Across the Pond Politics [Archive]

Snook

13-07-2004, 22:25

Originally posted by royjames
Sorry Snook but I have to disagree with your statement that we have more in common with the E U than the states.
Let us look at Nato to begin with,it looks like France and Germany woul'd like to replace the organisation which has protected the world for the last 50 yrs with this so called E U army.
I have to say I have no faith that this so called european army woul'd ever have the balls to enter conflict.
Secondly the U S is much more commited to the market ideals than the french or germans will ever be,this is one reason their economys are stagnating.
They are saddled with the old outdated socialist ideology which will always hold them back.
And finally the U S is not this mish mash of states which is the E U, theirs is a real union based on common language and ideals.

Don't be sorry, disagree all you like. It would be boring if we all agreed. :D

Although at the moment i think America might seem close to us, i think if you look at history we have the same 'old outdated socialist' views as Europe... as well as our stance on say; Education, health care, abortion, death penalty, taxation, government control... as well as many others.

Also, when it comes to wars, we have rarely taken the same stance as America. They really don't share anything like the History of wars that we do in Europe, and have never been invaded... unless you count the Europeans invading...

Not so sure about America not being a 'mish mash' of states either. I'd say that New Hampshire and New Mexico are about as different as you can get, in ideals and language.... as well as the economies of those two states being about as close as ours and Polands.

A.B.Yaffle

13-07-2004, 22:42

Seriously though, I do feel that as well as being in Europe geographically, most British people probably have more in common with mainland Europe than they do with the USA. Although I did actually vote for keeping Bush as president in the poll, I do think it is bad that they can't elect a president for more than 2 terms if they choose to in which case they would most likely still be suffering under Bill Clinton.

evildrneil

13-07-2004, 22:54

Originally posted by royjames
Let us look at Nato to begin with,it looks like France and Germany woul'd like to replace the organisation which has protected the world for the last 50 yrs with this so called E U army.

Nato is simply a mutual defence group - and in that way is not really any different to an E U army - or for that matter The Warsaw Pact. Just out of interest what has NATO protected the world from???

I have to say I have no faith that this so called european army woul'd ever have the balls to enter conflict.

Why not? Or do you really mean they wouldn't be as psychotically hawkish as the US have been in Iraq?

Secondly the U S is much more commited to the market ideals than the french or germans will ever be,this is one reason their economys are stagnating.

The US is arguably more commited to market ideology than the UK - which is probably why they have such a HUGE disparity between the richest and poorest members of society. And given the current UK dollar vs UK euro exchange rates and trends it looks rather like the US is in the weaker economic position?

They are saddled with the old outdated socialist ideology which will always hold them back.

Oh the poor scandanavian countries with their terribly outdated socialist ideals - its no wonder they are so poor and with such terrible areas of deprivation - ahem!

Many would say the US is saddled with an outdated and limited market economy which only works as long as you have an expanding market - so what happens when there is no more expansion in the market?

And finally the U S is not this mish mash of states which is the E U, theirs is a real union based on common language and ideals.

Questionable at the least - the US is an amalgum of French, German, Spanish, English, Dutch etc settlers and the individual states still remain pretty much their own identity and laws.

royjames

14-07-2004, 08:16

Originally posted by evildrneil
Nato is simply a mutual defence group - and in that way is not really any different to an E U army - or for that matter The Warsaw Pact. Just out of interest what has NATO protected the world from???

Why not? Or do you really mean they wouldn't be as psychotically hawkish as the US have been in Iraq?

The US is arguably more commited to market ideology than the UK - which is probably why they have such a HUGE disparity between the richest and poorest members of society. And given the current UK dollar vs UK euro exchange rates and trends it looks rather like the US is in the weaker economic position?

Oh the poor scandanavian countries with their terribly outdated socialist ideals - its no wonder they are so poor and with such terrible areas of deprivation - ahem!

Many would say the US is saddled with an outdated and limited market economy which only works as long as you have an expanding market - so what happens when there is no more expansion in the market?

Questionable at the least - the US is an amalgum of French, German, Spanish, English, Dutch etc settlers and the individual states still remain pretty much their own identity and laws. I have to say that you never hear a spokesman for the united stetes talking in anything other than english and guess why because it'd their first language.

royjames

14-07-2004, 08:25

Oh and do you really think the euro is ever going to overtake the dollar in influence.
Come on the dollar is the trading currency of the world and it will stay like that for a very long time.
May I also say if you were to ask the peole of this country who woul'd they rather have as a partner the French or the Americans I think you know who that woul'd be.
I woul'd never trust the French in a million years and I think most people feel the same.

evildrneil

14-07-2004, 08:50

Originally posted by royjames
I have to say that you never hear a spokesman for the united stetes talking in anything other than english and guess why because it'd their first language.

Thats cos English is their official languge - doesn't mean its the only, or in some places main, languge. I believe that recently Spanish became the most commonly spoken languge in California and thats likely to continue as people move north from South America...

evildrneil

14-07-2004, 08:57

Originally posted by royjames
Oh and do you really think the euro is ever going to overtake the dollar in influence.

Not immediately but given time theres no reason why it shouldn't - one currency is as good as another for trading and the combination of countries using the euro should give it strength and resiliance that isn't seen in the dollar - strength through diversity...

Come on the dollar is the trading currency of the world and it will stay like that for a very long time.
May I also say if you were to ask the peole of this country who woul'd they rather have as a partner the French or the Americans I think you know who that woul'd be.
I woul'd never trust the French in a million years and I think most people feel the same.

Ermmm I think thats you projecting your personal bias onto the rest of the country - were not all as politically niave and prejudiced as you appear to be - why pray tell are the French any less trustworthy than the Americans???

royjames

14-07-2004, 09:30

Yes your right about spanish being widely spoken especielly in the south west region,but english as you have acknoledged is the first and official language.
As for the french do you REALLY think they are trust worthy,history tells us not to trust them,after all we have had many conflicts with them over the years.
They even tried to invade us,nope can't be trusted.

