US Presidental Elections 2008

[Avatar]

So, the big elections are coming up, and I guess we're going to need a thread for them. Once they're over, or sooner, we can merge all the threads into this one maybe.

But I'm starting this because, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I'm woefully uninformed at the moment. What's happening? Have the final Candidates been picked yet? Looked pretty much like McCain and Obama last I heard. Is it official yet?

(When it is, I think I'll make this into a poll.)

So? Is America going to get a black president in the backlash to two republican terms? Or is the republican party going to default a win because America isn't ready to vote a black man into office?

The only way this could have been better would have been a black republican candidate against Hilary. Or a woman republican against Obama I guess.

What's gonna happen?

--A

[dlbpharmd]

Av, McCain has the 'Pub nomination locked, but the Dems haven't decided between Obama and Hillary yet.

[Avatar]

Ah, thanks Dlb. Either would be good really, (from my point of view, which is to see what happens. McCain would be more of the same I suspect), but I'm curious as to which gets in.

My big question of course is could either of them win?

--A

[The Dreaming]

Ah, thanks Dlb. Either would be good really, (from my point of view, which is to see what happens. McCain would be more of the same I suspect), but I'm curious as to which gets in.

My big question of course is could either of them win?

--A

McCain has seemed a little sycophantic recently, but he has always stood out as among the best men the Republican party has had to offer, while Bush has just inexplicably stood.

[Avatar]

But would there be a substantial change of policy if he got in? Hell, for that matter, I wonder if there'd be a substantial change if a dem got in? There doesn't tend to be that much difference between your politicians I think.

--A

[sgt.null]

the conservatives really don't McCain. but Hilary or Obama should get many people out to vote for him. but damn is he uninspiring.

[The Dreaming]

the conservatives really don't McCain. but Hilary or Obama should get many people out to vote for him. but damn is he uninspiring.

As a somewhat of a cons, I entirely disagree. He isn't as good looking as Obama, but he has always stood out as a maverick in the Senate, and there was a time fairly recently when he wasn't afraid to speak up against his own party. (And the Evangelical Right) For some reason, there is an inexplicable mistrust of him by a lot of conservatives, which I frankly don't understand. To me he was the standout candidate in 2000, and remains so. I also don't see anything uninspiring about his military service.

As far as policy goes... well we can't really know how much will change. The Current administration has a pretty wide gap between "Policy" and "Reality". McCain was a proponent of the war, but repeatedly stressed that it was being fought incorrectly. Our current and successful change in strategy vindicates him I think. His frank support of the war has earned him some enmity, but for god's sake did everyone forget that it might be a good thing to forge a stable and friendly government in Iraq? Now that victory seems so much more possible, how can anyone honestly seek it's immediate end?

Anyway, I doubt we will see much change in policy. What I expect to see is a change in integrity, transparency, and effectually with a McCain administration, which is where most of my criticism of the current one lies.

[High Lord Tolkien]

I also don't see anything uninspiring about his military service.

Sarge wasn't mentioning his military service but his ability to make me (and a lot of other people) change the channel whenever I hear McCain talking.
I'm voting for the guy but damn-it he puts me to sleep and I wish I had another choice.

[wayfriend]

I think it's fairly obvious that GWB was not the mastermind of everything we love about his administration. If you agree, then you understand why I don't think it really matters whether it's McCain or Romney or Huckabee or Paul becomes president. Between them, I would choose the way HLT chooses, and prefer the one that you can watch on TV, as there's not much else to consider.

[Avatar]

Anyway, I doubt we will see much change in policy. What I expect to see is a change in integrity, transparency, and effectually with a McCain administration, which is where most of my criticism of the current one lies.

Haha, if he could make those changes, I might vote for him. And anybody who speaks against the evangelical right can't be all bad.

But WayFriend, do you think a democrat president would make those changes? Or would they simply take advantage of any increases in power / whatever that the current one leaves in place? Afterall, that's my big thing with American politics...nobody wants to change the system cause they know they get turns using it...

--A

[wayfriend]

But WayFriend, do you think a democrat president would make those changes?

I think a Democratic president would be run by a Democratic machine, as a Republican one is run by a Republican machine. In the end, I vote for the machine behind the man, and not the man. Or woman. (I could also say that I think the Democratic machine isn't quite the single, tight, bulldozer machine that the Republican one is, which is good and bad, good in that a leader of vision can direct it, bad in that it is often fractured and working at cross purposes - but that comment would only be met by derision.)

