U.S. Politics

Page 190 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
irongrl said:
That is a very good description of American politics at work. Listen to both sides and you will find the truth somewhere in the middle. "Real" America is probably a little more fiscally conservative and socially liberal than the extremists of either group would have you believe.
There's no such thing as "real America", never has been and never will be. To the right, "real America" is people who see the world and think like we do, to the left, "real America" is people who see the world and think like we do, to the so-called centrists, "real America" is people who see the world and think like we do. It's identity politics at its worst.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
auscyclefan94 said:
I think one think everyone in America can agree on, that it is great the campaigning is over!
In just about every other democratic country, an election is called every 4-5 years, the candidates campaign, voters vote, and the whole thing is over with in a matter of months and they get on with the job of running the country. Here, we'll take a bit of a breather and then do it all over again in 2 years for the next series of Congressional elections and then a year after that the 2016 primaries begin. It's virtually never-ending campaign season, and it's nuts.
 
aphronesis said:
They’re not [tied in a dead heat]. According to the state polls, when taken together, the race has been fairly stable for weeks, and Obama has remained well ahead and, going into Election Day, is a strong favorite. “The best information comes from combining all the polls together,” says Linzer, who projects that Obama will get 326 electoral votes, well over the 270 required to win. “I want to give readers the right information, even if it’s more boring.”

In the 2008 presidential election, Silver correctly predicted 49 of 50 states. Wang was off by only one electoral vote.

http://chronicle.com/blogs/percolator/the-rise-of-the-poll-quants-or-the-demise-of-the-tv-pundits/31636
everyone with an internet connection has heard "silver got 49 out of 50 right" talking point a million times now and it greatly oversells his achievement as 47 states and dc were quite clearly going 1 way or the other. Unless we are to give him some medal for guessing that north dakota would go mccain and Conneticut would go obama then saying he got 1 out of 3 is a more reasonable way to look at it as Indiana Missouri and North Carolina were the 3 uncertainties going in and he got, as i recall, NC and MO right and Indiana wrong.

As for Wang its the same principle only that he must have gotten 2 wrong. If he was 1 electoral college vote off then it would probably have been that he got both Indiana and Missouri wrong and they cancelled eachother out.


Anyway, the reason greater turnout is big news for Obama is because no matter what the polls sa, they are only estimating the voter makeup. Some will estimate too high some to low, but what is clear is that Republicans are these days on the whole more likely to vote - see congressional elections, so if turnout is high it suggests that a lot of those on the shelf dems are coming out and ticking "obama", whereas the Republicans would have done so anyway.
 
Aug 9, 2012
1,719
0
0
aphronesis said:
After a certain point in his second term, it's less of a cost. And depending on how reality management goes he could finally have some leverage to work with. But then it's been seen how that has stalled out for past administrations. Israel is not as toxic as it was for the US govt before the Arab Spring--not at least in regard to short term appearances.
If you mean toxic as in not mentioned much in the media, you are right. But this is mostly due to the PLO putting it's diplomatic efforts on hold until after the election. The PLO is sitting on a powder keg, so they might not be able to wait for when it suits Obamas agenda.

Israel is toxic. See Egypt. It's evolving into a democracy, right now people are focused on their government and economy. This could quickly change, and now there is no dictatorship to keep the peoples will under control.

One complicating factor is how much the Syrian civil war effects the PLOs sceduling.

The vote for a Palestinian state is on the UN books. I think it will go to the security council again first. Then the question is if the PLO will call for a general assembly vote, or if they are going to wait like last year. I don't think they will wait one more year. And when the the vote goes to the general assembly things are out of the US presidents hands.
 
The Hitch said:
everyone with an internet connection has heard "silver got 49 right" talking point a million times now and it greatly oversells him as 47 states and dc were quite clearly going 1 way or the other. Unless we are to give him some medal for guessing that north dakota would go mccain and Conneticut would go obama then saying he got 1 out of 3 is a more reasonable way to look at it as Indiana Missouri and North Carolina were the 3 uncertainties going in and he got, as i recall, NC and MO right and Indiana wrong.

As for Wang its the same principle only that he must have gotten 2 wrong. If it was 1 vote then it would probably have been that he got both Indiana and Missouri wrong.


Anyway, the reason greater turnout is big news for Obama is because no matter what the polls sa, they are only estimating the voter makeup. Some will estimate too high some to low, but what is clear is that Republicans are these days on the whole more likely to vote - see congressional elections, so if turnout is high it suggests that a lot of those on the shelf dems are coming out and ticking "obama".
I'm not contesting your basic point. I posted the article for the simple reason that it goes against the running media bias (from either side) of getting a particular slant and story and running with it.