Sidla

14-07-2004, 09:37

History is history. I'm sure French people of today would not appreciate your generalisation that the French are untrustworthy.

max

14-07-2004, 10:59

Originally posted by royjames

They even tried to invade us,nope can't be trusted.

Er, they did invade us, in 1066. Don't tell me with your intimate knowledge of everything English you didn't realise that we are a French colony run by a German royal family?

evildrneil

14-07-2004, 11:42

Originally posted by royjames
Yes your right about spanish being widely spoken especielly in the south west region,but english as you have acknoledged is the first and official language.

Only because English was imposed as a language of government - in much the same way Latin and French have been the languages of govenment in the UK. Though in the case of the states it was a very close run thing between English and German. Imposition of a language of Government is hardly uncommon in invasion and colonisation - makes it easy to exclude the native population from the process of power.

As for the french do you REALLY think they are trust worthy,history tells us not to trust them,after all we have had many conflicts with them over the years.
They even tried to invade us,nope can't be trusted.

And what bits of history would these be - yes we have had our battles with France in the past - but we also had a pretty good one with the US - wars don't make countries untrustworthy - if you look into history you can find plenty of things that would make the US untrustworthy - e.g. propping up tin-pot dictatorships, use of biological warfare and concentration camps against the native population of the US, strong pro nazi and isolationist policies which kept them out of WW2 untill it became obvious that it COULD affect them right up to invasions of their past allies n the middle east of highly dubious legality and morality.

Oh and as pointed out they DID invade us (1066 and all that!) but I don't think that makes them untrustworthy...

evildrneil

14-07-2004, 12:04

Originally posted by royjames
They even tried to invade us,nope can't be trusted.

And does invading a country make the invader untrustworthy? If so what does it say about Britain, given the vast number of countries we've invaded over the years????

max

14-07-2004, 12:29

Plus, the last country to invade an independant democratic state which has the queen as their monarch was the good ol' US of A when they deposed the democratically elected government of Grenada. Not exactly the act of a friendly, trustworthy nation was it?

buck

14-07-2004, 19:36

Boy, some of you really hate us! Especially evildrneil, who I doubt has ever spent any time here unless it was two weeks in Orlando. So first let me put you on to a few things. Someone stated that the US is a mish mash of states al with their own agenda, saying that New Hampshire is as different as chalk and cheese from New Mexico. Well, of course it is. New Hampshire is one of my fellow New England states, prosperous and very Yankee. I don't know New Mexico very well, but Spanish would obviously be very predominant there. Contrary to belief English is not nor ever has been an official language here. It is required by new citizens only because not to know it makes it difficult to find work, and we don't need any more unemployed. If you ask an American what he is he doesn't say he's Virginian, or Alaskan, or Ohioan, he says he's American, and he says it with pride. For the most part Americans tend to be pro British, believing that between us we have done a great deal for the peace of the world, the white crosses in Normandy both British and American are there because of that commitment.
If a few of us come across as ugly Americans I can only apologize for them, but most of us are good neighbors to each other. Helping those who need a hand up, far away from the government. Volunteerism is a very strong suit here. It seemed to me long long ago when I lived in England that snobbery was rampant, people looking down their noses for the most trivial reasons like the way a person spoke. I have never faced that here, persons are judged by their ability to do their job and get on with others. You don't have to like us just don't insult us

evildrneil

14-07-2004, 20:03

I wasn't aware I had insulted anyone - I was pointing out that the US isn't a homogenious block but more a group of fairly disparate subcultures in much the same way that Europe is. I may have overstated things but I was to an extent playing devils advocate to Roys rather rediculous pronouncements!

royjames

14-07-2004, 21:51

Good on you Buck,we have quite a few on here who are anti american,but trust me they are VERY much in the minority in this country.
Bye the way Bush WILL win.

Snook

14-07-2004, 22:09

Originally posted by buck
Boy, some of you really hate us!

Well i really hope you don't include me in that, because my girlfriend really won't be happy!! (she's American) I was just simply pointing out some of the reasons that we are not closer in thinking to America.

If you go down to New Mexico, you will see that there is rampant poverty, with some places classed as third world situations by the W.H.O. The main language there is also Spanish, not English... i was just trying to point out that the states are not quite as similar as some people assume. I wasn't having a go at any states in particular. Also, you're right, there has never been an official language of America... something the founding fathers never made clear.

Personally i love America as a country (lived there for three years), and the American people. However, like most Europeans i don't share the political views of many people there. I am very glad that Britain has such a close friend in international afairs, and i hope that the combined states of Europe will one day be as successful as america.

Hope that clears that up. :D

noseyrosie

14-07-2004, 23:45

Originally posted by royjames
give me bush every time over some dithering liberal.

You can heardly call the Democrats liberal. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are more right wing even than our Conservative party! If they're liberal, you must be a Nazi! Oh wait, hang on a minute....

buck

15-07-2004, 02:05

Thank you Snook for your reply. I admire you for taking on an American girl, it ain't easy! I don't mean that badly, just joking. They are sassy though. The states obviously vary as you move south or west, all with their own governor, house and senate, They are all financially independent to a degree, but the feds will allocate or cut funds depending on the degree of need. Some states tax income, some like New Hampshire don't by getting money based on property you own. They each have individual minimum drinking ages but found that universal 21 saved lives especially on state borders. But the American flag is flown outside many private homes but rarely a state flag. The success of ventures like McDonalds or Pizza Hut which you have adopted came about because Americans love to travel and want to eat at a place they can recognize anywhere in the 50. I can remember a time long ago in England that finding a breakfast going from Sheffield to Cornwall was a real problem. Nearly bedtime, just enough left for a 16oz can of Bud and away. Best of Luck

Funke88

15-07-2004, 02:55

Well said Buck. I'm glad someone is standing up for Americans. They get a bad rap on this forum no matter what they do. Evildrneil you need to read some of the other forum topics and threads cos there are some people that hate all americans and voice their opinions quite clearly. They may not have said anything on this topic but there have been some insulting comments thrown around. Forum people should be more accepting of people from different countries and races, plus be more open minded and less narrow minded. Xenophobia is rife!

