Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Iorek wrote:
A president who enforces the ideals of personal responsibility, who gives the needy a hand-up but doesn't coddle them, who understands that only through hard work and sacrifice can we improve ourselves and maintain our high standard of living.

There is the problem right there and whats been lacking. Get one of these guys in there and then we may be getting somewhere.

Killkrazy, EVERY country should be angling to have a leader like that. If you don't look after your own national interests, no one will. And then you become Haiti.

Evil Eli wrote:The only thing people need to about Palin is that she is a MILF and I would hit it two times.

I think she's a man, baby.

Look at that jaw. I bet there's an Adam's apple under those Neiman-Marcus high-collared suits.

Iorek wrote:Killkrazy, EVERY country should be angling to have a leader like that. If you don't look after your own national interests, no one will. And then you become Haiti.

I am reminded that Britain's reward for supporting the USA in the GWoT was steel tariffs.

dietrich wrote:If the Republican party wakes up, they'll realize that to get back the White House and the Capital (where Congress sits, for those outside the US or inside the US and forgetting seventh grade), they need to get away from the right-wing evangelicals and move more to the center. That said, I don't think that means 'forget conservative roots', but I think it means 'distance yourself from the bible-thumpers.' Republicans need to get back to fiscal responsibility for the government, real homeland security (securing the borders, inspecting ships - not flag-waving support the troops motions), helping the middle class (and not just the top of the tax bracket - takes under Ike were like 70% at the top), and other 'moderate' issues.

I agree, although it depends on your local politics. Here in PA, I live at ground zero...one of the big suburban counties around Philly. Carry those, you win PA, win PA and you have a hefty chunk of EVs. My county was always described as a "GOP stronghold" until this election. I believe I saw that Obama won by double-digits. In another, similar county, Obama won by something like 20 points. It's a pretty amazing shift, and I don't think it's strictly because of population shifts like in Virginia, as I understand it.

Social conservatism doesn't play here. Fiscal conservatism would. PA is usually described as a "purple" state, but it's gone blue for three straight elections now. If the GOP wants to win PA or other northern states like Ohio, it probably needs to refocus...or at the very least do a better job sending the right messages to the right parts of the country. That's why I'm not as sure as some about Palin's future on a national level. She's too right-wing for the northeast and West Coast.

On the other hand (and to the point I'm trying to make), I'm sure droning on about the liberal media elite plays well in the deep South and parts of the Midwest. The GOP has some real decisions to make.

Anyway, back on topic, everyone should read the Newsweek article on the race. It's long (7 parts) but it does briefly address Palin and her preparation for her interviews, etc. Sounds like her handlers didn't do a good job, but she didn't help herself either.

Kilkrazy wrote:I read in the paper that John McCain's team were astonished at Palin's ignorance of these kind of issues. Which brings up the questions;

Why did they pick her?

Having picked her, why didn't they give her some useful briefing material?

Again, read the Newsweek articles. They pretty much give you the blow-by-blow. I thought it was interesting that although they confirmed it was the evangelicals who blocked Liebermann or Ridge, it was McCain decided on Palin. He wasn't strong-armed into it like I thought.

I was recently involved in collecting electoral data in an area populated almost exclusively by degree level students. You'd be surprised how many didn't know their own nationality.

Go on, how many?

I didn't keep an exact count but it was quite a lot.

I've worked with a number of college grads that struggle to handle addition. I can believe nearly any amount of ignorance in the American public.

George Spiggott wrote:I was recently involved in collecting electoral data in an area populated almost exclusively by degree level students. You'd be surprised how many didn't know their own nationality.

That isn't surprising. Nationality isn't something which is easy to pin down once considered as more than just "Where are you from?" If you're a random combination of German, French, Italian, and Irish what nationality are you? Does it even matter?

dietrich wrote:I've worked with a number of college grads that struggle to handle addition. I can believe nearly any amount of ignorance in the American public.

Nobody does basic math anymore. That's what calculators have done to us. Most of the math major I knows are terrible at addition, but can solve multi-variate differentials with their eyes closed.

dogma wrote:

George Spiggott wrote:I was recently involved in collecting electoral data in an area populated almost exclusively by degree level students. You'd be surprised how many didn't know their own nationality.

That isn't surprising. Nationality isn't something which is easy to pin down once considered as more than just "Where are you from?" If you're a random combination of German, French, Italian, and Irish what nationality are you? Does it even matter?

It does if you're registering to vote.

Most people aren't a random combination of multiple nationalities. My family on both sides can be traced back to the Napoleonic Wars before you get a Frenchman marrying in. Then I spoil it by marrying a Japanese and my brother marries an American. Maybe it's different in the USA.

They say you can define a Londoner by the fact he will tell you he is a Londoner.

Kilkrazy wrote:
It does if you're registering to vote.

Most people aren't a random combination of multiple nationalities. My family on both sides can be traced back to the Napoleonic Wars before you get a Frenchman marrying in. Then I spoil it by marrying a Japanese and my brother marries an American. Maybe it's different in the USA.

They say you can define a Londoner by the fact he will tell you he is a Londoner.

Ah, I didn't notice George was from England. It is different in the USA. Extreme mixes of nationality are very common. For example, I'm Czech, Polish, Irish, Cherokee.

Also, nationality doesn't factor in to voter registration here. At least not where I live, it could be different in other states.

Ja. In the US lots of folks have mixed nationalities/ethnicities. My grandparents are of Irish, French, Swedish and Canadian descent.

dogma wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:
It does if you're registering to vote.

Most people aren't a random combination of multiple nationalities. My family on both sides can be traced back to the Napoleonic Wars before you get a Frenchman marrying in. Then I spoil it by marrying a Japanese and my brother marries an American. Maybe it's different in the USA.