Similarly, despite the fact that many have been dismayed with the job Obama has done (relative to what he said he would do), I have yet to hear anything, read, or see linked anything that would convince me that a greater percentage of Democrats would not come out and vote than was the case, say, in 2000 or 2004
 
ToreBear said:
I'm a stingy ******.:D

I don't read hitch that way. I think he is talking in more general terms.

The problem for Romney is that reality has been contained by Obama the last year. It will explode shortly, the question is how it will be managed. A sensible approach in my view is forcing Israel to accept that it will have to change.

This is career suicide for a president, and Romney would do all he can to avoid having to make such a choise. But by avoiding the choise he is making a choise.

To make a long argument short. With Romney as president Israel faces Facism and isolation from Europe. It's officials will not be able to set their feet in countries that are members of the ICC.

Obama will have oppurtunities to influence the process, to avoid Israel decending that far. But, that is if he is willing to pay the cost it is to oppose the Israeli right wings reach into congress.
Your inquiry about "forcing Israel to change, " in theory the democrats (though this is hardly possible), and dealing with Israel as a "fascist state," as a result of republican goading (this, yes, is possible); has something to do with the great struggle of our age: namely, to reconcile civil principles with the prepotency of hegemony. This applies to the entire planet.
 
ToreBear said:
If you mean toxic as in not mentioned much in the media, you are right. But this is mostly due to the PLO putting it's diplomatic efforts on hold until after the election. The PLO is sitting on a powder keg, so they might not be able to wait for when it suits Obamas agenda.

Israel is toxic. See Egypt. It's evolving into a democracy, right now people are focused on their government and economy. This could quickly change, and now there is no dictatorship to keep the peoples will under control.

One complicating factor is how much the Syrian civil war effects the PLOs sceduling.

The vote for a Palestinian state is on the UN books. I think it will go to the security council again first. Then the question is if the PLO will call for a general assembly vote, or if they are going to wait like last year. I don't think they will wait one more year. And when the the vote goes to the general assembly things are out of the US presidents hands.
By toxic, I mean many things. As per your complicating example of Syria. No, I don't simply mean in terms of coverage.
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,119
0
0
auscyclefan94 said:
I think one think everyone in America can agree on, that it is great the campaigning is over!
Check back in on November 7th. We'll be back on. There are midterms to win. On November 7th positions will be taken and decisions will be made to get the edge 2 years from now.
 
Aug 9, 2010
5,284
0
0
thirteen said:
how were the lines in your neck of the woods?
I went for a ride this morning so ended up walking in at lunchtime-ish..., expecting a long wait. I even brought food with me :-D
Three People! No line!

I think everyone voted early....:confused: :eek:
may be crowded after work.....don't know...
 
etymology said:
the blitheringly bellicose rhetoric endlessly emanating from the retrogressive, bigoted, racist, unfettered free maket economy 1 percenters of the far right neo-con wing of the republican party - in concert with the ivy league educated, intellectual, open minded, tax the rich, we know what's best for you, you just don't get it progressive wing of the democrat party have succeeded in drowning the voice of the "real" america.

the "real" america lies somewhere in the middle of the two. neither the far right nor the far left is bereft of what i believe to be a few good ideas. unfortunately, it seems to me that these ideas cannot or will not be separated from their respective ideologies.

aided and abetted by both the democrat and republican parties primarily invested in preserving the two party system regardless of what either needs to do to preserve the ongoing sham that has lead to the sorry state of u.s. politics today, the "real america" is screwed for the forseeable future regardess of the preson elected or the party to which the elected belong.

following are the primary tennets - in order -of how the two party system has operated for some time and how it operaties today in the u.s. of a:

1. make "them" look bad.
2. make "us" look good.
and...as THE absolute last resort....
3. compromise


::: sigh :::

for now - my camera gear is packed and ready to go. first order of business is to amble the half mile or so to the place where i will vote. much as i want to write in pat paulson for president, i will not waste my vote on him as a write in because while it is entirely possible for the dead to vote, a now dead citizen of the united states cannot *actually* assume any elected office.

yet. ;)

after i cast my votes for president and other to-be-electeds, the plan is to wander around the city in which i live to shoot pictures of whatever may capture what strikes the fancy in my mind's eye. the wandering may or may not include a stop in my local bike shop because (a) the aroma of small, local bike shops is intoxicating, (b) there is a blowout sale on last year's stock of plain black, pleated knee wiinter cycliing tights i will wear while skating on the entirely open outdoor rink i use most every day from its opening in the first week of december until it closes in early march, and (c) drool over the bike i will be ordering sometime in early february.

when i return, i'll get things ready for the evening's festivities: conversation, tunes on my most awesome music system, and following election results with friends of varying political stripes.

and if by friday no one has opened the "us election 2016 (ONLY)" thread...i just don't know what i will do. :D
I enjoyed your intelligent and ironic post.

