Bonjour tout le Monde
Que pensez-vous des élection en Amérique?
Cordialement
Elections aux USA
-
Guest
-
Guest
Wrong forum, regardless. This is offtopic.
Seems like everyone in a foreign country wants to but into the USA's elections this year.
If you have issues with the USA, write to your government and have them do something about it. Trying to affect the election outcome is just as bad as all those under the table oil and arms deals that France had with some middle eastern country that currently had a chance in government structure.
Seems like everyone in a foreign country wants to but into the USA's elections this year.
If you have issues with the USA, write to your government and have them do something about it. Trying to affect the election outcome is just as bad as all those under the table oil and arms deals that France had with some middle eastern country that currently had a chance in government structure.
Crud, how do I do this again?
Since it's in off topic I'll endulge myself 
I won't put up any views on either candidates as that isn't what interests me, who ever wins means about as much to me as how far I can piss up a wall. I'll also not comment on the two candidates political views because I don't know what they are. I'm not even sure they have any
What interests me is the way the elections are going about in the non-political sense. From an interested bystanders point of view, what do you guys think of the way candidates are allowed to come on TV during advert breaks with messages slagging off the other candidate?
It seems a very strange way to go about things and it only seems to have gotten worse this time. The little bits I catch on the news all seem to be challenging each other on their testicular fortitude rather than any policies, is this a slanted view of the election or is it something that is actually quite true?
There has been some mud slinging over here too but it is usually about the party and their policies rather than anything else. The one exception I remember is when they did Blair up with devil horns, red eyes, the whole works. Even that wasn't really that personal, they weren't challenging any service in the Army or whatever.
Is it just me do you think or is it actually a legitimate problem?
As for French double standards, I think they hate us enough without me adding to it.
I won't put up any views on either candidates as that isn't what interests me, who ever wins means about as much to me as how far I can piss up a wall. I'll also not comment on the two candidates political views because I don't know what they are. I'm not even sure they have any
What interests me is the way the elections are going about in the non-political sense. From an interested bystanders point of view, what do you guys think of the way candidates are allowed to come on TV during advert breaks with messages slagging off the other candidate?
It seems a very strange way to go about things and it only seems to have gotten worse this time. The little bits I catch on the news all seem to be challenging each other on their testicular fortitude rather than any policies, is this a slanted view of the election or is it something that is actually quite true?
There has been some mud slinging over here too but it is usually about the party and their policies rather than anything else. The one exception I remember is when they did Blair up with devil horns, red eyes, the whole works. Even that wasn't really that personal, they weren't challenging any service in the Army or whatever.
Is it just me do you think or is it actually a legitimate problem?
As for French double standards, I think they hate us enough without me adding to it.
Warning: stern lecture approaching
Apologies if this comes across as hostile. I'm not looking for a fight, and I'm doing my best to keep this polite. However I've got a lot to say...
Sai: since when is stating an opinion meddling?
If it's going to sway somebody's opinion it's probably a good thing (hearing a different perspective can hardly be called a bad thing).
Buying votes or election fraud would be a different story.
Threatening economic sanctions or sponsoring coups would be a different story. I don't suppose that's what you suggested by "write to your government and have them do something about it"? (there are certain governments - that shall remain nameless here - that do that sort of stuff, you know...)
About "the French":
That list that shows certain French individuals, and others who are supposed to have received "oil vouchers"? That list also contains the names of Americans by the way - but their names have been blacked out "for privacy reasons".
Also - I may be wrong about this, but - if I understand correctly, the allegations of fraud came from someone by the name of Ahmed Chalabi...
Also: hands off the damn French. I don't always agree with French policies (e.g. vetoeing a request for Patriot batteries by Nato-ally Turkey), but they were perfectly in their rights to say "no" to that adventure. The US media/politicians like to blame them, but the fact of the matter is that the hawks could not even get more than 5 out of 15 votes on the security council, so they never pushed it to a vote.
What's more: France was right. And so was Blix. You were wrong. Ask David Kay. A bit of humility is in order.
By the way, thanks to the damn French, your government can get its hands on 56.6 million doses of 'flu vaccine: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/ ... index.html
US election
The way I see it, no US president (including Clinton or even Carter) has ever had any other interests at heart than the US - they're not supposed to, being US prez, and any valid higher priority would have to be "humanity" or something like that.
Some presidents are more reasonable than others, though.
I though GHWB was sort of OK.
I thought that Reagan was too trigger-happy, but we survived that (well, so far, anyway).
I liked Clinton, but I thought the dollar was getting a bit too strong.
In 2000, I figured that Gore and Bush would be virtually the same on foreign policy (which is all that matters to me), but that Bush was probably going to crash the US economy with his tax cuts.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but I thought it needed crashing - in a relative sense, i.e. I don't mean I wanted the US to sink into poverty. So in a way I preferred Bush.
Bush certainly did his best on part two, but boy was I wrong about part one...
He stuck his nose up at the rest of the planet by ditching Kyoto, signed the ASPA (I'm still looking for a full text of what sounds like a declaration of war on my country), and made a horrible mistake (yeah let's just call it a mistake).
And you probably should stop watching Fox News - it sounds like you've swallowed the lines from the WH.
Portraying "liberation" as a prime rationale for going to war is not the same as saying "Gee, we're awfully sorry we went in and killed about 10000 civilians for no good reason, but we hope that at least some good has come out of it, that it was worth the high price for the Iraqi people, etc etc".
As far as your elections are concerned: I don't really care who wins, but considering the foreign policy record of the current prez, if he gets "re"-elected it will probably be seen in many countries as an endorsement of aggressive war and torture.
Personally I think that US policies have become a liability for Nato, but US internal politics I don't care about, and besides, I don't make Dutch foreign policy.
Either way, we'll all probably survive another GWB presidency - although I'm mighty glad that I don't have to live in the US.
PS: I read about The Guardian's letter-writing campaign. I would never write a letter to someone I don't know. It's unsolicited, and I myself don't generally read mail from people I don't know. It sounds too much like junk mail.
From what I understand, the letters were polite and decent though. The nasty replies were funny to read, but I still can't call it meddling.
Edit: initially I wrote 56.6 additional - but the original plan had already included the 54 - but the fact remains that the French company is delivering on its commitments while the US company (Chiron, who manufactures the stuff in the UK) is letting the US down.
I just assumed the US had only looked for French vaccines after it was determined that they would not have enough.
Apologies if this comes across as hostile. I'm not looking for a fight, and I'm doing my best to keep this polite. However I've got a lot to say...
Sai: since when is stating an opinion meddling?
If it's going to sway somebody's opinion it's probably a good thing (hearing a different perspective can hardly be called a bad thing).
Buying votes or election fraud would be a different story.
Threatening economic sanctions or sponsoring coups would be a different story. I don't suppose that's what you suggested by "write to your government and have them do something about it"? (there are certain governments - that shall remain nameless here - that do that sort of stuff, you know...)
About "the French":
That list that shows certain French individuals, and others who are supposed to have received "oil vouchers"? That list also contains the names of Americans by the way - but their names have been blacked out "for privacy reasons".
Also - I may be wrong about this, but - if I understand correctly, the allegations of fraud came from someone by the name of Ahmed Chalabi...
Also: hands off the damn French. I don't always agree with French policies (e.g. vetoeing a request for Patriot batteries by Nato-ally Turkey), but they were perfectly in their rights to say "no" to that adventure. The US media/politicians like to blame them, but the fact of the matter is that the hawks could not even get more than 5 out of 15 votes on the security council, so they never pushed it to a vote.
What's more: France was right. And so was Blix. You were wrong. Ask David Kay. A bit of humility is in order.
By the way, thanks to the damn French, your government can get its hands on 56.6 million doses of 'flu vaccine: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/ ... index.html
US election
The way I see it, no US president (including Clinton or even Carter) has ever had any other interests at heart than the US - they're not supposed to, being US prez, and any valid higher priority would have to be "humanity" or something like that.
Some presidents are more reasonable than others, though.
I though GHWB was sort of OK.
I thought that Reagan was too trigger-happy, but we survived that (well, so far, anyway).
I liked Clinton, but I thought the dollar was getting a bit too strong.
In 2000, I figured that Gore and Bush would be virtually the same on foreign policy (which is all that matters to me), but that Bush was probably going to crash the US economy with his tax cuts.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but I thought it needed crashing - in a relative sense, i.e. I don't mean I wanted the US to sink into poverty. So in a way I preferred Bush.
Bush certainly did his best on part two, but boy was I wrong about part one...
He stuck his nose up at the rest of the planet by ditching Kyoto, signed the ASPA (I'm still looking for a full text of what sounds like a declaration of war on my country), and made a horrible mistake (yeah let's just call it a mistake).
And you probably should stop watching Fox News - it sounds like you've swallowed the lines from the WH.
