To you Americans, your view on politics.

[Krazyskooter]

I just got a post on my FB wall saying someone who voted tuesday wrote my name in for judge. I may have a future in politics. lol

 

[televator]

Here's how it seems to work right now: confuse, scare, and lie to the public. Once you've perversely changed enough people's outlook between right and wrong, give a crap load of tax money and tax incentives to the wealthy, the multinational corporations, and banks. Privatize the gain of wealth and socialize the loses. What this leads to is an unbelievably unstable society... What you "outsiders" are seeing is the US being eaten alive by vultures. From my point of view, this Empire is in its death throws and you are in for one hell of a show. A modern day observation of the decline of a global empire.

edited for grammar

 

[DeistPaladin]

Here's how it seems to work right now: confuse, scare, and lie to the public. Once you've perversely changed enough people's outlook between right and wrong, give a crap load of tax money and tax incentives to the wealthy, the multinational corporations, and banks. Privatize the gain of wealth and socialize the loses. What this leads too is an believably unstable society... What you "outsiders" are seeing is the US being eaten alive by vultures. From my point of view, this Empire is in its death throws are you are in for one hell of a show. A modern day observation of the decline of a global empire.

I think Bush was our Constantine.

 

[Finger]

Even though the Republicans are claiming the last election as a victory, they are now engaged in a battle with themselves. There's pretty much a civil war going on in the Republican Party between the more moderate republicans and the Tea Party. It all has a kind of poetry to it and I am compelled to illustrate it by paraphrasing a scene from Dark Knight.

OBAMA
I knew the GOP wouldn't go down without a fight, but this is different. They crossed a line.

BIDEN
You crossed the line first, sir, when you showed them the power of grass-roots politics. You squeezed them and hammered them to the point of desperation. And in their desperation they turned to a voting block they didn't fully understand.

OBAMA
Voters aren't complicated, Joe. I just need to figure out what they want.

BIDEN
With respect Mr. President. Perhaps this is a voting block you don't fully understand either. Some people aren't looking for anything logical. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some voters just want to watch the world burn.


Anyway, to answer your questions..

Is Obama really in as much trouble as it seems? Why is that?

The last poll I saw showed that his approval rating is 45%, but that doesn't necessarily reflect how voters would react to him in an election. Even if some Democrats are angry that Obama didn't overhaul healthcare the way they wanted, they're still more likely to vote for him than a Republican (especially with the current state of the Republican party.)

Do most Americans now blame him for an enormous debt (which I think is traced back to Bush... ) thereby somehow winning voters to the right 'conservative' fiscal management?

Not really... Yeah, some people think the situation was made worse by him (the average tea-bagger thinks Obama was responsible for the bank bailout, when that was passed when Bush was in office,) but for the most part people are just upset that the economy isn't rebounding as quickly as they would like. When times are tough, incumbents loose. That's the general rule.

I've seen him do stupid things too, like not give his support for gay marriages.

Not only that, but recently he had the opportunity to issue an executive order, repealing the "don't ask don't tell" policy in the US Military. He declined this opportunity saying that, "It has to go through the proper channels," by which he means Congress. And of course, the Republicans have a majority in the congress now. So fuck.

And 'obamacare'? I'm even confused by the word as an insult; because I'd be thrilled for national healthcare to be named for me! The man to push for and ultimately responsible for our national healthcare system has become a hero. (He's Keifer Sutherland's grandfather, btw ) I'm not sure if that anti-Obama association is racist or not, yet.

You're right that it's called "obamacare" as an insult. Basically, he attempted to please everyone and ended up pleasing no one. The Republicans didn't want any reform and the Democrats wanted universal healthcare. What he proposed was, at it's most basic, a system a lot like Hawaii's. Everyone would be required to have health insurance, and there would also be a government-run healthcare agency which would provide for those who couldn't afford it and also provide incentive for insurance companies to lower their prices. The government option didn't pass and what we're left with is a system that requires everyone to get health insurance from private companies. There are a lot of smaller additions to the law, like extending coverage and prohibiting some shady practices, but it's not really what either side wanted.

 

[Andiferous]

Thanks for the replies, I think I'm starting to understand a bit more.

That said, I'd hate to go into American politics.

Well, to start, as you may know, we have a different parliamentary system. Ours is more directly based on the British parliamentary model, and we even retain some British-inspired parties (whigs and tories). We have multiple parties, and when electing a government, our votes go towards a party and not a leader. The winning party naturally decides the leader of government. Senate is somewhat akin to the House of Lords and positions are awarded rather than elected.

Our system was also based on the British model, moreso than most people realize.

We set it in stone with a Constitution, so while the British system has evolved over time, ours has remained fairly static. The struggles 200 years ago in Britain between king and parliament are now reflected in America today between president and congress. The powers of the president are remarkably similar to those of the British king 200 years ago, with the most notable exception being that the court system was spun out into its own branch. The analog to our "Prime Minister" would be the "Speaker of the House". For all our bitching at the time about the "tyranny of Britain", we quickly adopted a lot of their style of government when it came time to form our own. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree, as they say.

Our Senators were also appointed at one time, so that wing of congress was likely inspired by the House of Lords. A Constitutional amendment changed that and now Senators are directly elected.

This may be the case, as the Americans separated a couple centuries before we claimed any kind of modified independence. I think that was 1982 or something.

 

[nasher168]

Here's how it seems to work right now: confuse, scare, and lie to the public. Once you've perversely changed enough people's outlook between right and wrong, give a crap load of tax money and tax incentives to the wealthy, the multinational corporations, and banks. Privatize the gain of wealth and socialize the loses. What this leads too is an believably unstable society... What you "outsiders" are seeing is the US being eaten alive by vultures. From my point of view, this Empire is in its death throws are you are in for one hell of a show. A modern day observation of the decline of a global empire.

I think Bush was our Constantine.

How do you mean by that? The last leader strong enough to hold it together properly?

I for one doubt (and dearly hope) that the US won't have time to fall. Short of a major catastrophe, it will likely be a major power for fifty or so years, by which time I would expect it and the world in general to be more open to the idea of sharing. What is happening with the EU at the moment I would love to see happen with the UN. That is to say, a gradual blurring of borders and perhaps a uniting of the member states under one flag. I would like to live to see a united humanity and the US will have to be instrumental if such a thing is to take place.

 

[DeistPaladin]

That is to say, a gradual blurring of borders and perhaps a uniting of the member states under one flag. I would like to live to see a united humanity and the US will have to be instrumental if such a thing is to take place.

One thing about which I'm proud of my country is the work we've done in promoting the idea of international government, first with the League of Nations and now with the United Nations. W Bush did a lot of damage, unfortunately, and I hope there's still time to undo it.

I agree that if humanity is to survive, divisive and outdated concepts like nationalism and religion have to go, or at least take a back seat to the greater good of the world.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

How do you mean by that? The last leader strong enough to hold it together properly?

That's maybe almost right. :ugeek:

Bush wasn't a strong, effective, or competent leader, but he WAS the leader that the nutjobs in American politics voted for. So their worst nativist instincts were somewhat muted by the idea that the "right" people were in charge. And to George W. Bush's credit, he DID show strength in the way he stood against anti-Muslim sentiments after 9/11. He did make the rhetorical mistake of saying that we were in a crusade, but he corrected from that mistake strongly, and never swayed from the idea that America was not at war against all Muslims. He also held a very moderate opinion when it came to immigration reform and made some general outreach efforts towards Hispanics.

In that sense, Bush was strong and effective... but not so effective that once a non-white president took over, Bush's effort to avoid demonizing Muslims and non-white immigrants collapsed.

 

[Andiferous]

Yes...

I think the open atmophere was nurtured in North America with free trade, but 9/11 really changed everything. A few years ago, what was once known as the longest "open" border in the world (USA/Canada) closed and now requires passports and regular inspections. Which is a bit backward from where we once were. The American government instructed the Canadian government on immigration security and such, and we've now become somewhat suspect. For some reason a few American politicians blame us for the presence of the 9/11 terrorists even though it's been proven they didn't come through Canada. It's unfortunate. There's a lot of misinformation and paranoia out there. I guess time might help.

 

[Mapp]

That is to say, a gradual blurring of borders and perhaps a uniting of the member states under one flag. I would like to live to see a united humanity and the US will have to be instrumental if such a thing is to take place.

One thing about which I'm proud of my country is the work we've done in promoting the idea of international government, first with the League of Nations and now with the United Nations. W Bush did a lot of damage, unfortunately, and I hope there's still time to undo it.

I agree that if humanity is to survive, divisive and outdated concepts like nationalism and religion have to go, or at least take a back seat to the greater good of the world.

Actually there was a strong one world government movement in the United States in the latter part of the 1940s. Many Americans saw after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that the proliferation of atomic weapons was an inevitability. Several prominent social scientists and activists argued that the only sure-fire way to prevent a war that could wipe out civilization was to place all fissionable materials in the hands of a single, sovereign world power that could guarantee that nations would not use them against other nations. Several of the atomic scientists like Leo Szliard signed off on the idea. With the onset of the Korean War and a second red scare, the idea was dismissed as socialist malingering, but nonetheless it enjoyed brief popularity.

 

[DeistPaladin]

I think Bush was our Constantine.

How do you mean by that? The last leader strong enough to hold it together properly?

No, Constantine fucked up the Roman Empire, first with his costly wars and then by opening the door to Christian theocracy as well as shifting military defense to rely more heavily on mercenaries. Although he is credited for being the last great Roman Emperor, mostly from the efforts of Christian fans, he was the one who set it up to fall.

 

[RestrictedAccess]

Is Obama really in as much trouble as it seems? Why is that?

As we saw with the Bush administration, blame gets heaped upon the Executive branch because they have the most visibility. The recent mid-term election showed that the party in power during economic hardship is the party that has to fight harder to keep their jobs. People were REALLY pissed off with congress wiping their asses with our tax dollars, and since dems were the ones with the power, they got steamrolled right out of office.

People forget that the Republicans are just as fiscally irresponsible, though. The reckless spending won't change - assuming anything actually gets done.

It could go either way for Obama. I think if the economy starts looking up, Obama may be in for another 4 years, because a lot of people will give him the credit for it. If it doesn't get better, he'll get part of the blame, while the Republicans get the rest of it.

I'm sure other hot-button issues matter, but it looks to me like the state of the economy is driving the votes this term. It doesn't matter either way, for me - the guy's never going to get my vote.

Do most Americans now blame him for an enormous debt (which I think is traced back to Bush... ) thereby somehow winning voters to the right 'conservative' fiscal management?

He gets part of the blame, because it HAS increased during his time in office. How much it increased depends on who you're asking, since the right will always come up with a larger number than the left.

I've seen him do stupid things too, like not give his support for gay marriages.

Well, he is religious.

And 'obamacare'? I'm even confused by the word as an insult; because I'd be thrilled for national healthcare to be named for me! The man to push for and ultimately responsible for our national healthcare system has become a hero. (He's Keifer Sutherland's grandfather, btw ) I'm not sure if that anti-Obama association is racist or not, yet.

Yeah, but is your national healthcare system just a revamp of the old broken one with the added mandate that everyone but the lowest-income earners in the country has to get it or else?

We're still going to have to go through insurance companies to pay our medical expenses, and I'm still looking for the part in that HUGE health care bill that says insurance companies will have to pay out on the claims they get. Not being able to reject people with pre-existing conditions is great, and something I was behind 100%, but it all counts for squat if the companies can still reject your claim.

I wouldn't want a health care system named after me if it turned out to be one huge steaming pile of crap, especially if I approved the mandate that people have to buy into it.

 

[brewpanda]

Do most Americans now blame him for an enormous debt (which I think is traced back to Bush... ) thereby somehow winning voters to the right 'conservative' fiscal management?

Probably. But the debt and deficit go back further than him or Bush. They both simply increased it. Bush by the cost of a war plus medicare and African Aid funds, Obama by stimulus packages and increased spending on social programs that will add a perpetual increase to the deficit per annum.

