... and we voted in Labour who have done an excellent and thorough job of shafting us all. The whole country fell for the big lie on more than one occasion. Don't get snobbish about the Americans because we are no different.
Reg the GOP. There was only one worthwhile candidate for the Republicans and that was Ron Paul, but they were never going to allow him to win.
That's a big part of it. Republicans control the House and Democrats the Senate, and through the House they've been blocking pretty much anything Obama wants to do (except a few measures that have been forced through, as codehound noted).
The Dems had control of the House, Senate, and the Presidency for 2009 and 2010. Obama got his stimulus spending passed. And Obamacare after twisting the arms of Democrats who were afraid to pass it because polls showed that the majority of the public didn't want it. For the last two years the House has blocked what Obama wants and the Democrat Senate has blocked most of what the House has tried to do. But we still went from $11 trillion in debt to $16 trillion in debt.
I think its ironic that I hear so many liberals professing their distrust for the government and American politics, but they find themselves having to support the most abusive government agency, the IRS, being in charge of the nation's healthcare. It's like those fundamentalist Christians who make themselves look like idiots when they can't see through the dogma and join the 21st century.
With $738,461 you could start two or three name brand fast food franchises. That should be about 5-6 jobs each. So about a total of 11 jobs. A person spending their own money just has more incentive to use it wisely and efficiently than does a bureaucrat who is spending someone else's money.
Gary Johnson 86%
Ron Paul 82%
Mitt Romney 68%
I dunno about the accuracy of this thing. I don't like Obama, but I can't stand Romney. Even though I like Ron Paul, I think a lot of his populist ideology is dated. He would've been a good President to have in the 1970's, but we're too globally connected for that sort of administration to be of much use.
The Libertarians really do need a good PR guy if they want a real shot at the White House or any Senate seats.
Libertarians usually let their ideas speak for themselves. Having a powerful leader in the party would be sort of against their ideals of a smaller, less powerful government. It is an ideology that can gain momentum in the state legislatures to retake the powers they need from the federal government. One thing that would help them greatly is pushing non-stop for term limits for congress, something I believe would solve almost all the biggest problems in our political system.
Term limits really won't do as much as you think. In fact, it can work against you. What matters is the quality of the people running. And lately that has been lacking.
And again the libertarians really need a PR guy. They can be minimalist all they want. But by staying in the shadows like they are, the best they can hope for is a shadow party made up of disgruntled pot smoking republicans.
Oh well. At least they ain't drinking the tea.
As I posted earlier regarding Romney getting funding from "reducted" and how in my opinion this was a criminal offence in the US.
Here is a US supreme court ruling supporting that view.
"In a terse four words, the Supreme Court on Monday issued an order upholding prohibitions against foreigners making contributions to influence American elections.The decision clamped shut an opening that some thought the court had created two years ago in its Citizens United decision, when it relaxed campaign-finance limits on corporations and labor unions. On Monday the Supreme Court, upholding a lower court’s decision in Bluman, et al., v. Federal Election Commission, refused to extend its reasoning in Citizens United to cover foreigners living temporarily here.
Foreign nationals, other than lawful permanent residents, are completely banned from donating to candidates or parties, or making independent expenditures in federal, state or local elections.
And I notice that GOP are doing their best to prevent Ron Paul's bid, beside blatent voter fraud, this is their latest.
"TAMPA, Fla. (AP) -- Republican officials abruptly announced plans Saturday night to scrap the first day of their national convention, bowing to the threat of Tropical Storm Isaac as it bore down menacingly on Florida.
"The safety of those in Isaac's path is of the utmost importance," tweeted Mitt Romney, his formal nomination as presidential candidate pushed back by a minimum of 24 hours from Monday night to Tuesday." http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s ... CTIME=2012-08-25-19-05-10
Anyways.... Ron Paul. Ron Paul never ever had a snowball's chance in hell to get the nomination. He was only tolerated because the party thought they could siphon voters from his camp once it deflated. He's still got a lot of supporters, but then again so does Lyndon LaRouche.
And say the unthinkable happened and he DID get the nomination.
LOL you think the republicans are unsupportive of the President we have now?
They would try to have him impeached.
But come to think of it, Ain't you from New Zealand? Don't you have your own politicians to complain about?
Wot a joke
The whole US system is a farce, u go on about the differences between Obama ( who legally cannot stand ) and Romney( who is a criminal according to your Supreme court ) and expect the rest of the world to accept that your the only righteous democrat people on earth
Your elections, for the rest of us, are a joke
Unfortunately, as u believe, we all need to suck up to u as u have nuclear weapons and so will attack any country that points this fact out requires us to support your pathetic views ?
I think not.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who doesn't suck up to "reducted" and want to be their president.
Perhaps if the people in the US were capable of having a brain and actually thinking then we may have more respect, as it is, the NZ view is your all a pack of useless tossers.
Please make some attempt to prove us wrong, I'm not holding my breath for this to happen tho !
I do find it odd that abortion is still a hot topic in american politics. That outlawing abortion even gets proposed in a modern society is shocking. Appalling even. It's getting the point where I wonder if the clerics in Iran tell their people that americans are jealous of their ruthless theocracy.
Why is abortion such a hot topic? I think it's as valid a topic as anything else as we are talking about the actual life of a human being. There is a debate to understand how the only difference between murder and legitimate killing is whether a baby is inside a womb or not. A difference of a couple of inches. A baby can be born, and if it is then killed that's full blooded murder, a murder which would have been perfectly legal only moments before a possible birth.
I probably lay more on the liberal side of the debate. Outlawing it would cause back alley abortions and then we have the topic of rape etc... But it's perfectly understandable why it's a 'hot topic'. It's typical anti-American and somewhat hypocritical ignorance that would think otherwise.
Why should we bother? We have a lot more problems here than trying to impress some flakes. I mean you live in a country that makes you register paintball guns. And you worry about the big bad U S of A dictating to you when you have your very own nanny-state controlling you.
Is that why you complain about ours so much is because your government won't let you complain about them?
If you really want to be so paranoid about a new world order, then realize you need to deal with more immediate threats like your very own nanny state instead of a fading dynasty thousands of miles away.
Abortion.... Actually that issue is overhyped a bunch. I don't know why extremists go off about it or why politicians use it s a vote getter tactic. It's just not really anything that's really brought up in political discussions - with citizens. We care more about the economy and security. Some Politicians, mostly republicans, seem to want to put this up front though. In fact I use it as a gauge to measure the competency of the candidate. If they spout off over and over about abortion instead of relevant issues, I realize that they are too stupid and are taking the bible thumping approach to get elected to cover their incompetency.
Personally? Abortions, though not OK with me, is still acceptable because I'm not a medical professional and realize that there are circumstances where this procedure may be the way to go in cases.
But the scary thing is, like everything else we do with things in this country, abortion isn't a "procedure" anymore, it's an industry.
Counselors using high pressure sales tactics, finder's fees....
Forget that garbage about the woman's right to choose. A distraught person that has already made a series of bad choices to wind up in this predicament
is pretty much an easy mark and a potential bonus for a counselor.
Oh and yeah, I know this FIRST-HAND. So that's why I'm not for abortion.
But I don't think it should be an issue with the clowns running. They should instead focus on what the country as a whole needs.
LOL the issue you want see Americans go nuts about is Gay marriage.
I still don't understand why that's an issue, but it is.
I tease the bible thumpers and tell them that they need to support this issue, because if they don't, There'll be all these gay and lesbian babies being born out of wedlock, clogging up welfare resources. You'd be amazed at how many actually stop and consider that.
They usually tell me that they are trying to protect the sanctity of Marriage. LOL They've been through two divorces and are worried about a couple a pillow biters slipping a ring on their finger? Maybe they're afraid that the gay couple will make it work when they couldn't? I dunno. Go figure.
So you think the aborted fetuses are in fact living humans? Maybe you should actually use some google to figure out how "living" the fetuses are at the moment of abortion. For example check what the acceptable abortion weeks are and at what stage the fetus is at that time.
Personally I find it almost shocking how some very basic ideas are still being "discussed" today in modern world. Abortion is just one thing but sexual equality, drug policies, stem cell study, the use of contraceptives and a whole lot of other things are so strongly tied to illogical and plain harmful ideologies and delirious religious interpretations and to the down right disastrously harmful need for maximum control about what people can and should do.
I just find it shocking that we still have people who think we should "discuss" about abortion for example. What's there to discuss? We already know that abortions save lifes, improve the living standards and status of women. The upsides by far outnumber the negatives. Yet we should still discuss about it? Should we discuss about the legality of the use of contraceptives as well? Or is them being legal nowadays already common sense even to the most ardent ideological preachers?
That's another example of one group playing loose with numbers to make the other side look bad.
It costs over 100 thousand USD a foot (about 27cm) to build a freeway on flat level ground. I can't even imagine a nice average cost to rebuild a bridge on just one of those projects to actually allow for people getting a 700k paycheck.
Oh look, here's another topic you insist on talking about when you know nothing about it.
Abortion laws attempt to determine at what point a foetus becomes self-aware and capable of feeling pain. In the UK that means you cannot abort a pregnancy after the 24th week of a pregnancy. In France it's 12 weeks. There is no country in the world that allows abortion up to the final day of pregnancy.
I'm not anti-american. I lived there for years and I have a lot of friends up and down the east coast and out west in California and Colorado. But you just like calling people names don't you. Enjoy the irony of calling me ignorant while knowing **** all about abortion law.
What I do know is that abortion, and the law, is a perfectly understandable topic of discussion and debate, especially in the states.
In the UK babies have been born within the limit (24 weeks) and survived, so yes I guess you can say some fetuses were humans. That does highlight a moral dilemma. The difference, in the UK at least, between murder and legal abortion is a matter of inches when the fetus/baby has reached 21-24 weeks.
Look, I naturally side on the liberal side of the debate. I am just stating that it's a perfectly acceptable debate to be having, especially the states. The nutjobs of course don't help who have banners and all that BS. But refusal on the part of 'pro-abortionists' to understand why it's still an issue highlights a level of ignorance that will only inflame people's feelings.