I may not be american but I am married to one and will become a naturalized citizen in 2 years. Right now I am a green card holder and don't have the right to vote. However, I pay my taxes and care about how this country is governed. Right now I don't have any major affiliation with either side. Still making my mind up. I don't like Bush at all but I don't like Kerry either. They're all insincere and seem to have personal agendas. I don't know much about UK politics these days but I do like Tony Blair. He is a better orator than Bush and interesting to watch and listen to. Anyway, I have a few more years to decide who to vote for. In the mean time what I have learnt is that Republicans are the party that celebrates free enterprise. Hmmm? so the more I earn the less taxes I pay, especially if I become self employed. Ultimately the richer I will get. God help me I could be Republican. Democrats supposedly have the party that cares about the average American citizen, and the party of compassion. So if I care about the environment, raising minimum wage, lowering taxes for low income families, more affordable health care. Maybe I should vote Democrat?

evildrneil

15-07-2004, 07:12

Originally posted by Funke88
[B]Evildrneil you need to read some of the other forum topics and threads cos there are some people that hate all americans and voice their opinions quite clearly. They may not have said anything on this topic but there have been some insulting comments thrown around.

I'm sure there are some people who dislike Americans (in the same way as there are people who dislike the French!) which is patently rediculous - especially when you consider what a varied country it is.

I'm still trying to work out what terribly insulting things I have said about the US - I pointed out they have some crappy things in their history yes but thats the same for every country and implied that Europe may become as big a power block as the States but thats hardly an insult is it????

Forum people should be more accepting of people from different countries and races, plus be more open minded and less narrow minded. Xenophobia is rife!

Quite right - but this extends to all countries - even *gasp* the non English speaking ones. Claiming 'the french are untrsutworthy' is more than enough xenophobia for one thread...

goose

15-07-2004, 14:34

Originally posted by royjames
Good on you Buck,we have quite a few on here who are anti american,but trust me they are VERY much in the minority in this country.
Bye the way Bush WILL win.

Wow bet you Bush supporters (if there are any!) are glad your getting support from a member of the BNP! It speaks volumes

buck

15-07-2004, 14:39

Calling us untrustworthy fits the bill of insulting in my book.

evildrneil

15-07-2004, 14:51

Go read what I said - I didn't say that America is untrustworthy but that there are things in its history which could be used to label it untrustworthy - which is the same of every country. Labelling one country untrustworthy because of its history is a pretty stupid thing to do as poke around in any countries history and you will soon be crushed under the weight of the skeletons in the their closet...

buck

15-07-2004, 14:56

Hi Funke, Glad to see you're taking the steps to citizenship, the green card is your toughest obstacle. After that it's plain sailing. Not many Euripeans are coming any more and they are very welcome especially Brits and Irish. I left Sheffield 37 years ago during what was called the brain drain, just as the steel industry started to decline on a 2 year contract with RCA in Montreal. After a number of years roaming the wilds of Canada,I was asked by my Ohio company to move to New England and have been here ever since. A citizen now for 20 years I vote for everything from first selectman to president , have served on three juries sending one man to prison for drug dealing. Jury duty will be one of the first things they get you for. If anyone questions whether I am a true American or not forget it cos I am. On a short visit in 1989 for my brother's funeral the woman immigration officer at Heathrow treaated me like a traitor, saying that I could only stay 6 motnhs and could not work, so much for compassion. As if I wanted to stay. I had a much better reception in tough old NYC from the equivalent at Kennedy. A year later I was on a company trip to Scotland, and went to Sheffield to my cousin's house in Hackenthorpe taking a trip in his Jag to look at our old hunting grounds in Attercliffe which had all been knocked down to make a divided highway. That was my last visit. I go to Ireland frequently with my Irish wife to our house in Shannon. Best regards

buck

15-07-2004, 15:11

One more thing quickly, I suspect there is some belief that we are in rivalry with the EU. This is not the case. Why would we wish harm to a great potential for peace and prosperity. There is a major airport a mile from my home. While the venerable Boeing 737 is most common as a domestic carrier there are plenty of Airbus too. I eat Cadbury bars, drool after Jaguars, and think the landrover is the best SUV in the world. I ride a french racing bicycle and an American mountain bike. I drink scotch whisky and beefeater gin, I also like a pint of Bass. Federation in the EU must be difficult because of all the languages in use, and ther have been some problems getting the euro accepted especially in Britain. The USA is still a work in progress, a hundred and forty odd years after the civil war, so don't be in too much of a hurry.WW2 has only been over 59 years!

Snook

15-07-2004, 15:19

Thanks for the support Buck :D

That was kinda the point of what i was saying before... I think Europe is moving towards the same sort of structure as the US, and i don't see how it can really be a bad thing. You guys certainly seem to do ok for yourselves.

I just think it would be a shame if Britain lost out on being part of Europe because we were scared of being told what to do by people who speak another language. I don't think we will lose our culture, just as the many states of America have their own distinct cultures. And personally i couldn't care less if we have the pound or the euro.

E-Man Groovin

15-07-2004, 15:58

Spending too much time on this forum today!

A couple of points:

1. To the bloke who said that the US overthrew the democratically elected government of Grenada in the 80s. You are mistaken I'm afraid (I was in Grenada shortly after that event). The Marxist goverment gained power by a coup. At first the locals supported it (the previous ruler was a bit of a tyrant). Then the original marxist PM was overthrown and murdered by hardcore elements in his own party who then imposed martial law. The people of Grenada were very happy when the US invaded. I know this doesn't fit the script but it is rather boringly true.

