Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

The American Political Thread

947K views 22K replies 68 participants last post by  Vader101 
#1 ·
Something I've noted several times is that, while most of us agree it's important to be informed about Canadian politics and to be an engaged citizen, the fact is that Canadian politics are generally pretty boring (this can be a good thing, IMO). The Americans, on the other hand, have turned the dysfunction of their political system into an entertainment industry (although it appears Harper, et al., are determined to reduce the Canadian system to the same level).

So I thought I'd start a thread for discussion of the Reality TV show they call American Politics.

I'll start with this posting I saw on another forum, with respect to the Republican's policies on women's health care, especially with regard to contraception and abortion:
After years and years and years of specifically targeting homophobes, racists, bigots, religious zealots, anti-intellectuals and sociopaths why should we be at all shocked that the GOP picked up a ****load of misogynists along the way?
 
#61 ·
When I lived in New York City, I helped a reform Democrat (he would be in the NDP if he were in Canada) get elected to Congress in my congressional district. That was in the Fall. When I was home from university in Dec. he was already working on his re-election bid by going around the district to meet people. Now, sadly, the emphasis is upon raising money for the next campaign as soon as you are elected to Congress. All 435 members of the House of Representatives are up for election every two years, with only about 30-35 senators from the US Senate up for election in that election.

I am very upset over the creation of the Super PACs that, at least in the Republican primaries, seem to be funded by a few very wealthy individuals. Again, while I don't support most of Ron Paul's views, I do respect the fact that he does not have a Super PAC funding his campaign.
 
#62 · (Edited)
The fact that politicians of my preference are in the minority is not at all surprising to me.

I'm not sure I understand the latter half of what you are saying, but perhaps we have a slight miscommunication between us. Certainly, my views will likely change over a 30, 40 or 50 year horizon. But I would hope that a particular politician's overall view or vision of the country/province/state/city/what-have-you would not change dramatically during their term--even though some of the promises they made during their campaign may change or not come to fruition.
Could certainly be the case...

But therein lies the rub... either they communicate the party line (in order to appeal to their voter base) or they move to another party (if they are so convicted... in a Canadian context which is out of place for this thread) ... or at least their communications are carefully crafted in such regard (i.e. being part of a party but disagreeing with specific policy and effectively communicating it while remaining within the party context, particularly difficult when the party forms the government BTW).

So... like with the upcoming NDP leadership race where Mulcair seems to want to move the party more to the "centre" for electoral success it seems that the old guard (e.g. Broadbent) are against this and there can be a fundamental shift in policy and "overall view" in a very short period of time "par example" if Mulcair wins the leadership.

Hope that explains what I am talking about... it is a very complex subject indeed and difficult to talk about in an internet forum post in a way that would not require much more space.

Sorry that this post is out of context for American politics... it kind of drifted that way... don't mean to derail... :eek:

So it seems like Romney vs. Obama will be the ticket... any guesses as to the victor and the degree of margin of victory?
 
#63 ·
The fact that politicians of my preference are in the minority is not at all surprising to me.

I'm not sure I understand the latter half of what you are saying, but perhaps we have a slight miscommunication between us. Certainly, my views will likely change over a 30, 40 or 50 year horizon. But I would hope that a particular politician's overall view or vision of the country/province/state/city/what-have-you would not change dramatically during their term--even though some of the promises they made during their campaign may change or not come to fruition.
not at all surprising to me either, as good leaders are certainly, very few and far between.
 
#64 ·
anyone see this?
As It Lobbies For Tax Holiday, Apple Admits Hoarding Cash Overseas To Avoid Paying Taxes | ThinkProgress

Apple is among the companies that make up WinAmerica, a coalition of corporations lobbying Congress for a repatriation holiday. The companies have argued that the holiday would boost economic growth and job creation by allowing them to bring money back either without paying taxes or at a lower rate than the current 35%.
Sound familiar? Corporations crying to the government for leniency on taxes, whispering sweet nothings into the ears of libertarians everywhere with that excited gasp of.... wait for it... job creation!!!!

Oh but...
There’s little evidence, however, that the holiday would have that effect, even as it has gained favor with Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates. Congress approved a similar holiday in 2004, only to watch companies use it to pay dividends to shareholders before promptly cutting jobs. Kristen Forbes, a member of the Council of Economic Advisers when the 2004 holiday was approved, said it “didn’t accomplish the stated goals of bringing jobs and investment to the US,’’ and afterward, corporations stashed even more money overseas in anticipation of another future holiday.
Further, at a time when the country’s effective corporate tax rate is at a 40-year low (companies that make up WinAmerica are already paying low rates), such a holiday would cost the U.S. $80 billion over the next decade.
Well slap me sillehhh...
 
#65 ·
Sound familiar? Corporations crying to the government for leniency on taxes, whispering sweet nothings into the ears of libertarians everywhere with that excited gasp of.... wait for it... job creation!!!!

Oh but...


Well slap me sillehhh...
I don't care if they create jobs or not. That isn't the responsibility of the companies. However, taxes are too high because the government spends too much and they should be cut--both corporate and personal.
 
#66 ·
"So it seems like Romney vs. Obama will be the ticket... any guesses as to the victor and the degree of margin of victory?" My prediction, scrature, is Pres. Obama will win with 325 electoral votes. We shall see.
 
#70 ·
I don't care if they create jobs or not. That isn't the responsibility of the companies.
I'm glad you understand this; I wish more conservative supporters would quit using the mantra of job creation to justify the asinine policies they espouse. The responsibility of corporations is to generate profits for their share-holders. Nothing else.

Therefore, if we as a society want corporations to behave in certain ways (and not others), we have to make it unprofitable to do the things we don't want them to do, and profitable to do the things we want them to do. Governments can play a role here (by legislating against the most egregious behaviours and enforcing large fines for infractions, and possibly by taxing less egregious but still undesirable actions). But the biggest influence is going to be the economic choices customers make: we've got to be willing to buy products made by companies doing "the right things" (even if they're more expensive), and refuse to buy from companies doing "the wrong things" (even if they're offering products or services for less than their competitors).

This is why the Wal-Martification of our economy is a serious problem. Consumers have been trained to look for the "best deal" without thinking about the impacts those purchases have on our society and our ecosystem. I see this as another problem Governments could help with: a government supported web-site with consumer information about the corporate behaviours of all the corporations operating in Canada would be a very valuable tool for people like me who want to be informed consumers, but don't always have the time, energy or expertise to search for the relevant info and critically evaluate the sources.
 
#71 ·
And they will en masse, continue to look for the best deal. This whole notion that we suddenly start forcing corporations to act responsibly by our buying choices as a solution to all the ails the corporate world is for morons. It has been done on a very limited rare case, but everytime sometime suggests this as an actual valid solution, it makes me laugh.

And yes it's about time one of them finally owned up to this great sham of corp tax cuts = job creation.

It's merely syphoning money from our pockets into exec bonuses.
 
#72 ·
And they will en masse, continue to look for the best deal. This whole notion that we suddenly start forcing corporations to act responsibly by our buying choices as a solution to all the ails the corporate world is for morons. It has been done on a very limited rare case, but everytime sometime suggests this as an actual valid solution, it makes me laugh.
I guess it would make you laugh if you didn't understand it at all. And that appears to be the case.
 
#74 ·
I'm glad you understand this; I wish more conservative supporters would quit using the mantra of job creation to justify the asinine policies they espouse. The responsibility of corporations is to generate profits for their share-holders. Nothing else.
Right, but this doesn't mean that everyone operating a corporation is a maniac either.

The whole idea of job creation will work ONLY when the company needs to hire more people--nobody decides to hire someone because they get a subsidy on their wages, or some other government kickback, or directly because of tax breaks. This is not to say that tax breaks can't create jobs if that freed-up money is used to expand the business, or if the tax breaks encourage businesses to locate in a particular country. Just that there's no direct link.

