Jump to content

Recommended Posts

the hero worship/messiah thing was MUCH worse last time round,EVERYONE expected him to perform miracles and naturally, he couldn't (who could!) But... there's an overall sense of relief that he got in again that I share and am optimistic as a result.


what shocks me is just how truly abysmal the alternative is, how can someone who clearly cannot think for himself get to become a Presidential candidate anyway. I don't think there was anyone in opposition that I would have trusted. To me, Romney looked like a fake whereas Obama seemed genuine, very happy he has a second chance.


much thanks to londonmix and others on this thread who have greatly helped my understanding of US elections/politics.

Not to sound like IDS but I think Romney gets slightly over caricatured over here. Take him away from trying to lead/manage GOP expectations and I?m sure youd find a much more palatable individual


The bigger problem for the party is where do they go from here. They are correct that America is changing but their relatively narrow, and rapidly ageing voter-base isn?t keen to acknowledge this ? so moderate candidates only get lukewarm backing . Then you have the lunatic element trying to go ever more rightwards ? get one of their people in charge and there will be a lot of noise supporting them but the wider electorate won?t be interested

I agree about Romney. The reason he came across as fake is because at his core he's a progrssive moderate. The win the GOP nomination he had to pretend to be something he's not. Like anyone pretending to be someone they aren't he became a caricature of what he understood these people to be which appeared even more monstruous than a real extreme right winger.


My real concern with him was that his main guiding conviction was to become president. He was willing to say and do whatever it took and was able to go against his 'true' moral convictions for political expendiency. All politicians do this to some extent but he was so extreme it compromised my perception of his ability to lead. A leader will be under huge pressure post election and they need to be able to take a stand despite the political implications.


My family are swing voters (though left leaning progressives so usually vote Democratic). We were discussing Romney this morning and agree the GOP will not be able to win unless they redefine themselves to avoid the lurching from right to centre that occurs between the nomination and the election.

I don't think there's any doubt that Romney is instinctively far more liberal on social issues than even the Republican mainstream, let alone the evangelical right, and his microeconomic approach to jobs and growth was arguably both closer to the US man in the street and more ultimately credible than Obama. On monetary and fiscal policy tho' Romney was a mess, both politically and economically, which gave Obama a comparatively easy ride in the area where he was most vulnerable.


I founbd following the campaign fascinating, particularly in revealing that although it's tempting for many of us to identify with the Democrats as somehow more European, actually US politics is just very very different.

...and yet the land of the free won't let millions of its citizens who want to, play online poker but they can buy a gun fairly easily! I am always intrigued by the US and it's paradoxes but I love it and most yanks I know, probably a small and bias sample, are more courteous, more small l liberal and generally better educated than many Brits I know. Always an irony to me that Brits who go on about ignorant unworldly Americans have such a biased stereotypical view of Americans themselves. god bless America.

"Bookies called it right - PaddyPower paid out last Sunday/Betfair had it 1/4 on on Monday, which backs the view that Betfair is as valid source of likely election results as opinion polls. wisdom of crowds etc."


Some pollsters had a pretty good night, it was the political "experts" and journalists who couldn't call it. Their opinions turned out to be no more use than a toss of a coin.


http://mashable.com/2012/11/07/nate-silver-wins/

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

http://election.princeton.edu/

They were discussing this on this on LBC a few days ago they also mentioned would we ever have a black prime minister my thoughts although you have some rising stars like below. This may not happen for some time America has more of multiracial history then we do.


