Next best thing for the US (and perhaps the world)

[dazzerfong]

@ csgators:

 

The situation in Taiwan is tricky, I admit. Do you know how Taiwan was formed? It was formed because on dictator got kicked out by another dictator. Hell ensues. Even then, the UN is on China's side this time (surprisingly).

The Vietnam situation: guess what's next to the Cambodia/Vietnam border? It spilled over. Please read up on it.

On border disputes, let's go to England...........ever wondered why it's called the 'United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland'? And why would China care about some outback land that no-one really cares about? It's called integrity.

 

You're being strangely aggressive here..............

 

@ Mandamus:

 

It's natural: people don't trust people they're not used to. Of course we'll all prefer the United States: we're used to them running the show for over 50 years. Before then, it was the United Kingdom. Even I, an Australian-Chinese, am more used to the Americans running the show. Until China could clean up its problems (namely corruption, I already admit democracy doesn't really work well in China (look into HK to see why)), I don't want them running any shows.

 

Back on topic:

 

Right now, whenever I try to read up on the race, the figures are all muddled up. Which side arguably has more support?

Edited September 12, 2012 by dazzerfong

[colourwheel]

Which side arguably has more support?

 

This is the problem....

 

The republicans focus on morals more so than policy. While the Democrates focus more on policy than morals.

 

The huge problem is to some people moral values are more important to them than policy and viceversa.

 

Recently the GOP has been slamming the media and TV with hate and fear.

 

The GOP sadly as it may seem are better at politics than Democratic Party. Despite campaigning on hate and fear billionaire polluters will hijack politians to get their voters to vote for them against their own interest by constantly reminding them things their political advisors know they can win at. Even if it is based on truth or not.

 

example:

 

You have a voter who is strong against abortion you keep reminding this person that you will fight to make sure a baby will never die in the country again from abortion, even when this issue doesnt really dirrectly effect them personally because they are a 65 year old woman who is not going to have a new baby anyways.

 

While a politician has got this persons vote in the bag at the same time they are duping them into getting elected because the 1st thing they will do in office is get rid of their healthcare. lol which is actually something they really need and would dirrectly effect them.

 

(as a note this is just a hypothetical example)

[mizdarby]

Theres' me thinking politicians had no morals at all.

 

Policies are great, it's good for the party in power to have clear objectives, and a well structured methodology to attempt to achieve those objectives. And voting would be simple, if all parties stated their aims, and stuck to their policies without fail. But we all know, what they promise at election time, is seldomly delivered in full and without compromise.

 

Morals are more complex, because people have such a range of attitudes towards issues. For instance the abortion issue, will have people strongly for it, strongly against it, mostly for but with provisios, mostly against it but with provisios etc. A good (or cynical) political party, will focus on the vote winning issues, and try to read the general perceptions of the public towards those issues.

 

For this particular election, I believe the state of the US economy is the single most important issue, and the party that appeals to most people on that issue, will in all liklihood win the election. From my own perspective, the Republicans, edge the issue but not enough to overturn the approval ratings of the Democrats, so haven't offered enough on the economy issue to actually win.

[colourwheel]

The US economy is the single most important issue.

 

But people tend to be split into voting for a canidate over morals or policy because any canidate will focus on the bigger issue anyways. This is why elections are ussually very close.

[saadus]

To me, its who lies the least and who is more likely to keep their promises. Obama has failed and lied more then any politician that I know. He even stated, when asked about why he hasn't kept any of his promises, that it was just politics. :facepalm:

 

And that was his first term. What kind of damage will he do when he knows he can't get reelected? No thanks, Im voting for the other devil.

[HeyYou]

To me, its who lies the least and who is more likely to keep their promises. Obama has failed and lied more then any politician that I know. He even stated, when asked about why he hasn't kept any of his promises, that it was just politics. :facepalm:

 

And that was his first term. What kind of damage will he do when he knows he can't get reelected? No thanks, Im voting for the other devil.

 

Well, since he won't be worried about getting RE-Elected..... He will be more willing to compromise with the repubbies in order to get things done. Quite frankly, I don't think Mitt is going to be good for the country as a whole. Certain parties will love him.... but as for the rest of us? Nope, we will end up taking the shaft so he can give more money to defense, and start another war in Iran.

[ginnyfizz]

 

On border disputes, let's go to England...........ever wondered why it's called the 'United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland'?

 

 

The last I heard, it was the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. As I am not aware that the Welsh and Scots have actually declared independence. I do actually live in the UK, am born and bred British and have a British passport, so yes Dazzer, on this I really do know best.

[Syco21]

@Syco21

 

A broken promiss is hardly something that would fall under criminal activity.

 

As for this "fast and Furious" thing there is no evidence still to what you are claiming. You might strongly feel Obama is to blame for this but if he is guilty i am sure he will be held accountable for it later.

Whether there is evidence or not Obama was directly involved then, he has directly involved himself now by leading the effort to cover up Fast and Furious.

 

But as i have already said, this really doesn't have much to do with what i originally said, which was a metaphor.

 

Speeches mean nothing, campaigns mean even less. Both parties will continue to appease the rich and destroy our rights. And when i say our rights,i do mean human rights the world over.

[mizdarby]

Human rights are a wonderful concept, and maybe one day even the key issue in major election campaigns. Right now though, in this particular election, people are mostly concerned with getting good jobs, paying less taxes and keeping more of their income, and a basic sense of financial security.

One of the fundamental problems with politics, is the blame game they all play. The Republicans blame the Democrats, I have seen people post on facebook, saying the current economic downturn in the US, can be directly linked to the 2007 Democrat Senate, and that Bush had nothing to do with it. The Democrats blame Bush. Everybody points their fingers and blame the other guys. Why cant the two parties, not keep looking to the past, and just focus on fixing the future, make policies and let the voters decide on which set of policies, appear to offer the best fix.

[Syco21]

They can not and will not, which is exactly why you should not vote for them. Rights are not their only weak point, everything is. They are both responsible for the financial crisis that has gripped the US.

 

They are far more concerned with their own power and enriching those that empower them, which is neither you nor I. They will do this at the expense of the people.

 

And while I can empathize with wanting the economy to get better and for there to be better jobs available, I am afterall one of those people, having a good job isn't going to mean anything if the police are able to gun you down in the street or your house or your work with no consequence.

 

Police in New York recently shot 9 or more innocent people. Police somewhere I forget, recently shot and killed a man running for his life from his kidnapper. Police had kicked in doors to the wrong home and shot/killed innocent people and their pets more times than I can count.

 

I'd say that our rights are more important than our economy, because right now, rights wise, things are very bad. But even if you disagree, it wouldn't matter. Because voting for Obama or Romney is just voting for someone that is going to be more concerned with playing politics than fixing our problems.