What might the effect be on the election?

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Post by ravingdave »

TallDave wrote:John,

Most wars start with very high approval. This is true even in non-democracies. Look back at the polls at the time on Iraq and Afghanistan.
If you chart the direction of America and the World, everything has been moving further leftward year after year. (except in russia and china where it is moving the opposite direction.)
To some extent. OTOH, iirc righties have won in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Ukraine, Poland, and appear poised to win in the UK.

And Fidel stepped down. So who knows.

The righties you refer to in countries like Canada, France, Germany, etc. (except Ukraine and Poland) are of the Milque Toast variety, and only represent the Rightward Swing of the political pendulum as the result of dissatisfaction with the Lefties that were in charge. More of a "Vote the Bumbs Out!" mentatility than any coherent understanding of the differing political philosophies.



David

rcain
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:43 pm
Contact:

Post by rcain »

[quote = Winston Churchill] The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter. [/quote]

...and that from a man who bought us through wars against both fascism and communism!

it is never ending my friends. and it is true, there are 'dark forces' in the world as well as good.

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Maybe I'm off base here, but since the US is a democracy and all, with "the will of the people" in charge, isn't it a good thing if the president listens instead of, oh I don't know, dragging the country into a war?
I wonder how come no one told Franklin Roosevelt that egging Japan on with an oil embargo while actually fighting Germany in the Atlantic was not the smartest idea? If he was going to listen to the will of the people and all.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

JohnSmith
Posts: 161
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:04 pm
Location: University

Post by JohnSmith »

Hey Simon, I'm not the guy who came up with democracy.
Hell, I think that the natural form of government really is monarchy, or at least dictatorship. (not a good form necessarily, just natural.) Personal loyalty will beat loyalty to an idea, for a generation or two at least.

And I suppose you're right dave, the Conservative party up here in Canada isn't super conservative. But how's this for political philosophies; most of us have figured out that it doesn't matter who you put in charge, they're not going to do any good. The only thing left is to try and punish the worst idiots as best we can.

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Post by ravingdave »

JohnSmith wrote:Hey Simon, I'm not the guy who came up with democracy.
Hell, I think that the natural form of government really is monarchy, or at least dictatorship. (not a good form necessarily, just natural.) Personal loyalty will beat loyalty to an idea, for a generation or two at least.

And I suppose you're right dave, the Conservative party up here in Canada isn't super conservative. But how's this for political philosophies; most of us have figured out that it doesn't matter who you put in charge, they're not going to do any good. The only thing left is to try and punish the worst idiots as best we can.


You are absolutely right about not mattering who you put in charge. Since 1976 I have been bitching about Democrats taxing and spending, the national Debt, and the Defecit. After 1994, we FINALLY got Republicans in Control of Congress, and at first they did well, but eventually they succumbed to the Drug that is power in Washington, and by 2006 they were spending WORSE than Democrats !!!!

The worst part of the whole situation is Conservatives (Which is not the same as Republicans) are being hammered for what the Free Spending Republicans have done which is completely against conservative Philosophy.

The financial Fiasco is being portrayed as a Failure of Conservative principles when conservative principles were not even being followed.


David

classicpenny
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:50 pm
Location: Port Angeles WA USA
Contact:

Post by classicpenny »

ravingdave wrote:Conservatives (Which is not the same as Republicans) are being hammered for what the Free Spending Republicans have done which is completely against conservative Philosophy. The financial Fiasco is being portrayed as a Failure of Conservative principles when conservative principles were not even being followed.
The conservative principle that WAS being following was letting Wall Street do whatever they wanted to do...The "Free Spending" fiasco is not so much the fault of Conservatism as it is the fault of the Conservative's own "fair-haired boys": Bush Jr and Cheney, their Halliburton benefit project and other related boondoggles. 'Course there were more than a few "liberals" (not exactly the same as Democrats :-)) who let (and are letting) them get away with it.

Bill Flint

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Post by ravingdave »

classicpenny wrote:
ravingdave wrote:Conservatives (Which is not the same as Republicans) are being hammered for what the Free Spending Republicans have done which is completely against conservative Philosophy. The financial Fiasco is being portrayed as a Failure of Conservative principles when conservative principles were not even being followed.
The conservative principle that WAS being following was letting Wall Street do whatever they wanted to do...The "Free Spending" fiasco is not so much the fault of Conservatism as it is the fault of the Conservative's own "fair-haired boys": Bush Jr and Cheney, their Halliburton benefit project and other related boondoggles. 'Course there were more than a few "liberals" (not exactly the same as Democrats :-)) who let (and are letting) them get away with it.

Bill Flint
You are of course referring to "laissez faire" economics. That was a factor insofar as the Liberals made it profitable to indulge governmental incompetence. Yes, people greedy for money will exploit stupid governmental policies for their own benefit, and that did occur in this current financial fiasco, but the underlying cause remains the stupid governmental policies that rewarded this kind of behavior. (a free market would never have made sub-prime loans.)

A really good and simple explanation of what I am talking about can be viewed here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiXwZI_YqHY

However, you better hurry if you want to see it. YouTube keeps yanking it down every time it's reposted.


But you are right about George W. Bush, but I don't understand what they hell you are talking about with Dick Cheney. George Bush has been the most Economically Liberal and Pro Big Government President we've had since Lyndon Baines Johnson.



David

Post Reply