Dollar democracy is particularly effective here--more effective in many cases than any government regulation. A good example is a recent California regulation micro-managing the size of an egg-laying chicken's nest. The net result was an exodus of egg-farmers from California. Californians now buy more eggs imported from other states. On the other hand, watch the number of brands of eggs now for sale from free-run chickens in Canadian stores. I'm willing to spend a buck on the belief that a free-run hen is happier, and as more people buy these eggs, the price is coming down closer to that of regular eggs. Organic milk likewise.

I would also advise people who believe hat a particular company is robbing them blind to buy stock in it. Hate the banks? Buy bank stock. Not only will you directly benefit from their policies, but you have an opportunity to modify them as well.
 
#75 ·
"So it seems like Romney vs. Obama will be the ticket... any guesses as to the victor and the degree of margin of victory?" My prediction, scrature, is Pres. Obama will win with 325 electoral votes. We shall see.
Not sure about the margin (mostly because I don't remember the numbers) but I do think Obama will win, but with a slimmer margin than in 2008.
 
#76 ·
Not sure about the margin (mostly because I don't remember the numbers) but I do think Obama will win, but with a slimmer margin than in 2008.
Sonal, in 2008, then Sen. Obama received 365 electoral votes to 173 for McCain. This year I am taking some of those "blue states" (Democratic) and changing them to "red states" (Republican). Still, with only 270 needed to win, Pres. Obama is reelected. We shall see.

Paix, mon amie.
 
#77 ·
Sonal, in 2008, then Sen. Obama received 365 electoral votes to 173 for McCain. This year I am taking some of those "blue states" (Democratic) and changing them to "red states" (Republican). Still, with only 270 needed to win, Pres. Obama is reelected. .
It ill take nothing short of a miracle to re-elect Obama, but that miracle may come in the form of Mitt Romney, the Bob Dole of the current crop of Republicans. Given a Paul Ryan, Obama would be decimated.
 
#78 ·
The lines are being drawn already in the US. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI), the aforementioned by Macfury, presented his 2013 budget plan on Capitol Hill March 20th.

This just in from the Washington Post --

This year’s GOP measure would produce deficit estimates that are significantly lower than a comparable measure passed by the House a year ago, claiming deficit cuts totaling $3.3 trillion — spending cuts of $5.3 trillion tempered by $2 trillion in lower taxes

The lower deficit figures build on cuts to annual agency budgets imposed last year and rely on new savings comes from benefit programs outside Social Security and the costly Medicare and Medicaid health care programs for the elderly and the poor.

On taxes, the measure calls for eliminating a host of tax deductions and credits in order to produce a far simpler income tax code with just two rates for individuals: 10 percent and 25 percent. But Ryan doesn’t say the income levels at which the new rates would apply.

The only way to cut the top tax rate to 25 percent is to essentially end the tax deductions for health care coverage, mortgage interest expenses and charitable contributions, even as Republicans would keep the temporary lower rates for capital gains and dividends that mainly benefit very high-income taxpayers.

Almost half of Ryan’s spending cuts come from $2.5 trillion in cuts to federal health care programs — including repeal of Obama’s signature health care law — over the coming decade.

This year, under pressure from conservatives to cut even more, Ryan doubled down on cuts to food stamps, student loans, welfare, and farm subsidies to small non-corporate farmers.
 
#79 ·
It ill take nothing short of a miracle to re-elect Obama, but that miracle may come in the form of Mitt Romney, the Bob Dole of the current crop of Republicans. Given a Paul Ryan, Obama would be decimated.
Pres. Obama and VP Biden vs Paul Ryan for president and Rand Paul for vice president. Now, that would be an election that would have the people of America singing "Which side are you on?"

Which Side Are You On - YouTube

I shall pray for you, Macfury. Paix, mon ami.

Pete Seeger Leads Amazing Grace - YouTube
 
#80 ·
I'm not so sure that Obama will win, as it appeared to me from the moment of his election that his own party was against him..I am not so sure things have changed all that much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top