Romney vs. Obama
- Thread starter Corey Batt
- Start date
AND
Only second Democratic Candidate to get a second term since WWII the other being Clinton.
Regards Peter
PS YOU MUST Check out the you tube video on voting machine rigged to help Romney. This appears is real corruption caught out by video phone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOj2IPulNPA
A significant achievement given the state of the US economy with unemployment still at 7.9%. A salient reminder for those on this side of the Pacific that merely economic discontent will precipitate a change of government.
Overall the state of the House of Reps, Senate & President is effectively unchanged, so it will be interesting how they negotiate, or not to get pass the significant public policy challenges that they have. Overall the popular vote in the Presidential race is even, with Romney at this stage slightly ahead, with the western states still to come and be counted. Still a divided nation. Leadership & the art of compromise are skills that are in desparate need.
Just a quick observation of the US election campaign, the one thing that astounded me was the lack of detail about the respective programs of both candidates. More slogans than detail. I respect that the nature of their system, means the President will need to negotiate with the Congress, but Australian elections at least provide far more detail about the future public policy agendas.
Overall the state of the House of Reps, Senate & President is effectively unchanged, so it will be interesting how they negotiate, or not to get pass the significant public policy challenges that they have. Overall the popular vote in the Presidential race is even, with Romney at this stage slightly ahead, with the western states still to come and be counted. Still a divided nation. Leadership & the art of compromise are skills that are in desparate need.
Just a quick observation of the US election campaign, the one thing that astounded me was the lack of detail about the respective programs of both candidates. More slogans than detail. I respect that the nature of their system, means the President will need to negotiate with the Congress, but Australian elections at least provide far more detail about the future public policy agendas.
Last edited:
Also amazing how each state gets to set the rules of the election. Some postal vote ok, some not. Some electronic. Some paper only. Not USA wide electoral commission.
Peter
Peter
A huge difference is that the US doesn't have compulsory voting like we do. As a result, a lot of eligible US voters, often the moderate middle, simply don't vote, resulting in the candidates focusing their appeals on people who DO vote, often the more extreme ends of the spectrum.
With our system, compulsory voting means that the votes more accurately reflect all eligible voters. It means that the parties are less likely to try to appeal to the fringes because they can't afford to alienate the moderates. In the US, most of the moderates wouldn't bother voting anyway.
With our system, compulsory voting means that the votes more accurately reflect all eligible voters. It means that the parties are less likely to try to appeal to the fringes because they can't afford to alienate the moderates. In the US, most of the moderates wouldn't bother voting anyway.
It makes sense when you consider how the US developed as a country. The original, 13 colonies were pretty independent when they banded together, reluctantly, to counter the British. Federal power was deliberately watered down and state power strengthened to prevent excessive power at the top. Then states were added over time from the other colonial powers (France, Spain, Netherlands, etc), and each demanded a level of independence. That's why they have that archaic electoral college system, where in effect the voters in each state vote on who their state supports.
The result is more political power at the lower levels such as state income tax, local election of judges, localised emergency services, schools, etc, while the Australian system tends to concentrate more power at the top levels (no state income tax, police / fire / ambulance are state services, etc).
I guess Romney really couldn't shake the "MoneyBags McFancyPants" image.
you should see infowars "fox news slips up showing votes before counting starts proves conspiracy and vote rigging"....
that guy will stoop so low to get a headline. he makes some valid points but honestly, maybe think before typing - engage clutch between brain and keyboard - in the US over 35mil votes were cast EARLY....
that guy will stoop so low to get a headline. he makes some valid points but honestly, maybe think before typing - engage clutch between brain and keyboard - in the US over 35mil votes were cast EARLY....
Pretty hard to beat Santa Clause....
What is needed in the US and what is happening are 2 different things and getting further apart.
Yay, will soon be wooops...oh nooooo...!
I don't see how a politician who wants to increase military spending and cut taxes is a better option.
Unfortunately the US is a war based economy and even moreso now. Not saying it's right or wrong............just sayin'
I read somewhere that every one serviceman keep seven people gainfully employed locally to their country's economy. The recipe also requires deflating the currency with hot printing presses and voila the can is kicked down the road. Smoke and mirrors continue. China (and by implication Australia) better hope that the US consumers continue consuming.
I read somewhere that every one serviceman keep seven people gainfully employed locally to their country's economy. The recipe also requires deflating the currency with hot printing presses and voila the can is kicked down the road. Smoke and mirrors continue. China (and by implication Australia) better hope that the US consumers continue consuming.
That's incredible. I had no idea that the US economy ran in this way. It's obviously very complex. Lets hope the politicians are able to manage the situation over the next 4 yrs.
That's just me thinking out loud, Jason. It may not entirely be like this, but I am no economics giant, so I keep it simple and a little cynical
Nevertheless the numbers of military personnel are not small. Circa 1.4 Mill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces
