Can't really blame the Iraqis for being interested now can we? Their lives are going to be affected by the outcome of this election more than anybody elses, including the average American.
Really? How's that going to work then, Pan?
Can we have some specific examples, please? Let's say...two specific examples, of how the outcome of the US Presidential election will affect the life of an average Iraqi, more so than it will affect the life of an average American. Quotes, proof, references, precedents, as you see fit.
...two examples isn't too many to expect in support of such a blanket statement, is it?
Can we have some specific examples, please? Let's say...two specific examples, of how the outcome of the US Presidential election will affect the life of an average Iraqi, more so than it will affect the life of an average American. Quotes, proof, references, precedents, as you see fit.
I shouldn't need to remind you that there are some significant differences between McCain's foreign policy and Obama's with respect to Iraq.
This is a matter of life and death for the Iraqis. The decision made by the next president will decide how many more Iraqis will die needlessly, and how many can be saved from this debacle of a foreign policy disaster...
That's the Iraqis...
Now let's see how Joe six pack will be affected shall we?
I guess his pocketbook could be affected perhaps depending on the monetary policies of the two candidates...
Maybe he'll have to drive a Saturn instead of a BMW or vice versa...
BIG F¤#%&ing DEAL!!! It's life and death for the Iraqis, everything else pales in comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brickhistory
But more than we wanted to grant you...
I will have my vote in due time my dear Brick, all in due time.
I shouldn't need to remind you that there are some significant differences between McCain's foreign policy and Obama's with respect to Iraq.
Maybe you shouldn't, but let's pretend I'm dumb, so perhaps you could, just to humour me, you know, in a specific kind of fashion. In fact, how about we make me an undecided American voter, and you're trying to convince me which way to vote. I want specifics.
Quote:
This is a matter of life and death for the Iraqis. The decision made by the next president will decide how many more Iraqis will die needlessly, and how many can be saved from this debacle of a foreign policy disaster...
Sorry, but what's a matter of life and death for the Iraqis? And what decision are we talking about? And how can we ensure that more Iraqis die needfully, rather than needlessly? Who decides what constitutes a needful death anyway?
Quote:
I guess his pocketbook could be affected perhaps depending on the monetary policies of the two candidates...
Maybe he'll have to drive a Saturn instead of a BMW or vice versa...
Yes, well, I'm fairly sure that Joe Six Pack doesn't drive a Beemer anyway, but in case he does, which specific monetary policies are you referring to?
Quote:
BIG F¤#%&ing DEAL!!! It's life and death for the Iraqis, everything else pales in comparison.
Hmm, a compelling argument indeed; but a bit light on the specifics, so I think at this point I'm still a swinging voter - hypothetically speaking, of course. In real life New Zealanders don't get to vote in the US elections, but then neither do Norwegians or Iraqis...which is probably the way it should be.
I cannot imagine why this is such a difficult concept for all of you to grasp.
The US president will decide the US strategy in the Iraq conflict one way or another.
Let's assume for a second that Obama's desire for an expedited withdrawal will result in the country falling into anarchy and civil war (as the Republicans would have you believe)... If this is the case, does this not prove my "blanket statement" that the elections have a very significant impact on the life of the average Iraqi???
Or on the other hand McCain's "stay the course, even if it takes a hundred years" policy will result in a prolonged conflict that further escalates tensions between moderate Iraqis and the occupying force.
I'm not arguing for McCain's policy or Obama's at the moment, I'm just saying that they're different and the choice of one or the other will result in very different, life-altering outcomes for the average Iraqi. It is life and death.
The same cannot be said about how the average US citizen will be affected.
I don't know if any posters on the forum regularly watch BBC World Service but if you did you would be forgiven for believing that Obama is the only candidate in the forthcoming presidential election. McCain does not exist.
I hope the coverage in the USA, where the voters are, is generally less biased?
I agree. I do watch the BBC's World broadcast and it is pretty much all Obama, all the time.
The biasness aside, even I squirm a little in that it's a "World" broadcast, yet 2/3s of it is devoted to US happenings. While I can understand covering the election or major events, why would a tornado somewhere merit coverage? Or many other newsworthy, but equally very local stories seeing air time?
For what it's worth, the major broadcast networks run along these lines (not set in concrete, but generally):
NBC/MSNBC - All Obama, all the time
ABC - more Obama than McCain
CBS - Much more Obama than McCain
NPR/PBS (Our 'public,' i.e., taxpayer financed) broadcasts - All Obama, all the time
Fox - All McCain all the time, unless they are attacking Obama.
Also, to throw a little more fairness into the very current events, the Democratic Convention is the big story.
I expect the Republican Convention to garner as much air/press time in two weeks. Although, I expect the skewed coverage to continue.
The 24/7, 365 coverage is tiresome.
The next candidate and round will no doubt start either immediately after the general election in November or after the Inauguration in January.
Probably the reason for that brick goes something like this.
Chances of Obama winning said election - - - 65% *
Chances of him being blown away prior to - - - 02% *
Chances of McCain winning said election - - - 45% *
I mean realistically speaking, which fair minded non-blinded citizen would vote for more of the crap that has been poured on their shoulders over the last few republican years !!!