All other things aside, I see the Democratic machine of '08 doing more for the working class america than the Republican machine, which means that they'll do more for the economy. I don't think the Democrats are likely to make reforms, but I see a greater chance of reform, and a far less chance of "reforms" that lead only to an oligarchy.

[sgt.null]

I also don't see anything uninspiring about his military service.

Sarge wasn't mentioning his military service but his ability to make me (and a lot of other people) change the channel whenever I hear McCain talking.
I'm voting for the guy but damn-it he puts me to sleep and I wish I had another choice.

exactly. the guy just doesn't seem like a president. next to Obama he is ambien. and that could hurt in the general election. why can't we have a firebrand conservative?

[Avatar]

I don't think the Democrats are likely to make reforms, but I see a greater chance of reform, and a far less chance of "reforms" that lead only to an oligarchy.

Gotcha. And personally, I'd love to see another democrat president. Maybe your liberals are pretty conservative, but I still prefer them to your conservatives.

Still, the real reason is that I think American politics needs a shake-up, and I guess a black or female president is in a good position to do it.

--A

[wayfriend]

Still, the real reason is that I think American politics needs a shake-up, and I guess a black or female president is in a good position to do it.

If the jackals don't effectively render them impotent. Recent events with Obama show that it's pretty easy to scare people about blackness, or womanness, despite being 'ready' for a non-white or non-male president.

[Kil Tyme]

Love the recent lies Hil and BO got caught with by the media. Vote Dem and get the same BS politics we always get. Vote Pub and get an unstable angry old fart in the WH. Policies won't change much, but taxes will go up with Dems. Oil price, Housing, education, blah blah blah will witness no change. It's the congress that makes changes and each side hates eachother so much and are willing to risk the blood of americans just to make political points that hardly anything will get done to the satisfication of americans no matter who wins the WH this time. It might be 2012 or 2016 before a pres can make a change in the country and have a willling congress play along.

And AV, America "is ready" to elect a non-white or women to high office of the presidency; can your country say the same? Can any of the anglo countries say the same beside the UK with Thatcher? I really chuckle when I hear that question posed "is america ready" when all the other countries asking that should ask that of themselves, frankly. Yes, America is ready for a black or a women for crying out loud; we're just not ready...hell...the world is not ready...for these two particular bleeping lieing loosers.

[finn]

I think the "machine" point is spot on Wayfriend, and the credibility of the individual is in how much he/she can influence the workings of that machine, which doesn't really answer to anyone and which is impervious to sugestions of threat or reward. Someone once spoke of of English government as elected members doing everything the civil service allowed them to do. I know you were referring to the party machine but I think its a larger problem.

As such the big issues are left unresolved as Av says, "everyone wants their turn". But now is the time people start saying "what if" and now is also the time when its easier to leverage promises for votes than at any other time.

So what's on the wish list, what do people want from their government?

For me as an outsider, (and let me explain that as the chief exporter of democracy, the recipe for democracy which is applied as a standard, does effect us non-yanks), the key reform in the US would be a complete review of the lobby system. For a government to have real credibility it must be working for its people, not well endowed special interest groups of poitical or commercial origin. Frankly, 'buying' government is a third world status criteria and I am amazed that the American people are prepared to allow their elected representatives to behave like tin-pot Banana Republic officials.

But I guess there's little chance of that one getting by when there's so much money on the table.......

[sgt.null]

congress will never willingly kill lobbying. as Finn says too much money.

we need more parties! the dems seem intent on destroying themselves.

[The Dreaming]

congress will never willingly kill lobbying. as Finn says too much money.

we need more parties! the dems seem intent on destroying themselves.

Systems which rely on more than two parties tend to fail dramatically. What happens is polarization without a majority endorsing either side. Three or Four party democracies have frequently collapsed, while 2 party democracies remain fairly stable.

Trust me, having more than two parties wouldn't fix anything, it would just create an even more turbulent and chaotic political environment.

[Avatar]

And AV, America "is ready" to elect a non-white or women to high office of the presidency; can your country say the same?

Haha, you do know our president is black right? And our vice-president is a black woman. (Doesn't matter anyway actually...people vote parties, not candiates here.)

Anyway, I dunno if it is ready...and we might never know. If the Republicans win the election, will it be because the country wasn't ready? Or because it was ready but they were the wrong candidates? Either way, it'll be interesting.

--A

[Cail]

None of the three potential POTUSs (POTI?) are worth a damn. Of the three, I think Hil would probably do the least damage, but that's nothing more than a semi-educated guess/gut feeling.

None of them are getting my vote. I am thoroughly disgusted with American politics at the moment. Partisanship is wrecking the country, and this election cycle has really highlighted that for me.