1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. We've had very few donations over the year. I'm going to be short soon as some personal things are keeping me from putting up the money. If you have something small to contribute it's greatly appreciated. Please put your screen name as well so that I can give you credit. Click here: Donations
    Dismiss Notice

Politics Romney - Is he ready?

Discussion in 'Tilted Philosophy, Politics, and Economics' started by rogue49, May 15, 2012.

  1. rogue49

    rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

    Location:
    Baltimore/DC
    Baraka_Guru, I respectfully disagree.
    Sooner or later...people are going to figure out...it's not what you are...it's what you DO.

    And both Dems, The Media & GOP will be scritch-ing their heads until they get that through their heads.
    As "why" someone went this way or that...for the most part, it's about who you believe in overall.

    I think Obama did...he embraced whomever he could...looking for those who shared his efforts more. You could see it in his tone.
    Even to this day, he doesn't emphasize his race/color in his communications...amongst other things.
    At least he does this...I don't know about his campaign advisors though
     
  2. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    Is that so? I won't hold my breath. I don't recommend you do it either.

    We categorize things. It's what we do. That's not to say everything and everyone is categorized and that it's all kept neat and tidy and that's all there is, but I doubt you'll ever see categorization go away. It's inevitable, especially among Americans, who tend to think in black and white terms—so much binary thinking.

    We are what we are; we do what we do.

    It is what it is. (j/k :D)

    Maybe Obama only comes down to single issues when he's pressed. I never viewed him as anything but comprehensive in his approach.
     
  3. Tully Mars

    Tully Mars Very Tilted

    Location:
    Yucatan, Mexico
  4. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
  5. Tully Mars

    Tully Mars Very Tilted

    Location:
    Yucatan, Mexico
    S
    So you're saying Canada has had a female president?
     
  6. Joniemack

    Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

    Location:
    Reading, UK
    I do wonder how many white, Southern, conservative men actually may have ended up voting for Obama in the privacy of the voting booth. I agree that we are too quick to label people. Most of us are far more nuanced than we're given credit for. Having said that, the fact that you are Jewish and grew up in the NE does say a bit about you. Much in the same way as my growing up Catholic in the NE is a fairly good indicator of what my political leanings might be. But most pollsters would have a difficult time believing that I voted for Ross Perot and Gerald Ford.
     
  7. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012
  8. Tully Mars

    Tully Mars Very Tilted

    Location:
    Yucatan, Mexico
  9. rogue49

    rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

    Location:
    Baltimore/DC
    Well, actually...I really didn't grow up with any formal religion...and only really started getting into it when I married my wife.
    My wife is "militant" Jewish, meaning Reform with an "attitude"...and she's politically ultra conservative...but by action, fairly liberal.

    And growing up in the Northeast was fairly irrelvant, the small town I was in was conservative,
    so if I learned any "liberal" values...it was from my Mother, who's a bleeding-heart liberal.
    But I think for the most part, she just showed me integrity and to consider all sides. I don't favor her viewpoints always.

    I think it depends on the person...some do exactly as they've been told by repetition over time, whether they know it or not. (ex. My wife)
    Some decide by experience and watching all the angles...gaining their own preferences. (ex. myself)

    Those who do as they are told, Dem or GOP, think they are deciding for themselves...but if you watch them, they do as others do.
    Those who decide by exposure...well you can't normally categorize them, because they think for themselves...and are willing to change.

    That's why the powers that be are getting more confused. The old cliches and definitions don't pan out anymore.
    People are starting to live how they want to live...not as others tell them.
    They are constantly absorbing more info on the new media...sooner or later, more & more will figure out what THEY want or like.

    I guarantee you...the pundits and political advisors will keep getting more off base.
    Unless they are ones truly keeping an open mind about people.
    It's less about the image, more about the idea.

    And if anything, this election proved it more...the ones where most come out, for the Prez cycle, not mid-cycle.
    If the GOP doesn't start give plans...giving details...thinking about the crowd...then they are going to lose more and more.
    Because people aren't the suckers they use to be.
    There's too much info to compare...and they're thinking for themselves more.

    Same with the Dems...they can't absolutely depend on the Unions, etc...

    It's about getting the good candidates...having the open ground game...having the info...giving them something to vote FOR.
    It may not be absolute now...but it's certainly trending that way.
    And the powers that be are actually going to have to come up with something than just a catch-phrase...and you can't pigeon-hole anymore.

    They're going to have to fix the primary system...that's an extreme base, because the average joe could give a shit about it,
    most only wait until the election...and that breadth of populus doesn't fit the molds anymore.

    OMG! They're actually going have to think & work, instead of hustle.
    No more judging by covers. But that's SO hard. :rolleyes:
     
  10. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    I know, right?

    But if you want something more relevant, in our federal election last year, we elected a record number of women to parliament: 76 our of 308 seats were filled by women (or 25%). That was up from 69 seats in the 2008 election.

    I just realized that the U.S. has just elected a record number of women to Congress this time around: 20 out of 100 in the Senate will be women, and at least 81 of the 435 members of the House of Representatives will be women. That puts the ratio at 19%. Not bad, but the U.S. still lags Canada in that department. I'll admit that both could still use improvement.

    Both Canada and the U.S. have histories of women in top-level government jobs, if not the top job itself, which is good. My overall point is that it's one step in the right direction to prove that positions of power in a nation don't belong to the old boys' club.

    That's one step. I see, too, that a lesbian was elected to office this time. That's another good step.

    The fact remains, though, that the U.S. is a bit behind when it comes to gay rights when compared to other developed nations.

    Bottom line: Traditionally minded American conservatives would have a bit of a culture shock coming to places like Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal, just as I would have a culture shock going to some small town in the Bible Belt.

    Jesus, could you imagine? We could to a reality show on that. I could go live with Lordeden and CinnamonGirl for a while or something.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012
  11. Tully Mars

    Tully Mars Very Tilted

    Location:
    Yucatan, Mexico
    Well BG I tell you what I think. I could care less if we're electing green or purple people and who they sleep with, doesn't effect me at all. So I'm not sure I'd measure progress on the number of female or homosexuals being elected. Don't get me wrong I think it's great the process has opened up as a viable option for more individuals and I thinks there's a good chance they'll make better decisions or at least consider the effects legislation has on minorities within our populace. But bottom line I'll vote for a middle aged or even older white male over a younger black lesbian if I think the lesbian has horrible ideas.

    I worked in a male dominated field all my adult life. When I first stared the only woman in the office answered the phones. After a couple years the pressure to hire a female officer became "hire a woman this time." So after looking over and over a huge number of resumes they decided on a lady who had a lot of education and years of experience in larger cities. After a month or two it was obvious she sucked. To this day she was the worst officer I ever worked with. She was a "bull in the the china shop" where ever she went. Her response to any problem was to get in someone face and yell. We started calling her 'bullet catcher' because we figured it was just a matter of time before someone shot her. After a while we started taken bets on who would shoot her- a parolee, one of us or the waitress at the cafe we regularly ate.
     
  12. rogue49

    rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

    Location:
    Baltimore/DC
    a goal...a pure meritocracy...

    but not one by paperwork...that's often as irrelevant.
    but judging by your background, skill, talent, ideas all within the context of the situation.

    unfortunately, this takes energy, thought and time...much of which people aren't willing to give...
    much less, often even be aware of.

    but we're getting there...bit by bit.
     
  13. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    Tully, don't get me wrong. It's not that people should get the job because they're women or gay or black or brown or Muslim or atheist. It's that they shouldn't be impeded or overlooked or denied positions because they are any of those things.

    Women make up more than half the population, and there is nothing about their sex that suggests they aren't suitable for politics. Just as I'm sure there are closeted gays in the political system for obvious reasons. There may even be closeted atheists too.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
  14. Tully Mars

    Tully Mars Very Tilted

    Location:
    Yucatan, Mexico
    BG, and I'm not disagreeing with that. Just saying voting for color, gender or sexual orientation alone is a bad idea.

    If Romeny and Obama's race and age were reversed I'd have voted have voted for the 62 yr old white dude.
     
  15. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    Yes, and voting against those things is another thing.

    We can't expect all Americans to be like you where they vote as it makes sense.

    Though it would be nice if we could.
     
  16. Tully Mars

    Tully Mars Very Tilted

    Location:
    Yucatan, Mexico
    I think the problem is 'what makes sense' to many. My personal opinion is people live in a bubble (or bubbles) in the US. I belong to several on-line forums. A diving based forum, a pilot forum and a gambling forum. All have a political sub-forum. The number of posters who thought Romney was an absolute lock to win the election was a little shocking. All the polls were leaning, some pretty heavy, to Obama. Every break down of the path to 270 had Romney at best a narrow pathway while Obama had many paths. Obama could have lost both Ohio and Florida and still maintained a better then 50-50 shot. Romney needed to nearly sweep all the battle ground states, he ended up winning one of nine. Yet many posters on many sites were claiming 'Obama is toast! You liberals are going to be crying so hard Weds. morning...' On and on post after post. Almost always if you knew or asked where these posters lived it was in states like Texas or Arizona. If everyone you talk to says they hate Obama, if every yard sign you see is for Romney then you have to start thinking 'how could Romney lose this thing?' If you watched Fox News and spent time on redstate.com you had to be certain of a Romeny win. And not just because all you're seeing, hearing and reading says Romney is ahead but because he made the most 'sense.' It only makes sense that no one would vote for Obama because he's not good for the country, everyone knows he makes no sense. Somehow those bubbles need to be shot full of holes or we'll continue to have popular votes of near 50-50%.

    For the record- gamblers hate Obama, pilots absolutely not fans, divers tend to lean Obama. Even divers living in the red states liked Obama.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
  17. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    That's interesting, Tully. I was a bit surprised to see the reaction on the right to the Republicans' "shellacking" (as Rachel Maddow put it). They had a lot riding on Romney, and that Obama was simply someone who "must go." I'm not sure if they saw Romney as a sure thing, but they seemed to have placed very high hopes and expectations on his winning.

    As has been mentioned countless times now, it appears that this occasion marks a very serious crossroads for Republicans and the right. The game as they're playing it isn't a winning strategy, and in some cases it does far more harm than any prospect of good. The country is slowly changing one way, and they've been heading in the opposite direction far too quickly.

    And the damn assumptions they are making already! So many on the right are blaming half the country who voted for Obama because they "want stuff." (The leeches are taking everything and producing nothing in return!) It's like they're caught in some allegorical alternate reality patched together from too many readings of Atlas Shrugged and Free to Choose.
     
  18. Tully Mars

    Tully Mars Very Tilted

    Location:
    Yucatan, Mexico
    Well living in my bubble I see a right that isn't fond of facts. They don't buy global climate change and other pretty basic science. They go with their gut over poll numbers. They are blind to facts that don't match their desires. I see some on the left with those traits but by far it's a main issue with the right. I don't see things changing until the majority of the right starts seeing life from a more reality based point of view.
     
  19. ring

    ring

    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 16, 2012
  20. rogue49

    rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

    Location:
    Baltimore/DC
    I look at it as an "Us vs. Them" mentality.
    As if they are rooting for a sports team...with all the related hype and colors that go along with it.
    Their brand, their team...you've got to root for that "team" no matter what the score is...do or die...win, win, win.

    Except that in ideal form...it shouldn't be in that mind-frame.
    You should be looking at the policy, the person, the background...and each can be different...and should be evaluated EACH time.

    My wife takes the "team" view...like she does for the Yankees.
    Or my father does it according to the "echo-chamber" from his friends and associates.

    Yes, it takes time to review each...every time.
    Yes, it takes energy to think about the person and situation...especially over time and watching the trends.
    Yes, it's easier to do what your friends think.

    But until most everyone starts put the effort into it...and gets into the habit of looking at all the angles,
    then the politicians are going to keep putting the easy bullshit out there.
    And you're going to get the same quality too.

    If you don't like your politicians and government...then people need to start looking at themselves,
    we vote them in.