Jump to content

Recommended Posts

heres a theme to get the colonials involved


As an ex student of Merican Politics ( you know what I am on about Mockney Piers ) , I am still at a loss at the popularity of Obama - Skimmed thro his policies but still seem to think he is getting the Anti Clinton vote with a bit of novelty value / PR in the mix - I really cant see why he should be so apparently popular, given the vapid nauture of his agenda


anyone ?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/2922-obama-vs-clinton/
Share on other sites

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> heres a theme to get the colonials involved

>

> As an ex student of Merican Politics ( you know

> what I am on about Mockney Piers ) , I am still at

> a loss at the popularity of Obama - Skimmed thro

> his policies but still seem to think he is getting

> the Anti Clinton vote with a bit of novelty value

> / PR in the mix - I really cant see why he should

> be so apparently popular, given the vapid nauture

> of his agenda

>

> anyone ?


Can't ignore the fact that he's a man of dual racial heritage who might be POTUS (thanks West Wing), would the 'vapidity' of his agenda be a way of appealing to the broadest and most inclusive lot of voters.

A black man in the White House? I'm up for it.

I think that Obama's popularity has a lot to do with his platform of "change" and there is no doubt the Americans need change and hope. There is something about him which also seems like a safe pair of hands, a quality which JFK had in abundance. In addition, he is tackling the race issue which JFK managed to do with the help of his brother. Let's hope he surrounds himself with good foreign policy folks (he should ask Hillary to take on that role but you know what the answer would be!!!) There is still huge support for Hillary because many Americans feel that a win for her would also put Bill back in the driver's seat.

You don't want to go reading manifestos and policies Snorky. You know as well as I that damned few* vote for anything sensible like that. There may be almost no daylight between the clinton and obama platforms, but it's all about presentation and sound bites and of course Iraq.

In Clinton you have a classic hard bitten politician, she's prevaricative and evasive. Not that Obama's entirely free of that, but he feels fresher, less in hock to those vested interests. When he speaks of change its believable.


While ill the other day and flicking through the purgatory that is daytime tv, I somehow got as far as BBC Parliament that was showing a full obama speech. He's a very good orator, he's earnest, as I say believable and speaks of hope rather than of fear.

I found myself quietly impressed by the man.


Aaaah forgedaboudit...the Daily Mash as ever says it best. http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/clinton-slump-shows-u.s.-still-not-ready-to-vote-for-a-harpie-20080104634/


*well, in the US and UK, the likes of Spain and France are very different.

I hate to think it, but I reckon the Obama/Clinton battle, Homeric though it is, will leave both candidates bloody and bowed, and McCain will sail in. He is less terrifyingly Right than Bush on the social agenda, but really pretty conservative generally.


Sorry Snorky, to return to your actual thread - it seems a common phenomenon that people vote for just for change when they're fed up with the status quo, regardless of what the change really means. Could we argue Blair and New Labour were just that? - a young, charismatic new leader, one in the eye for the Tories, etc etc? I might be stretching a point here using the wisdom of hindsight...

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

    • But all those examples sell a wide variety of things,  and mostly they are well spread out along Lordship Lane. These two shops both sell one very specific thing, albeit in different flavours, and are just across the road from each other. I don't think you can compare the distribution of shops in Roman times to the distribution of shops in Lordship Lane in the twenty first century. Well, you can, but it doesn't feel very appropriate. Haa anybody asked the first shop how they feel? Are they happy about the "healthy competition" ?
    • ED is included in the 17 August closure set (or just possibly 15 August, depending on which part of the page you trust more) listed at https://metro.co.uk/2025/07/25/full-list-25-poundland-stores-confirmed-close-august-23753048/. Here incidentally are some snippets from their annual reports, at https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/02495645/filing-history. 2022: " during the period we opened 41 stores and closed 43 loss-making/under-performing stores.  At the period-end we were trading from 821 stores in the UK, IoM and ROI. ... "We renogotiated 82 leases in the year, saving on average 45% versus the prior lease agreement..." 2023: "We also continued to improve our market footprint through sourcing better store locations, opening 53 and closing 51 stores during the year." 2024:  "The ex-Wilco stores acquired in the prior year have formed a core part of this strategy to expand our store network.  We favour quality over quantity and during the period we opened 84 stores and closed 71 loss-making/under-performing ones."
    • Ha! After I posted this, I thought of lots more examples. Screwfix and the hardware store? Mrs Robinson and Jumping Bean? Chemists, plant shops, hairdressers...  the list goes on... it's good to have healthy competition  Ooooh! Two cheese shops
    • You've got a point.  Thinking Leyland and Screwfix too but this felt different.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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