Hillary Clinton Is In...

I know Lincoln took on extended powers during the Civil War, but I assumed that after the war there was a return to what had gone before.

To me it does seem that whoever is President in some way becomes for the rest of the world a kind of metric or a lens through which we understand the mood of America. I think the President's role in terms of foreign relations is very important. Witness the Carter era and the progress made back then on the middle east.

I get what you say about the power being more political. It's like that here too. Voters often choose the party whose leader they like the best regardless of the local candidate.
But I think that might help Hilary - because a lot of women will surely vote for her just because she's a woman. And I hope she makes it because I would like to see more women leaders in this world. As well of course as the fact that I favour the Democrats as far as US politics concerns me. (which it does actually for reasons we know well).

 

Not all the way back, and... as you probably know, we've been in a lot of wars, large and small.

Mitch McConnell has shifted the balance of power somewhat by interpreting "advise and consent" in a new way. Key Presidential appointments have always required Senate approval, in order to prevent incompetent individuals from receiving those jobs as political payback. McConnell was the first Senate leader to decide that being liberal is a form of incompetence that disqualifies a person for a job.

That's unfortunate, because a lot of Americans regarded Bush (2nd) as a dangerous fucking idiot the whole time he was in office. I went to Canada one time during those years, and local people wanted to make angry comments to me about him. All I could do was put up my hands and say, "I know all that! I voted against him twice, and did volunteer work for the other candidate! I did all I could do!"

Putin surely pays more attention to the US President than anyone else, just because of nuclear weapons. He will surely never talk to McConnell or Boehner. His own ego would not allow it.

Definitely a factor to be considered. Obama didn't increase the black vote much, because that group always votes 95% Democratic anyway. The turnout was higher.

 

I know the feeling, although it's not as extreme as in the case of Bush jnr. When I see David Cameron in action I just cringe.

 

It's hard to get much news coverage of a leader's domestic actions unless you live in that country, so Americans can't possibly see Cameron the same way you do. We don't see him making a lot of big mistakes on the world stage, and that's about all we know about him.

I'll trust your judgment on him, since our general political views are so similar.

You can trust me that the younger Bush's domestic policies and leadership sucked just as bad as his international actions. When people from other countries wanted to imply that I was somehow responsible for him because my country elected him, I was very tempted at times to say, "What do you expect me to do, assassinate him? That's illegal, you know!" Morally, I could only hope that he would die of natural causes in office.

I would assume that international coverage of Mitch McConnell is very limited, since he was elected by nobody but the voters of Kentucky (a state most Americans don't care about), even though he has become one of the most important people in Washington. He scares the shit out of me. When I was a child, every important Southern politician and business leader was just like him; white, male, rich, ruthless, completely without compassion or mercy, unwilling to listen to anyone with a different opinion. I once thought people like him had been left in the dust, relegated to the history books.

If you want to know what Hillary is really like, look at things she said and wrote much earlier in life, before she learned to censor herself for political advantage. She's always been much more liberal than her husband, and Bill isn't bad.

 

It's definitely true that we see a lot less of what goes on in terms of domestic American politics than Americans, and the reverse is also true.

My reasons for disliking Cameron are many. The Conservatives are the rough equivalent of Republicans in the US. They rule on behalf of corporate interest, and generally have the agenda of un-doing whatever social measures have been taken by previous governments in the past. The latest thing, although it's strongly denied, is the wish they have to privatize our national health service and replace it with something resembling the US model. (note that the USA spends 5 times more on healthcare than we do, and has worse outcomes).

Cameron personally represents a privileged monied elite, mainly ex-Etonians who think they were born just to rule. They are ideologues who hate anything resembling socialism. Upper class morons of the worst type. One day, the truth may emerge about alleged Westminster paedophile rings. We've had some limited revelations already, and the powers that be are determined to keep the lid on this, but in time it may all come out.

Now and then he'll do something to try to prove to the electorate that he's just an ordinary chap. The most recent such farce was when he gave a photo opportunity to some journalists whilst he ate lunch. He was having a hot dog (doubt he's had one before) which he proceeded to try to eat with a knife and fork. I can't say how long it took him to work out which knife and fork to use. :dizzy2:

Anyway, in short what we've had over the last 5 years has been a concerted attack on the poor, and on ordinary people through various policies, whilst at the same time we were told it's 'austerity' for all, big tax cuts have been given to the richest.
Cameron also wanted to go into Syria, but got voted down thank heavens, or we'd now be in yet another pointless war.

Enough anyway, or I'll just go on and on.

McConnell's name was unknown to me before I read your post, but I'm going to do some reading up on the web.

 

I didn't know half the harm Thatcher had done until I started reading about it from UK forum members.

Wow. The BBC has let you down. This guy was causing big problems for Obama even before the Senate majority went Republican, because of filibuster rules.

Maybe you can find a YouTube interview clip that gives you a feel for how aggressive and vindictive he is. I don't think just reading an article would fully get that aspect across. He's one of those dangerous adversaries who believes that compromise is an intolerable weakness, not a technique for getting things done, and never misses a chance to kick an enemy when he is down.

I don't know what part of Kentucky he is from, but he acts like somebody from eastern Kentucky. That's a tough environment where trying to get along with people doesn't get you very far in life. Nothing there but coal mines, environmental destruction, corporate greed, and poverty.

If Hillary wins, all her key appointments will have to go through him for approval. He will want all those people to be individuals who are likely to fail and make her look ineffective.

 

Oh Lord!

I think Hilary is Double Agent... Vote Democrats but Republicans will rule.... amen

It's the Monsanto thing she is in bed with, and never was there a more heinous thing in the history of our planet than Monsanto.

Then there are other forebodings in her itinerary that just cannot allow me to vote for her.

I was a single parent under the Thatcher/Reagan regime which led us into the 'Me' generation that now causes so much suffering and is the root of the trouble we are in....

I am going to vote for the Green Party, and heaven knows in the USA they cannot even get their act together to get a decent website!

Heaven have mercy upon us all...

We need to change our thinking, and our political system or else we are all doomed!!!

 

I agree 100%. But how do we go about changing our political system? What's the first step? It seems like radical change is what's needed most, but too many Americans have become apathetic and given up. We've become a nation of divided states (not united), so living here is like living in two countries, not one. Again, what's the first step (since voting is just a band-aid on a seriously infected wound)?

 

First step is get organized. If every likeminded person is hopeless and has kind of become apathetic about US politics nothing will change even if all of you together would be a gigantic group.
If no one knows how many people would be willing to really try something new it is certain no third party can make a difference. So everybody will keep voting democrats and say and feel hey i did the best i could to change this country for the better

 

I'm all down for a female president. but hilary seems batshit. But compared to the other shitty runners. Fuck I've never been so disinterested in the candidates. I just hope bill gets to be the first man lady

 

I think Hilary's pretty much all we've got, and I think she's electable. The Republican problem is that they have to pander so much to the far right to win the primary that it's really hard to get back into the middle from there to win the actual election. Hilary is moderate enough and the Democrat pool isn't really big. I think she's got more than a fighting chance.

 

Who is we? America or the Democrats?

 

People here, people who advocate for women's rights, gay rights, reproductive rights, worker's rights, rights of the poor, issues with racism, and so on unless you are actually thinking that a republican will be better for our nation. Um, okay?

 

I was a part of the Occupy Movement (we are the 99%). I marched, protested, wrote a bunch of brutally honest essays on my blog, yet America does not seem to have changed all that much. In fact, I've noticed more homeless people on the streets than ever before (many of them still had jobs during the Occupy Movement).

This makes me think that we (the 99%) don't really have a say in how this country works. So what's the next step? Seems like voting for the lesser of 2 evils (Democrat) is the only option that counts. Another Reagan or Bush ain't gonna improve the lives of the 99%. I'm just sayin'

 

That group never could decide what their next step was going to be, so they did nothing. Unlike the Tea Party, which elected candidates to office.

 

In discussing voting either Rep or Dem, it seems that the Rep are starting to push Romney the voter's way.

Aside from M Romney being a Rep, there is something about his Mormonism and clone-like boys that disturb me greatly, especially in considering someone that is running for president.

Since Jeb Bush is a Bush, no matter what...that speaks worlds (of evil to be spread) to me...nothing good, imo

Viable Rep candidates = 0 / jmo

 

Same losers that America rejected last time.

Hillary should win unless she fucks up big-time, which is why we should expect a boring campaign from her.

When you're up by 30 points in a sports contest, you don't attempt any spectacular plays. You just hang onto the ball, and wait for the game to be over.

 

But we at least tried to do something. And that's always better than inertia and apathy

 

This does worry me a bit. 3 family members (so great is their hatred of Hillary) have stopped speaking to me, because I dared to defend her. If family members behave so insanely, what does that say about the general (Republican) public? At first, I felt totally lost and confused? Then I just ultimately said fuck it, and decided to be honest to my instincts and beliefs. If somebody is that shallow (family or not) I'm best off without them.

 

I wanted them to do so much more! :-(