2. There's a great and balanced book about Britain's dilemma of being sat between the US and the EU which I'm reading - Free World (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0713997648/qid=1089906918/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/026-8779731-7521200) by Timothy Garton-Ash. It's a clear-eyed look at the current situation. Europhiles AND Pro-Americans will get a lot out of it as it dispels a lot of the myths promoted by both sides.

Funke88

16-07-2004, 03:36

Vote Bush? or Vote Kerry?

I work in a hotel and we can't get Americans to work for minimum wage. Some positions warrant responsibilty and experience, so these workers get a few dollars above the minimum, which is $5.25. Depending on the rate of exchange it's about 2.70 uk pounds. Anyway, we are now hiring foreigners to do jobs, while people moan about not being able to get a job. Right now we have 8 Russian students here on temporary work visas. They speak English so have been given jobs working on the front desk and in the restaurant. We have a Croatian, a Dominican Republican, plus a bunch of Koreans, all of whom do not speak English. Therefore, they work in the laundry and maintenance. We actually all work for Manpower and everyone is legal. The point is that foreigners have a totally different work ethic and upbringing. They work longer hours and accept lower wages. Kids these days seem to think they can get a job with no experience and no education and still get paid like they have a college degree. So maybe Americans should vote Democrat so that the minimum wage will be increased. Right now I see the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer. Minimum wage has not been increased for years. Inflation goes up leaving people earning below poverty level. Can the Republicans change that? Haven't seen it happen yet.
Any comments Buck? you've been here long enough to see the changes with every new President. Should we be worried?

buck

16-07-2004, 14:49

We most certainly need to worry. Even with both spouses working, it is becoming impossible to afford a house. I live in the richest state in the union, the very rich enclaves being near the border with NYC. A house in Greenwich would cost you at least a million. Some of the poorest cities in the Country are also in Connecticut. The taxes here are outrageous. In my town , a small industrial place, a home will cost anything from 150,000 to 350,000. A family would need to be jointly earning about 50,000 a year to qualify. How do you do that on 7 bucks an hour.
Manufacturing jobs are disappearing at an alarming rate, so all the jobs Bush is spouting about are in service, and you know what they pay. Unfortunately, we have raised a bunch of spoiled brats who expect their own car at 16, with Daddy providing gas and insurance, kids who cry if you ask them to mow the lawn.
The problem is our politicians, republican and democrat, are concerned only with how much they can wheedle out of the richest companies, and of course who will vote for them, then who they forget for the next four or six years. If we were ever to go to global war again we have no steel industry, a military already stretched to the limit, and presidents who can only posture in flight suits rthat never saw a shot fired in anger.

Funke88

16-07-2004, 15:08

Buck,

You need to move south and live on Pensacola Beach. It's exensive but here in Florida there are no State taxes. We pay only Federal. We live in Gulf Breeze, which is 10 minutes from the beach. House prices are reasonable. We live in a modest 3 bedroomed ranch style house in a nice quiet neigborhood for $80,000. We bought it for 50,000 3 years ago. I think of Gulf Breeze as the "Fulwood" of the south. Low, low crime and nice friendly people. We can leave our doors open at night and my husband rarely locks his car door. For exercise we walk the streets at night time too. Middle class average income families live here. We border on million dollar homes and there are the snobs. But you get those everywhere. Beach ones are more down to earth and less showy.

I couldn't move back to city life and Sheffield City Center scares me now. I hear of all the crime and think of the areas that my family live in. I'm just not used to it anymore.

Anyone else care to emmigrate? Ignore politics - The beach is wonderful!

The Funkes

buck

16-07-2004, 18:53

We are frequent visitors to Florida, with family in Melbourne. ( No folks not Australia), who have begged us to come down, and I wouldn't mind snowbirding (coming for the winter). We are retired and it would certainly help us financially, but my wife hates the idea of leaving our little granddaughters at the mercy of their parents, and I'm not ready to become an old fogey yet, and I love my little girls too. So it's snowdrifts for three months a year. I am fortunate to have had enough money in my 401K to live in my lovely Colonial comfortably, and Connecticut is beautiful, with its stone walls to remind me of the Peak District. I think there are more British in Florida then any other state, though there were plenty in California when I was there, mostly illegals dodging the INS. There was a pub in Cupertino called the Britannia Arms, and when I first went in was asked by some if I had a green card, I said no and they said "Illegal like us" I said not exactly I'm a citizen! Most of them lived by doing home improvement projects under the table, I felt really sorry for them, cos they had no chance for accreditation, having come in on tourist visas, and had no money to go home

Snook

26-07-2004, 18:17

Very funny video, well worth a watch!!!!

http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/af/content/this_land

royjames

27-07-2004, 16:33

Just been looking at the Democrats convention and watched bill clinton give his speach,you have to hand to the man he is real quality.
It's funny how a few yrs ago he might have been looked on as a embaressment yet now he is paraded as the saviour of the democrats.
Mind you he knows how to deliver a speach,which seems in stark contrast to the man who is trying to get the job.
I feel sure that if clinton was able to take on bush he woul'd get the democrats back in the oval office,no problem.

Snook

27-09-2004, 10:41

Noticed that Bush is still winning in the polls, and with not too long to go now. Maybe the adverts saying Kerry is a lier and coward actually worked?

DerekH

27-09-2004, 17:22

Originally posted by Snook
Noticed that Bush is still winning in the polls, and with not too long to go now. Maybe the adverts saying Kerry is a lier and coward actually worked?

Character assasination seems to be the way forward in politics.

You only have to look here to see the long knives out and the scandal being put out between the parties.

At the end of the day they are all liers......Winning an election is based of who's lies are more convincing..

Phanerothyme

27-09-2004, 17:54

Originally posted by royjames
Just been looking at the Democrats convention and watched bill clinton give his speach,you have to hand to the man he is real quality.
It's funny how a few yrs ago he might have been looked on as a embaressment yet now he is paraded as the saviour of the democrats.
Mind you he knows how to deliver a speach,which seems in stark contrast to the man who is trying to get the job.
I feel sure that if clinton was able to take on bush he woul'd get the democrats back in the oval office,no problem.

You're not wrong - Clinton is a talented statesman, politician and speaker. In many ways, a proto-blair.

the trouble is, that as far as foreign policy practice goes, you couldn't get a blue rizla between the republicrats and the democans anymore. It's even worse than here, especially since the US will never, ever move to fully representational national government.

Greybeard

27-09-2004, 18:20

Originally posted by evildrneil
Hmmmm wonder how long before he declares a state of emergency and postpones elections indefinately?

Well if he thinks he's Julius Caesar he'll hopefully meet the same fate.

Lickszz

27-09-2004, 21:59

I wonder if Clinton may find himself back in the Whitehouse alongside Hilary. :suspect:

poppins

06-10-2004, 12:16

I predict (hope) Bush will be back in, one reason is he hasn't finished cleaning up the mess the democrats left him, he inherited all the problems Clinton ignored, Bush & Blair are a good team, not as great as Reagan & Thatcher were, they would never have let it go so far.

As far as giving tax cuts to the rich, (no being rich myself ) I belive it's the right thing to do, we all need rich people, they give us jobs, it trickles down to us middle class, do you know anyone that works for a poor person ? and gets paid from them ?

Belive me there are more Bush supporters in the States than people think, you only hear from the Hollywood crowd.

Bush will win, and he will win BIG.

elf

06-10-2004, 12:24

Ay? Hasn't Bush totally destroyed your economy and gotten all the americans being as scared of muslims as they were of communists some time back?

poppins

06-10-2004, 12:57

The us economy is fine, for us middle class as far as I can see,
It should have been a lot worse after 911, not too many unemployed people here, not was what was expected anyhow.

Do you get the O'Reily Factor over there ? it think you do, but it's on at odd hours, the only news channel you can trust over here is FOX.

Greenback

06-10-2004, 13:50

Originally posted by poppins
Do you get the O'Reily Factor over there ? it think you do, but it's on at odd hours, the only news channel you can trust over here is FOX.

I think this says it all, really. Fox doesn't provide news, but it's darned good at pro-Bush propaganda.

max

06-10-2004, 14:05

Originally posted by poppins
The us economy is fine, for us middle class as far as I can see,
It should have been a lot worse after 911, not too many unemployed people here, not was what was expected anyhow.

Do you get the O'Reily Factor over there ? it think you do, but it's on at odd hours, the only news channel you can trust over here is FOX.

The following article was written by Joseph Stiglitz, professor of economics at Columbia University and a Nobel prize winner:

Bush and the USA economy (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1320596,00.html)

In case you're on dial up here are the main points:

Median income has fallen by over $1,500 in real terms

45 million Americans have no health insurance, up by 5.2 million from 2000.

Those with health insurance face annual premiums that have nearly doubled, to $7,500

Clinton also left a huge budget surplus - 2% of GDP ... Bush squandered that surplus, converting it into a deficit of 5% of GDP through tax cuts for the rich.

This is the first time since the early 1930s that there has been a net loss of jobs over the span of a presidential administration
The huge trade deficit provides the spectacle of the world's richest country borrowing almost $2bn a day from abroad

The economy's fine under Bush is it?

Phanerothyme

06-10-2004, 14:09

Originally posted by poppins
As far as giving tax cuts to the rich, (no being rich myself ) I belive it's the right thing to do, we all need rich people, they give us jobs, it trickles down to us middle class, do you know anyone that works for a poor person ?

I thought trickle down economics were discredited back in the King Bush 1 era, and even the Republicrats acknowledged it, since one of the reasons that rich people stay rich is they keep people on minimum wage and economise on safety, environment etc, etc and generally hang on to money rather than spend it (how to get rich 101).

Either way, I hope at least this time that the candidate that wins the most votes in the country has that mandate endorsed by the electoral college, rather than the last debacle - maybe we should send international election monitors to this one to ensure free and fair elections, as North Korea offered (lol) last time.

Who ever wins, it will be how they deal with China and the impossible large amount of US debt that now belongs to the chinese that will be important. In theory (although it could *probably* never happen) the Chinese government could simply call in its debts on the US and the economy would be deeply if not fatally wounded (as one pundit put it).

royjames

06-10-2004, 17:22

I have a strong feeling that the Republicans will win the race for the white house,and they will win on the economy and iraq.
Kerry looks like he needs a charisma by pass,he just dont look the part.
At least with georgie you know what you are going to get,so as they say its better the devil you know than the one you dont.

poppins

06-10-2004, 18:46

Yes royjames
The republicans will win, a vote for Kerry is a vote for Hillary ! and we don't want any socialized medicine in the US, then wer'e done for.

Bush has to clean up the mess first the Clintons left behind, then get down to buisness.

max

06-10-2004, 18:55

Originally posted by poppins
we don't want any socialized medicine in the US, then wer'e done for.

Can you tell me what this is, please?

Did you read that article by the nobel prize winning economist telling us what a mess Bush has made of the ecoomy (see my previous post)? Any comments?

royjames

10-10-2004, 14:59

I have recently watched the debate between vice president chaney and democrat edwards.
I thought that edwards did very well and I was somewhat suprised by his intelect,I feel sure he at least woul'd make a very good vice president.
I still get the gut feeling that the republicans will win bar some unforseen event,which is a shame as edwards lookes the part.

poppins

10-10-2004, 20:18

It's sad to say and hard to explain, but the popular vote won't count as usual, it's the electoral vote that count, each state is aloud somany electoral votes whoever wins the Ohio votes will win the election, no matter how the people vote, no ones benn able to explain this yet !

poppins

10-10-2004, 20:23

The electoral votes are what counts for the race to the whitehouse, not the peoples vote, each State is aloud so many votes, no matter how the people in that State vote, whoevery gets Ohios electoral votes will win.

royjames

10-10-2004, 21:03

Well that system is not really very good is it,I know about the electoral colledges in the states but to me it is not such a good thing.
Am I correct when I say in the last election that al gore actually got more votes than bush,if so then your system needs to be looked at soon.

Killian

10-10-2004, 23:20

Originally posted by poppins
The electoral votes are what counts for the race to the whitehouse, not the peoples vote, each State is aloud so many votes, no matter how the people in that State vote, whoevery gets Ohios electoral votes will win.

This sounds exactly like our system, doesn't it?

Lickszz

11-10-2004, 00:54

Our own first past the post system needs looking at. It's undemocratic to say the least.

Lickszz

28-10-2004, 22:45

Up to 60,000 voting papers lost. Florida again?

These will be replaced apparently but there is some doubt whether the papers will be delivered in time for use on 2 November.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6648580

jgharston

28-10-2004, 23:26

Originally posted by poppins
... US electoral college...
Wiki has a very comprehensive explanation here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Electoral_College

--
JGH

jgharston

28-10-2004, 23:30

and if people in England actually could vote for Bush and Kerry it seems that Bush is ahead:
http://www.geocities.com/dadge.geo/ElecColl.htm

--
JGH

poppins

29-10-2004, 00:56

You all seem quite afraid of Bush , why ? he hasn't done anything just yet, he's still cleaning up the mess the Clintons left him, things Clinton should have taken care of in the middle east among other things, we willl all be in big trouble if Kerry wins, if he does ,i just hope the republicans get all the senate seats.

I hope by next Tuesday i can say "I told you all"

Poppins

Greenback

29-10-2004, 07:50

Originally posted by poppins
You all seem quite afraid of Bush , why ? he hasn't done anything just yet, he's still cleaning up the mess the Clintons left him, things Clinton should have taken care of in the middle east among other things, we willl all be in big trouble if Kerry wins, if he does ,i just hope the republicans get all the senate seats.

I hope by next Tuesday i can say "I told you all"

Poppins

Why? Becauase the man's unfit to be president of the only superpower in the world. He's a buffoon, and a very dangerous one at that - try telling the thousands of Iraqi civilians (and 1,000-odd US troops) in Iraq that he "hasn't done anything just yet"... :rolleyes:

poppins

29-10-2004, 16:12

Seems to me that over half the people in the UK hate americans, the rest just pretend to like them, but you do have a choice, you can always go to another counrty to spend your dole money.

JoeP

29-10-2004, 16:32

Originally posted by poppins
Seems to me that over half the people in the UK hate americans, the rest just pretend to like them, but you do have a choice, you can always go to another counrty to spend your dole money.

That's a rather unfair generalisation, poppins.

I quite like the US as a country and the American people, and I think you'll find that a lot of other people feel the same.

However, I'd agree that in some respects much of what's happened since 2000 is a product of the Clinton years and the Bush Senior presidency, IMO. There was a failure to provide 'joined up' policy after Reagan and the demise of the 'old enemy', the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union.

The thing to bear in mind though is that, like us 100 years or so ago, the US is THE superpower in the world. That position comes with a load of responsibility and on the whole people will hate you for it.

I think that part of the problem for subsequent US administrations is that they hate the idea of being a global policeman and also dislike the idea of being viewed as a quasi-imperial power. In many respects the US does what we did a century ago in terms of projecting it's power around the globe, but we were an imperial power and had no problems with being that - it was expected of us to behave like that.

I wonder if some US Governments in the past have been a little 'schizophrenic' about their position in the world; in one mind they're aware of their responsibilities and the need to protect their interests and those of their allies in the wider world, whilst in the other mind being aware of Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points, and the natural dislike of being viewed as an imperialist power.

Ignoring the racial connotation of the poem, but reflecting on the political issues involved, perhaps Kipling's poem 'The White Man's Burden' is as relevant today as when it was written in 1899, in response to the US invasion and occupation of the Philipines after the Spanish-American War.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/Kipling.html

royjames

31-10-2004, 19:36

Well I for one dont hate the americans Poppy, I think they are by and large no different than us.
Yes sometimes they come across as a bit big headed but I woul'd guess that when Britain was a super power we had the same attitude also.
I am full of admiration for the people of the U S ,I have visited the country before and I indeed loved it in New York and Boston.
I really think this forum does not really reflect the prevailing views of the british people on a wide range of issues this one included.:clap:

poppins

01-11-2004, 11:05

Yes Roy
They do come accross as big headed and pompous too, like a lot, some spoil it for others, i'm english myself, i meet a lot of english people in this part of the states, in 40 years i'v never met an english person here i like, they seem different from at home, they don't seem interested in mingeling with there own country men here, especially me with my yorkshire accent ! i can still sence the snobbishness from them, makes me laugh now thought, but it's always nice to get home and hang around with (real) english people.

royjames

02-11-2004, 11:27

Popins you make some interesting points which I agree with,as for the peole of the states I have to say they were friendly to me when I was there in fact they loved my english accent.
You will always get one or two who are assholes but then you get them here also.
I am curious which part of the country you live in?? I myself will be going over to the states in the near furure,i'm going to the west coast and then on to vegas so I hope to be able to come back here and say again what nice people they are.
Bye the way I STILL THINK BUSH WILL WIN THE ELECTION.:thumbsup:

poppins

02-11-2004, 11:45

We live in Connecticut, lovely place, been here almost 40 years, it's very much like England, fact it's called NEW england, very green.

Voting day today ! going to be a long night i think,maybe a long week ? hope not, Bush has to get back to work, Kerrys areal scare, but Edwards more so, (his running mate) it's because of him we have no flu vacs, he spent years sueing the drug companies for these sue happy people over here in his lawyer practice among other things.

got my fingers crossed
Poppins

Snook

02-11-2004, 11:47

Well, we'll find out soon enough.

Gonna be a close one, not sure what difference it will make to us, as even the Democrats seem to be further to the right then tories on some issues.

Anyone else notice the similarities between Kerry and Kennedy? Democrats with the initials JFK, from Connecticut, both Catholic... I wonder if Kerry will be travelling in Texas if he gets in?

Personally, i'd vote for Nader as he seems to be the only one that cares about his country and not money.

nomme

02-11-2004, 12:01

For anyone who's interested in the US elections, the CNN website has a
Tally Room where you can watch the results come in.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/

royjames

02-11-2004, 12:36

Well lets all keep our fingers crossed that the right man wins and you all know who that is dont you??
Looks like the state of ohiho will be pivitol and seems like iowa will also be very interesting,either way we will soon see.
VOTE BUSH.

Snook

03-11-2004, 09:59

Originally posted by royjames
VOTE BUSH.

And they did!

You have to hand it to the guy, he has a fantastic team behind him, and it wasn't exactly a massive surprise was it?

JoeP

03-11-2004, 10:09

Originally posted by poppins
Yes Roy
They do come accross as big headed and pompous too, like a lot, some spoil it for others, i'm english myself, i meet a lot of english people in this part of the states, in 40 years i'v never met an english person here i like, they seem different from at home, they don't seem interested in mingeling with there own country men here, especially me with my yorkshire accent ! i can still sence the snobbishness from them, makes me laugh now thought, but it's always nice to get home and hang around with (real) english people.

I spent a little time in Alaska some years ago and it was superb! I was treated very well by the locals, who were quite surprised to see a lone Brit off the tourist trail and made sure I was well fed and watered wherever I showed up!

Joe

evildrneil

03-11-2004, 10:12

Originally posted by Snook
And they did!

You have to hand it to the guy, he has a fantastic team behind him, and it wasn't exactly a massive surprise was it?

They say you get the government you deserve - the thing that now worries me is what god-awfull things must the Americans have done to deserve that - not for one term but for two!!!!

Snook

03-11-2004, 10:18

Originally posted by evildrneil
They say you get the government you deserve - the thing that now worries me is what god-awfull things must the Americans have done to deserve that - not for one term but for two!!!!

Awww, bless them. I love Americans, but they seem to be a little on the naive side. I'm not sure they really understand democracy by the comments they were making on TV last night. Things along the lines of... 'I think Bush has done a bad job with the economy, but I’m voting for him because there is a war on'... seemed to be the average thinking.

It is a genius system, one used in '1984' if I remember correctly, of telling everyone you are in a state of permanent war, then telling them that only a fool would change leaders in a time of war. Why change horsemen mid apocalypse, eh?

evildrneil

03-11-2004, 10:27

Originally posted by Snook
It is a genius system, one used in '1984' if I remember correctly, of telling everyone you are in a state of permanent war, then telling them that only a fool would change leaders in a time of war. Why change horsemen mid apocalypse, eh?

And the world ends not so much with a bang as a DOH!!!!

chill

03-11-2004, 11:20

I feel genuinly sad for the US this morning. I truly believe they've just done themselves incalculable harm. I don't really mean in terms of terrorism and foreign policy, Bush has dropped the ball on that already, and I think it naive to think Kerry could have begun to repair the damage done by the neo-cons. But if the first term was the time of the neo-cons, I think the second will be the time of the Fundamentalist Right.
Let's make no mistake about this, Bush is a born-again, evangelical Christian. He has <i>faith</i> and he uses that faith to guide him in the decision making process. Actions based on faith rather than logic are bound to fail at some point. And what is particularly disturbing for the deomcrats is that the electoral support for Bush is based on faith too, and faith is something you simply cannot counter with facts and logic.
To see in some way what I mean by this, take this quote from another website I saw this morning...
I dropped by my workplace for a moment on a quick latenight errand. We have a TV. It was tuned to CNN and the bulk of the room was in an understandable funk. Except a custodian, who was pumping her fist in the air celebrating the Bush victory. I was astounded (she's a good person and I had asumed we shared many common values) and asked her why. The first thing out of her mouth was: "Kerry supports gay marriage!" I said: "Um, that's not really true. He's stated flatly that he's against gay marriages. He supports civil unions and considers it more a matter for the state. Pretty much the position Bush took originally." I was informed that I was wrong and when I offered to bring it up in Google, she abandoned that complaint and launched into: "You think Kerry can protect us from terrorists? I don't want them damn Iraqians (*cringe*) knocking down any more towers!" She imagined she dealt me a rhetorical death-blow, since I stared blankly at her for a few seconds too long. "I finally told her that NONE of the hijackers were "Iraqian" -- that they were mostly Saudis, a few from the UAE, one was Lebonese and one was Egyptian." He snorted a few more things and it slowly, chillingly dawned on me: she was not merely blurring the line between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin-Laden -- to her they WERE ONE AND THE SAME.
If I was a US citizen, I would feel nothing but despair right now.

wibbles

03-11-2004, 11:31

Originally posted by poppins
Seems to me that over half the people in the UK hate americans, the rest just pretend to like them, but you do have a choice, you can always go to another counrty to spend your dole money.
I'd say you're underestimating the feelings of contempt towards Americans, not only by Middle Eastern countries but Western European ones too.
As a country America is a laughing stock and personally I'd be embarrased to be abroad as an American. Its hard enough being British abroad and being associated with everything stateside.

How can you be proud to come from a country that basically bullies the world to get its own way with total disregard for the consequences. Rule Brittania !!!

wibbles

03-11-2004, 11:32

Originally posted by max
Can you tell me what this is, please?

Did you read that article by the nobel prize winning economist telling us what a mess Bush has made of the ecoomy (see my previous post)? Any comments?

