Will the results of the election really matter?

[skydiver30960 0]

This has been bugging me for a while, so I thought I'd throw this out and see what you all think.

PLEASE NOTE: I'm trying to keep this as non-partisan as I can, which many would agree seems to be nigh impossible in SC, but let's try, shall we? When voting YES above, I don't really care WHO you are voting for, just whether or not you TRULY believe either candidate could really make a difference.

My guess: the partisan flavor of the SC will result in a robust turnout for people voting YES; but I'm also interested in seeing how the NOs balance out.


Elvisio "waddaya think?" Rodriguez

[lawrocket 3]

Yes. If one wins, then we'll see some action from a President as opposed to another four years of campaigning for another term. This action will likely be bad.

If the other one wins, then it will begin four years of campaigning for a second term and lightweight type action, most of which will be bad.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Squeak 17]

I Hope it's Barry, he's better for your country on a world stage.
BUT

Whomever does take it will have a pretty much dream run.
your economy is already on it's way back and over the next few years it will continue to improve, this will happen pretty much regardless of the figurehead.
However the incumbent WILL take FULL credit for it.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[Remster 30]

The biggest potential impact wold be the supreme court, considering several judges there are 1 step and 2 pokes away from passing...

Remster

[grimmie 186]

I think the biggest issue will be foreign affairs and how we operate against Iran. We really don't need one more war. Mitt's advisors scare me.

The economy will take care of itself.

[kelpdiver 2]

Gore winning instead of Bush would have lead to a very different course. 9/11 still would have happened as would Afghanistan, and we would still have suffered loss of civil liberties, but Iraq and the deficit spike would not.

Mitt over Obama would also lead to a substantial shift. Probably. Oddly enough, Obama seemed in many ways to be the next Bush on so many policies, aside from the health care legislation.

[1969912 0]

http://anodtothegods.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/forward.jpg

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[Nataly 38]

I believe that if two candidates are roughly as capable as one another, then the differences are smaller, but every once in a while, an exceptionally good, or exceptionally bad person comes along and then it makes a big difference. What's more, for a Nation such as yours, the impact is felt not only in the US, but on the international front as well.

For me, the way George Bush attained power in the first place seriously discredited the notion that the United States follows democratic principles. Yes, it was close, and yes, a decision had to be made, but for me there is no excuse for giving the Presidency to the guy who was not voted in by its citizens. The result of that election was shocking to me (and I believe to lots of other people around the world) because it showed that in the US, there is cheating, corruption, and the possibility of unfair elections. It was a massive blow to your image as a nation that values rights, freedoms, justice, equality and democracy; it puts into question your core values and beliefs. But perhaps you don't care about your "image" on the world front... Nevertheless, the impact on your "brand" was real and it was negative.

During his first 4 years, Bush (irrespective of his politics and advisors, et cetera) was perceived as having the IQ of a fucking goldfish. Unfortunately, how the world perceives your leader affects how the world perceives you as a nation. Forgive me, but as a nation and as a people, you therefore looked like a bunch of fucking morons by association. Re-electing this incredibly dumb man for a second term didn't help your case...

Would things have been different if Bush had never had power?? YES. A thousand times YES. Perhaps the day-to-day may not have seemed much different to you guys... Perhaps the war, and the financial crisis would still have occurred... Perhaps on balance it would have been no better or no worse (or slightly better or slightly worse), but I can't help but doubt the world's opinion/view of the US would have taken such a blow with a different president. I would certainly not go so far as to say that Bush has *caused* the financial crisis or has *caused* terrorist actions, but I do think he fueled a deep(er) hatred of the US, which is a very, very, very bad thing.

But of course, it's just my opinion, and I can't *prove* the link between an increased negative view of america/americans and Bush...

"There is no problem so bad you can't make it worse."
- Chris Hadfield
« Sors le martinet et flagelle toi indigne contrôleuse de gestion. »
- my boss

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

For me, the way George Bush attained power in the first place seriously discredited the notion that the United States follows democratic principles. Yes, it was close, and yes, a decision had to be made, but for me there is no excuse for giving the Presidency to the guy who was not voted in by its citizens. The result of that election was shocking to me (and I believe to lots of other people around the world) because it showed that in the US, there is cheating, corruption, and the possibility of unfair elections. It was a massive blow to your image as a nation that values rights, freedoms, justice, equality and democracy; it puts into question your core values and beliefs. But perhaps you don't care about your "image" on the world front... Nevertheless, the impact on your "brand" was real and it was negative.

It's hard to care too much about the opinions driven by ignorance of how our elections work. You still don't understand apparently, and last night we saw another poster making the same remark during early returns when Romney lead on votes cast.

But the oddity of the electoral college is hardly different from the undemocratic concepts around a multiparty parliamentary system where no one wins a majority, and coalitions must form. The largest winner is not necessary the one who selects the prime minister.

[Nataly 38]

Quote

It's hard to care too much about the opinions driven by ignorance of how our elections work.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. I *do* understand how american elections [should] work.

What happened in Florida when Bush "won" his first run has nothing to do with "how your elections [should] work." Read up on the corruption, the incorrect counting (or dis-counting) of votes, and the court's decision if you don't understand what I mean.

I stand by my original statement. It will take a loooong time to undue the damage that Bush did to your country's image.


ETA: It's ridiculous to discount my view not based on the facts, but based on your assumption that as an "outsider" I couldn't possibly understand.

"There is no problem so bad you can't make it worse."
- Chris Hadfield
« Sors le martinet et flagelle toi indigne contrôleuse de gestion. »
- my boss

[labrys 0]

Quote

ETA: It's ridiculous to discount my view not based on the facts, but based on your assumption that as an "outsider" I couldn't possibly understand.

I love you

Owned by Remi #?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

What happened in Florida when Bush "won" his first run has nothing to do with "how your elections [should] work." Read up on the corruption, the incorrect counting (or dis-counting) of votes, and the court's decision if you don't understand what I mean.

It's pretty simple. Bush won Florida. There was silliness around the way the recounts were conducted and suspended and completed, but the result was correct and every counting method in the following spring confirmed it. No one on the losing side is going to be happy in a dead heat, but you don't have ties in elections.

I already addressed the arguments about how democracies should work.

Quote

ETA: It's ridiculous to discount my view not based on the facts, but based on your assumption that as an "outsider" I couldn't possibly understand.

We still have insiders that refuse to accept that Gore lost, but MoveOn got most people to move on.

[Nataly 38]

Quote

It's pretty simple. Bush won Florida.

OK. You believe this firmly; I firmly believe the opposite - and so do a lot of people around the world. Let's just say it's debatable.

Quote

There was silliness around the way the recounts were conducted and suspended and completed

Forgive me, but from my point of view, it was more than "silliness." And all this "silliness" is NOT how a democracy should work. Period.



(ETA - spelling... Dammit! )

"There is no problem so bad you can't make it worse."
- Chris Hadfield
« Sors le martinet et flagelle toi indigne contrôleuse de gestion. »
- my boss

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Quote

It's pretty simple. Bush won Florida.

OK. You believe this firmly; I firmly believe the opposite - and so do a lot of people around the world. Let's just say it's debatable.

You can believe whatever you want but the evidence does not support this belief.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Nataly 38]

Quote

You can believe whatever you want but the evidence does not support this belief.

It all depends on what evidence you look at.

"There is no problem so bad you can't make it worse."
- Chris Hadfield
« Sors le martinet et flagelle toi indigne contrôleuse de gestion. »
- my boss

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Quote

You can believe whatever you want but the evidence does not support this belief.

It all depends on what evidence you look at.

OK, post the evidence you look at to confirm you in that belief. I've looked at tons of media recounts. They all confirm that Bush won [just for the record I was not and am not a Bush fan and didn't vote for him].

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

You can believe whatever you want but the evidence does not support this belief.

It all depends on what evidence you look at.

This is the same sort of argument used by the 9/11 conspiracy theory types. Sorry, that argument lacks substance.

The most tangible complaints about Florida center around the butterfly ballot and around the voter poll purgings done in advance of the election. However, neither of these are fixable in the sense that you can derive a new vote count that changes the victor.

[Nataly 38]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You can believe whatever you want but the evidence does not support this belief.

It all depends on what evidence you look at.

OK, post the evidence you look at to confirm you in that belief. I've looked at tons of media recounts. They all confirm that Bush won [just for the record I was not and am not a Bush fan and didn't vote for him].

Oh my god. Why don't I say it this way:

On the international front, Bush was perceived not to have won - the elections were perceived to be unfair and "undemocratic". The shenanigans (perceived or real) around those elections seriously damaged your image as a Nation.

Bush was perceived to be a moron. Fine, everyone can make a mistake, but electing him for a second mandate made people think americans in general must be morons. This damaged your image as a people/Nation. (IMO)

In my opinion, it will take the US a long time to overcome this bad image. And in my opinion, this bad image is directly related to who was in power. So in answer to the original question, in some cases, an exceptionally good or an exceptionally bad president *can* make a big difference (good or bad). In my opinion. The scale or net impact of this difference is up for debate. Maybe in the grand scheme of things, it's not that important that the entire world seems to hate america. (YES, that is exaggerated - the *entire* world does not hate (or care) about america.)

"There is no problem so bad you can't make it worse."
- Chris Hadfield
« Sors le martinet et flagelle toi indigne contrôleuse de gestion. »
- my boss

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

OK, post the evidence you look at to confirm you in that belief. I've looked at tons of media recounts. They all confirm that Bush won [just for the record I was not and am not a Bush fan and didn't vote for him].

Oh my god. Why don't I say it this way:

On the international front, Bush was perceived not to have won - the elections were perceived to be unfair and "undemocratic". The shenanigans (perceived or real) around those elections seriously damaged your image as a Nation.

Again - confirming what I started with - why do we care what outsiders with chips on their shoulders and a refusal to look at actual facts think about our election?

And bluntly, how much of a factor is it that France is a rival, particularly on the Iraq issue?

[billvon 3,071]

>Again - confirming what I started with - why do we care what outsiders with chips
>on their shoulders and a refusal to look at actual facts think about our election?

Well, I can't answer as to the "why." But based on your five replies to an "outsider" on this topic, you probably could.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Again - confirming what I started with - why do we care what outsiders with chips
>on their shoulders and a refusal to look at actual facts think about our election?

Well, I can't answer as to the "why." But based on your five replies to an "outsider" on this topic, you probably could.

it wasn't obvious at first that facts were nonessential. Apparently she's a member of the GOP.

[yoink 321]

As long as you have the House of Representatives and the Senate controlled by separate parties, and the people in those institutions more interested in chest-beating and damning-the-eyes of the opposite party and voting against each other out of spite and bloody-mindedness, then no, nothing substantial will change.

If the President and the leader of the House could come to a public agreement to dismiss any of their members who displayed an attitude of 'I'm not supporting x because it's THEIR idea' (regardless of whether it's good for the country or not) then MAYBE something would change...

Quote

"The 65-year-old former Massachusetts governor urged politicians on both sides to "put the people before the politics".

hahahaha. Pigs will fly first.

fuck. Now I'm depressed.

[wmw999 2,535]

I think Bush was a lousy president, and I most definitely voted against him. But he was elected fairly. The election wasn't perfect, but it was within the (sometimes arcane) rules of our elections. The Supreme Court is there for exactly the kind of situation it was in.

Yeah, it's silly. But we don't wear wigs in court, so I guess that makes up for it. Every country has its own weird rules; we understand them, sometimes we disagree, but they're our ugly rules, and we'll defend them just like we'll defend our ugly babies.

It's also in the past.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Nataly 38]

Quote

Quote

>Again - confirming what I started with - why do we care what outsiders with chips
>on their shoulders and a refusal to look at actual facts think about our election?

Well, I can't answer as to the "why." But based on your five replies to an "outsider" on this topic, you probably could.

it wasn't obvious at first that facts were nonessential. Apparently she's a member of the GOP.

Am I the "she" you are referring to??? Are all your assumptions about me based on thin air??? Me, have a chip on my shoulder?? Pray tell: what is this chip you speak of?

And, please tell me you are not saying how the rest of the world views America is irrelevant... If this is really what you think, you live in a bubble, my friend.

Finally, when I speak of "the rest of the world," I don't mean "France." My world-view is not limited to where I happen to be living at the moment...

And Wendy... Perhaps it's in the past for the US, but unfortunately a bad reputation lives on for a very long time... And I really *do* think it's unfortunate... A LOT of really great things have come from America / American culture.

"There is no problem so bad you can't make it worse."
- Chris Hadfield
« Sors le martinet et flagelle toi indigne contrôleuse de gestion. »
- my boss

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Am I the "she" you are referring to??? Are all your assumptions about me based on thin air??? Me, have a chip on my shoulder?? Pray tell: what is this chip you speak of?

It's based on the words you put out.

Sorry to be blunt, but it's hard to respect you when you start with a claim of false democracy and when challenged with the facts say "fine, it's looks like false democracy."

I think you're incapable of separating out rage for Bush policies with his merits as a President (lackluster, imo) and the fairness of the process that elected him. You're hardly alone - but admit this isn't objective.