Everyone loves a winner
* Figures for purely representative purposes only, no demographic or scientific content or significance applys: ok:
Speaking for the rest of the world (yes there are people out there). We are all sick to death of it
It should be a domestic thing like American football where the rest of the world have zero interest!
Orangputi, who made you the spokesperson for the rest of the world?
I certainly didn't vote for you.
Why, being sick to death, did you click on a thread called 'American presidential elections'? You a masochist or something?
Like many here, I think that the tv coverage is a tad excessive, but that doesn't in any way negate the fact that what happens politically in the USA and Russia has direct and indirect worldwide impact. On my life, and on yours in Asia.
Same way that what happens in UK, German and French politics has a major impact on the rest of the EU.
Or China and India, emerging powers that are already making their influence felt.
African politics have a direct influence on the amount of asylum seekers fleeing their countries and looking for an abode elsewhere. That impacts us.
You might not be interested, and none of us have a say in other countries' internal politics, but that doesn't mean we all want to live like ostriches.
Speak for yourself man, don't presume to speak for others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by West Coast
The irony of it...a three a.m. text message. Another swipe at Hillary.
Fire engines racing down Broadway to a fire in New Jersey woke me up at 4 AM on saturday, and when jet lag prevented further slumber, I switched on the television. Biden had just broken and several channels referred to the same thing as Westie here. No doubt a minor point, but in what way was the 3 AM text message a swipe at Hilary please?
Another point. If what is linked to here about foreign contributions to Obama's campaign is true, I can easily understand why they (the furriners) are doing it. I can also understand why at first glance this would bother Americans. More so if it is against the law.
Then again, is it realistic in this global world of ours to expect elections to be a strictly national affair? The famed links between the Bush family and the Saudis come to mind. As does Haliburton. Or business leaders contributing heavily to campaigns. With money made in international endeavours, money made in cooperation with foreign business leaders who have their own special interests. With money streams having become truly international, can and should we expect our elections to remain strictly national?
Above examples are no direct campaign contributions perhaps, but doesn't it essentially amount to the same thing?
Foreign money influencing a local election.
Is it something to be fought or something to be recognised as a reality?
the crap that has been poured on their shoulders over the last few republican years !!!
That BO propaganda found a home with you. The reason I'm going to vote for McCain is that he's not Bush. Within the party there are plenty of differing voices, Ron Paul and Bush couldn't be further apart yet both are Republicans and subscribe to common themes. Either you're not as well introduced to the US political process or you're simply spouting off.
Fire engines racing down Broadway to a fire in New Jersey woke me up at 4 AM on saturday, and when jet lag prevented further slumber, I switched on the television. Biden had just broken and several channels referred to the same thing as Westie here. No doubt a minor point, but in what way was the 3 AM text message a swipe at Hilary please?
Juud-
There was a Hillary Clinton campaign television ad some months ago that went something like: "Who do you want to be answering the phone call at 3 am?" Who do the Kids Want Answering the Phone at 3 am?
I didn't actually pick up on that connection as some here did, but now, I would tend to agree that the timing was very specifically chosen precisely as a dig at Hillary Clinton.
While this link is not the ad... I ran across it while trying to google you the ad. The second video has a small bit from the ad embedded in it.
I made it out of my own sandals. Does that stuff have mind-altering qualities?
El G has one guy with a 65% chance, another guy with a 45% chance and I make that a 110% chance in all. Okay, 112% if you want to lump in the bit about Obama dying. Is this socialist math, like when Fidel or Kim Il Sung used to win an election with 99.9% of the vote?
Surely some of those Iraquis must die usefully? It would hurt my feelings to think that every guy we spent millions to turn into a grease spot with one of our over-priced PGMs had died uselessly even if he were a fully paid-up member of Al Qua'ida. Aren't there some people out there who really need killing? They cannot all be innocent, surely?
Personally, no, I am not so big on going around just killing folks but to just condemn killing out of hand, isn't that being sort of intolerant? Killers need love too, you know.
What a mess we are in with the wrong candidate in the lead! The liberal media is drooling over Obama but McCain is leading in the polls. How can this be? Someone needs to tell those would-be voters to get back on message here! This could end up getting those poor Iraquis in real trouble!
Juud, you are trying to tell me that New York City firemen actually bother about what happens over there in "Joisey"? I could see them going over in their spare time with marshmallows but otherwise surely it is so that a nice, brisk fire could only improve the view from the east bank of the Hudson River looking across to the west. "Like the back of an old radio," as some Manhattan-based wag once said.
Most of the "news" coverage of the Demcratic Convention seemed to focus on Mrs Obama's dress choice and how sweet the little darlings were. Those must have been far tougher choices for seasoned newsmen to go with than say; Gas Prices, Iraq, Plunging home prices, bleak economy, Russian Imperialism, Iranian Nuclear capability and Chinese domination of world markets.
Brick's summary of the news channel output demonstrates that they might as well report directly to their respective political masters, because they certainly gave up on reporting news some time ago.
Linear Mode