Something to consider though: I was talking about a perspective that sees "the middle of the two" (in your case a reassuring 'happy end') as constituting marginal differences that don't really pan out in the end, at least not from my perspective. This because I don't think that there is a problem with a "radical left" in America.

Obama, in other words, is not a radical. If anything, he is a foregone disappointment.
 
Aug 9, 2012
1,719
0
0
rhubroma said:
Your inquiry about "forcing Israel to change, " in theory the democrats (though this is hardly possible), and dealing with Israel as a "fascist state," as a result of republican goading (this, yes, is possible); has something to do with the great struggle of our age: namely, to reconcile civil principles with the prepotency of hegemony. This applies to the entire planet.
I'm more focusing on the situation Israel is in right now and where it is going. But this should perhaps be discussed after the election.:)

aphronesis said:
By toxic, I mean many things. As per your complicating example of Syria. No, I don't simply mean in terms of coverage.
Ok, thanks for the clarification.:)
 
Bala Verde said:
Check back in on November 7th. We'll be back on. There are midterms to win. On November 7th positions will be taken and decisions will be made to get the edge 2 years from now.
A year from yesterday, Christie will be up for reelection (which he may have secured by hugging the president) and there will be a big Virginia election too.

Since obama wins today, i expect GOP to take both those and claim momentum going into 2014 midterms including "take back the senate".
 
Feb 25, 2011
2,403
0
0
mewmewmew13 said:
I went for a ride this morning so ended up walking in at lunchtime-ish..., expecting a long wait. I even brought food with me :-D
Three People! No line!

I think everyone voted early....:confused: :eek:
may be crowded after work.....don't know...
good to know! i've just cringed seeing lines from FL on the telly, so was curious.

btw, i hope your guy wins as well! my cousin and her husband will be at the event tonight, and i feel partially responsible because i convinced them to tell their daughter to stay on the campaign until the end after her summer internship was up. very proud that she did!
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
mewmewmew13 said:
Just voted a while ago.
Fgs I am going to be glad when this is done!

(just hope my candidate wins) :p
I just got done with not voting today. Feels good not to be part of a fundamentally broken system.

I hope my candidate wins but if he doesn't then it won't really make a difference anyway.
 
BroDeal said:
I just got done with not voting today. Feels good not to be part of a fundamentally broken system.

I hope my candidate wins but if he doesn't then it won't really make a difference anyway.
You could write in "Travis Tygart". Afterall didnt all the Lance hacks moan that he was just after a political career.
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,119
0
0
The Hitch said:
A year from yesterday, Christie will be up for reelection (which he may have secured by hugging the president) and there will be a big Virginia election too.

Since obama wins today, i expect GOP to take both those and claim momentum going into 2014 midterms including "take back the senate".
Yup. Senate legislation, assuming D retain the majority in the Senate, will start focusing on vulnerable senators. D have 20 to defend and R 13, some of which they gained in the 2008 Obama waive election.

Hence, some interesting (vulnerable) states:

AK (1 term D); VA (1 term - D); NC (1 term D); WV (coal country - D); CO (1 - D); MT (D); SD (D); MN (1 term D); LA (D)

ME (R); NH (1 term - R)
 
Bala Verde said:
Yup. Senate legislation, assuming D retain the majority in the Senate, will start focusing on vulnerable senators. D have 20 to defend and R 13, some of which they gained in the 2008 Obama waive election.

Hence, some interesting (vulnerable) states:

AK (1 term D); VA (1 term - D); NC (1 term D); WV (coal country - D); CO (1 - D); MT (D); SD (D); MN (1 term D); LA (D)

ME (R); NH (1 term - R)
Presumably MN is the seat Al Franken won after 10 recounts against Coleman. Considering how close that was in the big Democrat election of 2008, gop will probably be feeling good about that 1.
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,119
0
0
The Hitch said:
Presumably MN is the seat Al Franken won after 10 recounts against Coleman. Considering how close that was in the big Democrat election of 2008, gop will probably be feeling good about that 1.
Correct. Franken. But then again, it's difficult the first time. Second time you have an organization that works for you and you've had 6 years to build relations with constituents. His committee assignments are not something that would help him though, and I think Rs really dislike him. So you are right that it could be high on the list, but who will the run. T-Paw, Michele Bacherach, Coleman again... they also need an appealing candidate.

Good times; election 2014, haha.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY