USA Elections

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ...LastNext
Current: 6 of 34
markadams99 Thursday 4 September 2008 12.29pm
wjfox2004 wrote:
I bet that petition was made by oil companies/big corporations and their associates.
Is that riposte based on science?
JonR Thursday 4 September 2008 12.35pm
but Katia - you don't vote for who you want to be president based on how much you like the choice of VP - You can think Palin is great as much as you want but you'd still have to vote for McCain, and if you think he's an old fogie, not in touch with the vast majority of US citizens, and not right for the post, then you either vote Obama or abstain. You don't get a chance to vote for Palin.
maurits Thursday 4 September 2008 12.46pm
JonR wrote:
but Katia - you don't vote for who you want to be president based on how much you like the choice of VP - You can think Palin is great as much as you want but you'd still have to vote for McCain, and if you think he's an old fogie, not in touch with the vast majority of US citizens, and not right for the post, then you either vote Obama or abstain. You don't get a chance to vote for Palin.

I don't have the impression from Katia's post that she'd vote for McCain/Palin. Like me, she sees the good choice in Palin as a running mate and what she adds 'to the ticket' but that does not imply that you'd want that to be the winning ticket. On the contrary, where I am concerned.
jackie rokotnitz Thursday 4 September 2008 1.01pm
Ithink she's a terrible choice, but I'm not voting. The Professor IS voting however. He has just (this minute)) landed from the States and he's utterly horrified by the various died-in-the-wool Republicans he's seen (amongst a majority crowd of Democrats). He says it's hard to imagine a bunch of educated, intelligent people can STILL be considering voting McCain/Palin.
Katia Thursday 4 September 2008 1.03pm
Indeed, Maurits, I'd rather that wouldn't be the winning ticket. I am afraid it might be though. As you say, JonR, nobody votes for the VP, but I think Palin makes McCain electable for the social conservatives.

How the Republicans manage to be both "no-state-free-market-dog-eat-dog" and "holier-than-though-every-life-is-sacred-and-marriage-means-one-man-plus-one-woman" every time is amazing. I am expecting a split every time, never happens.
markadams99 Thursday 4 September 2008 1.32pm
This thread shows that the conservative mindset is a mystery to many liberals. That may be due to projection of their own fantasies by liberals onto imaginary stereotypes such as 'stupid,shallow,merkins' and prudes. Hence the cognitive dissonance with reality. I've never seen such a bunch a scalded cats since Margaret Thatcher said 'Rejoice!'. No doubt normal service will be resumed as the urgency of using the media and Alaskan Democratic state legislature to tear down Palin and her family trumps decency.
Katia Thursday 4 September 2008 1.42pm
Markadams, most Americans I have met are neither stupid nor shallow, but eloquent, well educated people. Most Republican Americans I have ever met are either deeply religious and care more about the personal moral stance of a politician than everything else or would rather have no taxes, little state and things done by free market forces plus charity.

All I did was express my wonder that those two groups should vote for the same party.

Will you be so kind as to explain the conservative mindset then, rather than just repeatedly stating that "liberals" don't understand it?
markadams99 Thursday 4 September 2008 1.57pm
Katia, a conservative would not be amazed that 'eloquent, well educated people' care about a politician's character and prefer a small state, free markets and personal charity. They may even be religious! I am amazed that you are amazed and that is a good instance of the gap in comprehension. I'd rather not write an essay, but there's some commentary this morning that may interest you, eg What's so special about Sarah in the WSJ. An apt extract:

The Sarah Palin story doesn't fit the standard liberal model the past 30 years of what defines a high-achieving woman. The impulse in acceptable political society to condescend to lovely, ebullient Sarah is palpable. If the TV commentators tried to sound any smarter dismissing her qualifications, their big brains would burst.
markadams99 Thursday 4 September 2008 2.02pm
finger trouble, sorry.
Katia Thursday 4 September 2008 2.12pm
Thank you, markadams. I am not amazed that eloquent people can be religious and care about a politician's character. Equally, liberalism and indeed atheism does not make one a person of no moral stance.

I am amazed that the Republicans don't have a deeper rift. Are there Republicans who are both of "no taxes, no state" and "moral and religous stance most important" groups? It's difficult to deny a rift, every candidate from one side had to appease the other.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ...LastNext
Current: 6 of 34


To post a message, you must be a registered user. If you are already registered, please log in.

Subscribe now

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,300+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum

Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions