, literally overnight. If Obama is elected he is going to find it incredibly difficult to keep his promises. Still, the longer the Democrats wait, the more time the Republicans and Independents get to swing over to McCain (not to mention the millions of dollars spent campaigning that could serve a much better purpose - people will blindly give to a political candidate but not to a charity).

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Frankie_Grove Obama's recent comments about rural and small town Pennsylvanians was very disturbing -- however I do not expect it to effect his numbers in the polls; He was actually taking a stab at Pennsylvania's Republicans.quote>

Hate to nitpick, but:

It will potentially affect his numbers, not effect them.

This is a common mistake. Generally speaking, "affect" is a verb and "effect" is a noun.  But there are exceptions. The following paragraph (italicized) is all grammatically correct:

The change effected by the new government policy affected the citizens adversely. In particular, the effect that their affects were now subject to new taxes was controversial and ultimately ineffective at raising sufficient new funds. Any remaining affection the people had for their leader was lost with it going into effect.

See, this is what I love about English. It's so damn confusing that even native speakers of it screw it up all the time.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

LOL, thanks Duke. I have given up correcting people on this one, it's a never-ending endeavour.

General election poll numbers from Colorado, I'll quote:

Per their polling, McCain would defeat Hillary in Colorado 52-40 and beat Obama 51-39.

Whole piece here.

It ain't over 'til it's over, so they say. I am still hopeful that the pendulum won't swing as far left as the Dem candidates. Moderation is key, not reactionary extremes.

[seemurray2 21]

I think Obama and Hillary are screwing themselves over, big time.  Seems like they would be trying to gain the support of the "red" states, especially from what happened the last presidential election.   Bush got re-elected because the Dems are so out of touch with the values and beliefs of the average middle class working American, and the statements Obama made sure aren't helping his cause. 

[Micah 16]

Well, McCain will probably have large gains over Clinton or Obama until their nomination is certain because Democrats are divided at the moment, but it doesn't help the Democrats at all that about 20% from each side would go to McCain if the other Democrat won the nomination.

[DanWalker8 3]

It is very interesting to think of what will happen in the future. I am growing repulsed by the media's deliberate divisiveness. All I hear about the candidates anymore is about how they are tearing each other down, belittling citizens (albeit by saying things that are true, just not acceptable to say), and how they're elitist/out of touch.

What's the media doing to help us actually decide?

[belfastuniguy 18]

What's the media doing to help us actually decidequote>

The media is and always will be bias and will look at scandal and things that tar the candidate.

You should really go and look at each candidate yourself and then decide who to vote for and not base your vote on what the media has portrayed.

[Duke87 1,070]

I'll grant you this- the fact that the Dems still don't have a candidate and many within their party are violently butting heads over the issue does put them at a distinct disadvantage in the general election, at least in the case of the presidential run (congressional positions may or may not really be affected).

If nothing else, either Hilary or Obama potentially ends up being a lame duck since the republicans in congress won't back either, and many the democrats would, right down the middle, support only one, and not either or. Basicallly, not accounting for the actual number of seats held by each party (which isn't known at this point), McCain would have a lot more congressmen behind him than Hillary or Obama would. The percent who would support a given candidate would likely look something like this:

McCain: 48%

Hillary: 20 %

Obama: 20%

Hillary or Obama: 8%

Any of the three: 4%

(not actual numbers based on anything, just demonstrating the rift in the democratic party)

And that is a huge problem. Divide and conquer at its finest.

Of course, the election is still over six months away, so that situation could change. I have a sinking feeling it won't, though.

[Zelgadis 638]

I rather enjoyed this humorous British take on the American Electoral system. 

Link

Oh yes, It's messed up.  But they should talk anyway.  I can't tell you how many times the parliamentary system here in Canada (like Britain's) has left me scratching my head. 

ISF

[belfastuniguy 18]

Oh I liked that one....very funny.

I actually find our system easy to understand...but then again I would I suppose

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: zelgadis I rather enjoyed this humorous British take on the American Electoral system. 

Link

Oh yes, It's messed up.  But they should talk anyway.  I can't tell you how many times the parliamentary system here in Canada (like Britain's) has left me scratching my head. 

ISFquote>

Messed up? That was fairly easy wasn't it? Well, at least the part that happens after the convention anyway. But then again, these Australians are no better; punishing you for delivering a blank ballot

[The_Dalai_Llama 15]

As a bitter Pennsylvania Republican myself, I'm sick of both Hillary and Obama at this point. We Pennsylvanians aren't used to being in the spotlight this early in the political season and the barrage of ads and campaign stops is great for the electoral process, but rough on Republicans because we're being pushed aside. Both Hillary and Obama visit my area at least once a week, sometimes more... it's too much. Thank God the primary is this Tuesday.

Sorry for being bitter, but that's how I feel.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: The_Dalai_Llama

As a bitter Pennsylvania Republican myself, I'm sick of both Hillary and Obama at this point. We Pennsylvanians aren't used to being in the spotlight this early in the political season and the barrage of ads and campaign stops is great for the electoral process, but rough on Republicans because we're being pushed aside. Both Hillary and Obama visit my area at least once a week, sometimes more... it's too much. Thank God the primary is this Tuesday.

Sorry for being bitter, but that's how I feel.quote>

So what is the truth about Pennsylvanians and bitterness?  Were people bitter before the election process started?   or bitter for how it's playing out?  or both?  or not bitter at all?

[The_Dalai_Llama 15]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

So what is the truth about Pennsylvanians and bitterness?  Were people bitter before the election process started?   or bitter for how it's playing out?  or both?  or not bitter at all?quote>

 

In relation to Obama's "bitter" comment, he's partially right that some Pennsylvanians, primarily in smaller cities and rural areas in the middle of the state, are displeased with the government in general and do focus on one issue they are truly passionate about (gun control, faith issues), but he sounded as if he oversimplified Republican voting patterns in PA.  Pennsylvania is also full of Reagan Democrats that have many of those same conservative values... and that doesn't fare well for Obama who leans more liberal on those issues.  There are some one-issue voters, but most of us look at a variety of issues.

Outside of the Obama comment, a lot of people here are bitter because we haven't really recovered from the loss of key industries.  I'll use my area as an example.  Scranton (Hillary's second home apparently) has never completely rebounded from the end of the coal era and while some progress has been made, good-paying jobs are hard to find and people are still leaving the state to regions where there's more opportunity and many people here are feeling it.  People around here are fed up with the government (federal, state and local) and they want a change from the norm... and this began before the primaries started.

That's what I get from my experiences and quick research.

As for my bitterness, I'm just sick of all the ads and news about the race.  I agree that it's good that Pennsylvania finally matters in a Presidential primary for a change, but Hillary and Obama have virtually lived here for 6+ weeks... and it's time for them to move on to the next state.  It's just overkill at this point.

[krbe 193]

Sounds like you need McCain telling you that your jobs won't come back.

[The_Dalai_Llama 15]

Originally posted by: krbe Sounds like you need McCain telling you that your jobs won't come back.quote>

 

At least he'd be honest if he said that.  After 50+ years of the decline of good manufacturing jobs in the Rust Belt, why would the trend reverse suddenly now?

[Meg 368]

Generally, being honest isn't in a politician's own self-interest.  It's one of the problems with the system.

[Simfan34 11]

McCain isn't stupid. He's honest.

[belfastuniguy 18]

Once the results come out I'll update

Clinton's poll day threat to Iran

Hillary Clinton hopes her poll lead will translate into a big win in Pennsylvania

Hillary Clinton has issued a stark warning to Iran, as Democrats in Pennsylvania vote to choose between her and Barack Obama to run for president.

She said the US would attack, and could "obliterate" Iran, if it launched a nuclear strike on Israel.

Mrs Clinton has been playing up foreign affairs and leadership as she tries to make up ground in the Democratic race.

She leads polls in Pennsylvania, the largest remaining state, but analysts say her hopes depend on a big victory.

A Zogby survey released on Tuesday showed Mrs Clinton leading Mr Obama by 10%, while an InsiderAdvantage poll had her 7% ahead.

Polling stations opened at 0700 (1100 GMT), with results expected soon after they close at 2000 (2400 GMT).

Hillary Clinton's threat to Iran

As the candidates appeared on the US talk show circuit on Tuesday morning, a row erupted when Mrs Clinton was asked how she would respond if Iran launched a nuclear attack on Israel.

She replied that: "If I'm the president, we will attack Iran... we would be able to totally obliterate them.

"That's a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that, because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would b

[belfastuniguy 18]

Now in response to her statement. To be honest I agree if Iran launched a nuclear attack on Israel then I would expect the United States and the United Kingdom and NATO allies to respond with force. Iran if it did such a thing it would have to have all its militarily targets and infrastructure destroyed immediately. I would not use nuclear weapons but would certainly unleash devastating force upon their army and government.

Typical vague wishwashy Obama statement, be nice to hear from him what he would actually do where Israel attacked with nuclear weapons....

[JanYpe 17]

Of course there would be a reaction by everyone if Iran nuked anyone at all. It's nuclear bloody weapons! Obama wouldn't be about to invite them over for tea either. Does anyone really need to hear all the time from Hillary that, yes, she does have the sack to push the button? Much like including Osama in her latest campaign video, this is a sad appeal to fear. Just because saying "obliterate" sounds a lot more gung-ho and forceful than a reasoned, slightly less action hero, answer doesn't make it the right one.

Clinton is going to need a very convincing win here to continue with any sort of credibility.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Voar Tok 4]

Hillary? Obliterate Iran? Hillary would do no such thing. She doesn't want to come across sounding like Bush.

[blade2k5 1,523]

Too late, she already did.