When following the democratic primaries way back when, btw, I supported Clinton. But I was okay with Obama too. I have observed (possibly mistakenly) that Obama tried to delegate tasks in the government somewhat independent of political affiliation. I also observe that his government has been fraught with stand-still politics; and I believe largely due to lobby groups.

I've seen him do stupid things too, like not give his support for gay marriages.

We have had stagnant politics before, it happens when parties aren't bipartisan.
But as to the gay marriage, it would be ridiculous for him to pass legislation regarding gay marriage since marriage is not a federally granted right within the central government's constitution. Marriage is state sanctioned and gay marriages would be and should be included on the state level, not the federal level.

And 'obamacare'? I'm even confused by the word as an insult; because I'd be thrilled for national healthcare to be named for me! The man to push for and ultimately responsible for our national healthcare system has become a hero. (He's Keifer Sutherland's grandfather, btw ) I'm not sure if that anti-Obama association is racist or not, yet.

It depends on to whom you speak. Many people disapprove of nationalized healthcare.

Cons
Tax Burden
Drives down competition between healthcare agencies
Drives the cost of healthcare up
Doesn't accurately reward or reflect the real cost of hc
Doesn't properly value or reward medical professionals for their expertise and study to the craft
Makes it more difficult for everyone to get proper care
Forces people to have hc regardless of whether they want it or not

Others approve of it.

Pros
Makes it easier for some to get proper care
Costs less for some

 

[Don-Sama]

Here's how it seems to work right now: confuse, scare, and lie to the public. Once you've perversely changed enough people's outlook between right and wrong, give a crap load of tax money and tax incentives to the wealthy, the multinational corporations, and banks. Privatize the gain of wealth and socialize the loses. What this leads to is an unbelievably unstable society... What you "outsiders" are seeing is the US being eaten alive by vultures. From my point of view, this Empire is in its death throws and you are in for one hell of a show. A modern day observation of the decline of a global empire.

edited for grammar

This is also the outlook I have gotten over the last years from the USA. The popularity of fox and the obvious bullshit they sent out says a lot about all of the states all together. Wether Fox causes the ignorance or the ignorance causes Fox, it doesn't really matter. The feeling I have gotten is that the population gets more extreme and dumb witted. Common sense, logic and science are thrown out of the window, and let that exactly be what USA needs to stay ahead in the global game of power. I really feel sorry for the people who aren't represented well in politics..
Across the ocean time stands still as well, more extreme views and more shit throwing to anyone who doesn't agrees to you. We are all to lazy and take it way to easy.

The western world Usa, Europe and Japan might still be growing and won't stop doing so. The growth simply won't be enough to stay ahead of the now new arising economic powers. Asia is winning this race and I don't like it!

 

[Jocomo]

Canadians and Mexicans also share the continent, and that's just North America. When you say "Americans", I know what you mean, but that's not what you're saying. United Statesians would be more accurate.

***********************

Nobody ever seems to want to blame the failing US economy on recent terrorist activity. 9/11 was a crippling blow.

 

[Andiferous]

Do most Americans now blame him for an enormous debt (which I think is traced back to Bush... ) thereby somehow winning voters to the right 'conservative' fiscal management?

Probably. But the debt and deficit go back further than him or Bush. They both simply increased it. Bush by the cost of a war plus medicare and African Aid funds, Obama by stimulus packages and increased spending on social programs that will add a perpetual increase to the deficit per annum.

... and together these are still pittance to the billions spent annually on futile wars without even a clear target at hand. And by ignoring foreign policy and refusing funds to the international economy the USA would only be returning to isolationist policy and would also contribute to a poor global image. With the momentum of the EU and other global organisations, I think this could be economic suicide in current political climate. Such an opinion could encourage protectionist policy which isn't easily forgiven these days.

I appreciate the the perspective, but it still doesn't seem logical to think this way.

When following the democratic primaries way back when, btw, I supported Clinton. But I was okay with Obama too. I have observed (possibly mistakenly) that Obama tried to delegate tasks in the government somewhat independent of political affiliation. I also observe that his government has been fraught with stand-still politics; and I believe largely due to lobby groups.

I've seen him do stupid things too, like not give his support for gay marriages.

We have had stagnant politics before, it happens when parties aren't bipartisan.
But as to the gay marriage, it would be ridiculous for him to pass legislation regarding gay marriage since marriage is not a federally granted right within the central government's constitution. Marriage is state sanctioned and gay marriages would be and should be included on the state level, not the federal level.

Of course not, and however silly it is, his opinion is still referenced in the public media, and he managed to upset a lot of electorate with his dithering.

And 'obamacare'? I'm even confused by the word as an insult; because I'd be thrilled for national healthcare to be named for me! The man to push for and ultimately responsible for our national healthcare system has become a hero. (He's Keifer Sutherland's grandfather, btw ) I'm not sure if that anti-Obama association is racist or not, yet.

It depends on to whom you speak. Many people disapprove of nationalized healthcare.

Cons
Tax Burden
Drives down competition between healthcare agencies
Drives the cost of healthcare up
Doesn't accurately reward or reflect the real cost of hc
Doesn't properly value or reward medical professionals for their expertise and study to the craft
Makes it more difficult for everyone to get proper care
Forces people to have hc regardless of whether they want it or not

Others approve of it.

Pros
Makes it easier for some to get proper care
Costs less for some

What happened with the bill is depressing to me. I hoped at least it's a beginning to larger strides in the future. A country ought to care about its own, and the USA tends to sell that idea, but not seemingly practice it. Again, an outsider view.

 

[InReasonWeTrust]

Is Obama really in as much trouble as it seems? Why is that?

Yes and no. Yes, because he's another bought politician. No, because he's not really getting anything productive accomplished.

Do most Americans now blame him for an enormous debt (which I think is traced back to Bush... ) thereby somehow winning voters to the right 'conservative' fiscal management?

No, they do not. The blame him for making the situation worse. The US has had a phony economy for a long time, even long before Bush. However, Bush took a recession, inflated an asset (housing) and temporary caused a phony boom in the economy. When the economy crashed, Obama is making Bush's mistake. That is not letting the recession work by reallocating resources where they need to be.

When following the democratic primaries way back when, btw, I supported Clinton. But I was okay with Obama too. I have observed (possibly mistakenly) that Obama tried to delegate tasks in the government somewhat independent of political affiliation. I also observe that his government has been fraught with stand-still politics; and I believe largely due to lobby groups.

It's because the federal government is running more things than they're allowed to by the Constitution.

I've seen him do stupid things too, like not give his support for gay marriages.

Ehh, government should be out of the business of marriage. gay AND straight. It's a religious ceremony.

And 'obamacare'? I'm even confused by the word as an insult; because I'd be thrilled for national healthcare to be named for me! The man to push for and ultimately responsible for our national healthcare system has become a hero. (He's Keifer Sutherland's grandfather, btw ) I'm not sure if that anti-Obama association is racist or not, yet.

The federal government has 17 specific powers afforded to them in the Constitution. Running health care is not one of them.

 

[Andiferous]

I'd love views on recent events, like the political bickering in congress about debt sealing. From here it seems that the elected republicans will go to any length to make trouble for the governing democrats. As an outsider.

And if this doesn't pass, what sort of reprocussions might it have on costs such as the military?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I'd love views on recent events, like the political bickering in congress about debt sealing.

Debt CEILING. And it was a joke from the start. It was always an excuse for the Republican in the White House to pretend that the Republicans in the Congress were forcing him to betray the American people. It was a fucking theater exercise from the beginning. Obama is the sacrificial Republican who gets to carry the blame for the rest of his party for destroying the American Dream for future generations.

 

[Andiferous]

I'd love views on recent events, like the political bickering in congress about debt sealing.

Debt CEILING.

Oops, but I suppose it's applicable.
:lol:

By the way, Obama as the "sacrifical Republican?" This confuses a foreigner who assumes he's a Democrat.