They say you can define a Londoner by the fact he will tell you he is a Londoner.

Ah, I didn't notice George was from England. It is different in the USA. Extreme mixes of nationality are very common. For example, I'm Czech, Polish, Irish, Cherokee.

Also, nationality doesn't factor in to voter registration here. At least not where I live, it could be different in other states.

Do you mean that anyone living in the USA can vote, regardless of their nationality?

Ah, no. You certainly need to be a US citizen to vote.

Most Americans use nationality and ethnicity as interchangeable terms. What I meant was that, in Illinois where I live, you aren't asked questions about your ethnicity when you register to vote.

You must be a citizen of the United States to vote in a US election. There's a couple exceptions, you have to be 18, felons can't vote, and anyone declared mentally incompetent in a court of law can't vote either. I think you can't be drunk while you vote, but it's alright to be a drunk.

Dogma meant that it doesn't matter what country of origin your family originally came from. America is a land of immigrants, even the native americans came from Russia by way of the landbridge through Alaska (if you want to believe that - I guess othrewise, you believe that they were just created in America and were here waiting for the Europeans to come and brutalize - I mean civilize them. ).

dogma wrote:Ah, no. You certainly need to be a US citizen to vote.

Most Americans use nationality and ethnicity as interchangeable terms. What I meant was that, in Illinois where I live, you aren't asked questions about your ethnicity when you register to vote.

Okay.

Brits use nationality to mean which country you are a citizen of. Possibly we think less of ethnic differences between countries since we regard everywhere in Europe as "over there."

Interestingly, Irish citizens are allowed to vote in elections in the UK, and EU citizens are allowed to vote in local elections. In Kawasaki city, non-Japanese citizens are allowed to vote in local elections once they have been resident for three years.

We're still a young country. Everyone here except Native Americans think of themselves as having originally come from someplace else.

British, EU and Commonwealth (ex empire countries) citizens may vote in local and in some cases national elections with some restrictions. These students I encountered appeared to be confusing nationality and ethnicity as well.

I find when Americans do the 'I'm country X' thing quite odd. It is the source of much humour here in europe.

George Spiggott wrote:British, EU and Commonwealth (ex empire countries) citizens may vote in local and in some cases national elections with some restrictions. These students I encountered appeared to be confusing nationality and ethnicity as well.

I find when Americans do the 'I'm country X' thing quite odd. It is the source of much humour here in europe.

Yeah, though it’s not just an American thing, it’s really common in Australia too. I know a guy who’d never exhibited any Scottishness in the years I’d known him, but then wore a kilt for his wedding. Turns out one grandparent had emigrated from Scotland when he was two or three years old.

I think there’s a desire to be from somewhere, and when you live in a fairly new country your home just isn’t enough. So Americans and Australians like talking about their Polish/Scottish/German heritage, when really they’re just another white suburbanite.

Although -- at least in the U.S. -- not everyone uses their ethnic background as an phony affection. Plenty of people feel quite close to their given country, especially if they're only a generation or two removed. The families keep a lot of the food, traditions, language, etc. alive.

As Dietrich said, it's a land of immigrants...from its beginning straight through to today. My father's side probably arrived around the Revolutionary War. My mother's side arrived in the early 20th century. My wife arrived when she was a child. And all of those situations are completely common.

There's a lot the U.S. can learn from other countries. Americans tend not to think that, but it's true. However, I think our diversity here is something really unmatched around the world, and it's probably our nation's greatest strength.

gorgon wrote:Although -- at least in the U.S. -- not everyone uses their ethnic background as an phony affection. Plenty of people feel quite close to their given country, especially if they're only a generation or two removed. The families keep a lot of the food, traditions, language, etc. alive.

As Dietrich said, it's a land of immigrants...from its beginning straight through to today. My father's side probably arrived around the Revolutionary War. My mother's side arrived in the early 20th century. My wife arrived when she was a child. And all of those situations are completely common.

There's a lot the U.S. can learn from other countries. Americans tend not to think that, but it's true. However, I think our diversity here is something really unmatched around the world, and it's probably our nation's greatest strength.

No, your diversity is pretty much on par with most Western nations. It's certainly no more diverse than Australia or the UK, for instance.

It depends on how you define diversity.

There is a much higher proportion of non-white people in the USA for example, than in Europe.

Europeans don't count Hispanics as a separate racial/ethnic category.

Americans arrived from Europe in several massive waves of immigration much of which was in the period 1848-1900, whereas European immigration into the UK was on a smaller scale and happened over a longer period.

sebster wrote:No, your diversity is pretty much on par with most Western nations. It's certainly no more diverse than Australia or the UK, for instance.

Oh, it's not that other nations are homogenous. They're certainly not. And we're not at the apex of racial harmony, either. But I think you underestimate the level of immigration that's taken place here.

gorgon wrote:Oh, it's not that other nations are homogenous. They're certainly not. And we're not at the apex of racial harmony, either. But I think you underestimate the level of immigration that's taken place here.

No, I know the US has a strong immigrant population. I'm suggesting other developed countries have a lot as well.

Kilkrazy wrote:Europeans don't count Hispanics as a separate racial/ethnic category.

We don't have to many Hispanics, we have have Latinos.

gorgon wrote:But I think you underestimate the level of immigration that's taken place here.

Are we talking about overall immigration or recent?

Kilkrazy wrote:

Iorek wrote:Killkrazy, EVERY country should be angling to have a leader like that. If you don't look after your own national interests, no one will. And then you become Haiti.

I am reminded that Britain's reward for supporting the USA in the GWoT was steel tariffs.

Ha! I just did a report on that.

Yeah, we're douchebags. But then again, I think most people are douchebags, so it all works out.

You guys do have dicks in power, but not in the right way (Hello Nanny State!).