Chuka Umunna

Adam Afriyie

Shaun Bailey

Kwasi Kwarteng

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Absolute mugs. That's what they take you for.  
    • Trossachs definitely have one! 
    • A A day-school for girls and a boarding school for boys (even with, by the late '90s, a tiny cadre of girls) are very different places.  Though there are some similarities. I think all schools, for instance, have similar "rules", much as they all nail up notices about "potential" and "achievement" and keeping to the left on the stairs. The private schools go a little further, banging on about "serving the public", as they have since they were set up (either to supply the colonies with District Commissioners, Brigadiers and Missionaries, or the provinces with railway engineers), so they've got the language and rituals down nicely. Which, i suppose, is what visitors and day-pupils expect, and are expected, to see. A boarding school, outside the cloistered hours of lesson-times, once the day-pupils and teaching staff have been sent packing, the gates and chapel safely locked and the brochures put away, becomes a much less ambassadorial place. That's largely because they're filled with several hundred bored, tired, self-supervised adolescents condemned to spend the night together in the flickering, dripping bowels of its ancient buildings, most of which were designed only to impress from the outside, the comfort of their occupants being secondary to the glory of whatever piratical benefactor had, in a last-ditch attempt to sway the judgement of their god, chucked a little of their ill-gotten at the alleged improvement of the better class of urchin. Those adolescents may, to the curious eyes of the outer world, seem privileged but, in that moment, they cannot access any outer world (at least pre-1996 or thereabouts). Their whole existence, for months at a time, takes place in uniformity behind those gates where money, should they have any to hand, cannot purchase better food or warmer clothing. In that peculiar world, there is no difference between the seventh son of a murderous sheikh, the darling child of a ball-bearing magnate, the umpteenth Viscount Smethwick, or the offspring of some hapless Foreign Office drone who's got themselves posted to Minsk. They are egalitarian, in that sense, but that's as far as it goes. In any place where rank and priviilege mean nothing, other measures will evolve, which is why even the best-intentioned of committees will, from time to time, spawn its cliques and launch heated disputes over archaic matters that, in any other context, would have long been forgotten. The same is true of the boarding school which, over the dismal centuries, has developed a certain culture all its own, with a language indended to pass all understanding and attitiudes and practices to match. This is unsurprising as every new intake will, being young and disoriented, eagerly mimic their seniors, and so also learn those words and attitudes and practices which, miserably or otherwise, will more accurately reflect the weight of history than the Guardian's style-guide and, to contemporary eyes and ears, seem outlandish, beastly and deplorably wicked. Which, of course, it all is. But however much we might regret it, and urge headteachers to get up on Sundays and preach about how we should all be tolerant, not kill anyone unnecessarily, and take pity on the oiks, it won't make the blindest bit of difference. William Golding may, according to psychologists, have overstated his case but I doubt that many 20th Century boarders would agree with them. Instead, they might look to Shakespeare, who cheerfully exploits differences of sex and race and belief and ability to arm his bullies, murderers, fraudsters and tyrants and remains celebrated to this day,  Admittedly, this is mostly opinion, borne only of my own regrettable experience and, because I had that experience and heard those words (though, being naive and small-townish, i didn't understand them till much later) and saw and suffered a heap of brutishness*, that might make my opinion both unfair and biased.  If so, then I can only say it's the least that those institutions deserve. Sure, the schools themselves don't willingly foster that culture, which is wholly contrary to everything in the brochures, but there's not much they can do about it without posting staff permanently in corridors and dormitories and washrooms, which would, I'd suggest, create a whole other set of problems, not least financial. So, like any other business, they take care of the money and keep aloof from the rest. That, to my mind, is the problem. They've turned something into a business that really shouldn't be a business. Education is one thing, raising a child is another, and limited-liability corporations, however charitable, tend not to make the best parents. And so, in retrospect, I'm inclined not to blame the students either (though, for years after, I eagerly read the my Old School magazine, my heart doing a little dance at every black-edged announcement of a yachting tragedy, avalanche or coup). They get chucked into this swamp where they have to learn to fend for themselves and so many, naturally, will behave like predators in an attempt to fit in. Not all, certainly. Some will keep their heads down and hope not to be noticed while others, if they have a particular talent, might find that it protects them. But that leaves more than enough to keep the toxic culture alive, and it is no surprise at all that when they emerge they appear damaged to the outside world. For that's exactly what they are. They might, and sometimes do, improve once returned to the normal stream of life if given time and support, and that's good. But the damage lasts, all the same, and isn't a reason to vote for them. * Not, if it helps to disappoint any lawyers, at Dulwich, though there's nothing in the allegations that I didn't instantly recognise, 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...