Ignorance is bliss!!!!!!

noseyrosie

03-11-2004, 13:30

As I see it, the Americans probably don't see Bush as an extreme right winger in the same way that we do (i.e. probably closer to Hitler than to our own govermnent in the scale of things). If both of their parties are right wing (and even the democrats are further right than the Tories), then they are still going to see them as 2 sides of a spectrum, so they won't see the Republicans as all that bad. Like, we say that the Tories are a right wing party, but compared to american parties they are pretty lefty. So maybe they jsut can't see it.

Either way, Bush and Dick are gonna cause some irreperable damage.:heyhey:

Never did I think I'd see the day when the world was run by a fundamentalist religious nut with a mental age of 6, who is practically illiterate and, to top it all, told the public not to vote for Kerry because he was a 'flip-flopper' - not even a god damn word!

100 000 dead in Iraq, 3000 in the world trade centre. Well done America, you'v re-elected an idiot, criminal, murderer, and a war-monger

fyybj

03-11-2004, 13:43

There's a book written by Emmanuel Todd called After the Empire, he went against conventional thinking and in 1975 or thereabouts, predicted the fall of the Soviet Union. After the Empire predicts the fall of the United States due to the problems that presidents are facing and social division within America, the re-election of Bush is only going to speed this up in my opinion, America will no longer be the world's super power if it continues in the direction it's going now. It's only a matter of time.

It's worth noting that during the war in Afghanistan, Bush had nearly 90% popularity, now he's got about 50%. America is becoming more divided.

max

04-11-2004, 12:23

MOD: Poll closed, but thread still open. There's a new poll created after the election here:

Post election poll (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&postid=201396#post201396)

Snook

05-11-2004, 09:49

Maybe this'll cheer some people up?

Dear Friends,
Ok, it sucks. Really sucks. But before you go and cash it all in, let's, in the words of Monty Python, 'always look on the bright side of life!' There IS some good news from Tuesday's election.

Here are 17 reasons not to slit your wrists:

1. It is against the law for George W. Bush to run for president again.
2. Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president sinceWoodrow Wilson in 1916.
3. The only age group in which the majority voted for Kerry was young adults (Kerry: 54%, Bush: 44%), proving once again that your parents are alwayswrong and you should never listen to them.
4. In spite of Bush's win, the majority of Americans still think the
country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn't worth fighting (51%), and don't approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%). (Note to foreigners: Don't try to figure this one out. It's an American thing, like Pop Tarts.)
5. The Republicans will not have a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the Senate. If the Democrats do their job, Bush won't be able to pack the Supreme Court with right-wing ideologues. Did I say "if the Democrats do their job?" Um, maybe better to scratch this one.
6. Michigan voted for Kerry! So did the entire Northeast, the birthplace of our democracy. So did 6 of the 8 Great Lakes States. And the whole West Coast! Plus Hawaii. Ok, that's a start. We've got most of the fresh water, all of Broadway, and Mt. St. Helens. We can dehydrate them or bury them in lava. And no more show tunes!
7. Once again we are reminded that the buckeye is a nut, and not just any old nut -- a poisonous nut. A great nation was felled by a poisonous nut. May Ohio State pay dearly this Saturday when it faces Michigan.
8. 88% of Bush's support came from white voters. In 50 years, America will no longer have a white majority. Hey, 50 years isn't such a long time! If you're ten years old and reading this, your golden years will be truly golden and you will be well cared for in your old age.
9. Gays, thanks to the ballot measures passed on Tuesday, cannot get married in 11 new states. Thank God. Just think of all those wedding gifts we won't have to buy now.
10. Five more African Americans were elected as members of Congress, including the return of Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. It's always good to have more blacks in there fighting for us and doing the job our candidates can't.
11. The CEO of Coors was defeated for Senate in Colorado. Drink up!
12. Admit it: We like the Bush twins and we don't want them to go away.
13. At the state legislative level, Democrats picked up a net of at least 3 chambers in Tuesday's elections. Of the 98 partisan-controlled state legislative chambers (house/assembly and senate), Democrats went into the 2004 elections in control of 44 chambers, Republicans controlled 53 chambers, and 1 chamber was tied. After Tuesday, Democrats now control 47 chambers, Republicans control 49 chambers, 1 chamber is tied and 1 chamber (Montana House) is still undecided.
14. Bush is now a lame duck president. He will have no greater moment than the one he's having this week. It's all downhill for him from here on out -- and, more significantly, he's just not going to want to do all the hard work that will be expected of him. It'll be like everyone's last month in 12th grade -- you've already made it, so it's party time! Perhaps he'll treat the next four years like a permanent Friday, spending even more time at the ranch or in Kennebunkport. And why shouldn't he? He's already proved his point, avenged his father and kicked our ass.
15. Should Bush decide to show up to work and take this country down a very dark road, it is also just as likely that either of the following two scenarios will happen: a) Now that he doesn't ever need to pander to the Christian conservatives again to get elected, someone may whisper in his ear that he should spend these last four years building "a legacy" so that history will render a kinder verdict on him and thus he will not push for
too aggressive a right-wing agenda; or b) He will become so cocky and arrogant -- and thus, reckless -- that he will commit a blunder of such major proportions that even his own party will have to remove him from office.
16. There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting age. We only lost by three and a half million! That's not a landslide -- it means we're almost there. Imagine losing by 20 million. If you had 58 yards to go before you reached the goal line and then you barreled down 55 of those yards, would you stop on the three yard line, pick up the ball and go home crying -- especially when you get to start the next down on the three
yard line? Of course not! Buck up! Have hope! More sports analogies are coming!!!
17. Finally and most importantly, over 55 million Americans voted for the candidate dubbed "The #1 Liberal in the Senate." That's more than the total number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore.Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal. The country has always been filled with evangelicals -- that is not news. What IS news is that so many people have shifted toward a Massachusetts liberal. In fact, that's BIG news. Which means, don't expect the mainstream media, the ones who brought you the Iraq War, to ever report the real truth about November 2, 2004. In fact, it's better that they don't. We'll need the element ofsurprise in 2008.

(from an email from Michael Moore)