Portraying "liberation" as a prime rationale for going to war is not the same as saying "Gee, we're awfully sorry we went in and killed about 10000 civilians for no good reason, but we hope that at least some good has come out of it, that it was worth the high price for the Iraqi people, etc etc".
As far as your elections are concerned: I don't really care who wins, but considering the foreign policy record of the current prez, if he gets "re"-elected it will probably be seen in many countries as an endorsement of aggressive war and torture.
Personally I think that US policies have become a liability for Nato, but US internal politics I don't care about, and besides, I don't make Dutch foreign policy.
Either way, we'll all probably survive another GWB presidency - although I'm mighty glad that I don't have to live in the US.
PS: I read about The Guardian's letter-writing campaign. I would never write a letter to someone I don't know. It's unsolicited, and I myself don't generally read mail from people I don't know. It sounds too much like junk mail.
From what I understand, the letters were polite and decent though. The nasty replies were funny to read, but I still can't call it meddling.
Edit: initially I wrote 56.6 additional - but the original plan had already included the 54 - but the fact remains that the French company is delivering on its commitments while the US company (Chiron, who manufactures the stuff in the UK) is letting the US down.
I just assumed the US had only looked for French vaccines after it was determined that they would not have enough.
hmmm, it seems to me that Bush is more concerned about international affairs while Karry is more concerned about domestic affairs.
i agree that the US needs a good economy crash. becaus then the government will (hopefully) put some more consideration into its economical and international decisions
it seems to me that the US is acting in some of the ways it does to the French government (hard to put this into clearer words without insulting anyone) because of their refusal to participate in the US' pointless slaughter in Iraq (does anyone remember the first reason the US went to war in Iraq? because there was "evidence of weapons of mass destruction"). after my government's refused to send troops to iraq the US completely stopped its import of Canadian beef, which makes up 90% of all beef sales here, for half a year because of one single cow with mad-cow disease. it crippled the economy in the prairies. and the thing that pisses me off the most is that Parlement didnt react at all!!!
i think that the US needs reforms that gives more power to the senate and less power to the president
EDIT: and i think that 9/11 worked for the taliban, it completely terrified the US government.
i agree that the US needs a good economy crash. becaus then the government will (hopefully) put some more consideration into its economical and international decisions
it seems to me that the US is acting in some of the ways it does to the French government (hard to put this into clearer words without insulting anyone) because of their refusal to participate in the US' pointless slaughter in Iraq (does anyone remember the first reason the US went to war in Iraq? because there was "evidence of weapons of mass destruction"). after my government's refused to send troops to iraq the US completely stopped its import of Canadian beef, which makes up 90% of all beef sales here, for half a year because of one single cow with mad-cow disease. it crippled the economy in the prairies. and the thing that pisses me off the most is that Parlement didnt react at all!!!
i think that the US needs reforms that gives more power to the senate and less power to the president
EDIT: and i think that 9/11 worked for the taliban, it completely terrified the US government.
interesting to hear all you foreigners discuss my country 
. Personally I hate Bush,both his domestic and foreign policies. Kerry doesn't thrill me, but I'd rather take an unknown over someone I know will screw things up.
It's also so encouraging to realize that much of the rest of the world is glad of our economy crash.
. Personally I hate Bush,both his domestic and foreign policies. Kerry doesn't thrill me, but I'd rather take an unknown over someone I know will screw things up.It's also so encouraging to realize that much of the rest of the world is glad of our economy crash.
You do a lot of programming? Really? I try to get some in, but the debugging keeps me pretty busy.
Crucible of Stars
Crucible of Stars
I don't claim to speak for the whole world, you know.
I also said "relative". I don't wish poverty on anyone, and quite frankly there's enough of that in the US already.
I'm no economist. I just thought that the strength of the US economy was hurting the rest of the world - until GWB took over, that is.
For an analogy, think buying power of large supermarket chains versus small farmers: sell your goods at the price I set or don't sell your goods.
And since the "mom and pop" stores don't have that power, they cannot force their prices down in the same way, so they end up more expensive - and even though their quality is probably better than that of the supermarket, they have trouble competing.
If the small farmers can't produce at lower cost than the chain offers, they can either sell at a loss or go under - or maybe find a mom and pop - but those might not buy enough.
(BTW: it's an analogy - this also happens in the EU and the UK - presumably everywhere there's a free market) I'm not calling it evil, just unfortunate.
I also said "relative". I don't wish poverty on anyone, and quite frankly there's enough of that in the US already.
I'm no economist. I just thought that the strength of the US economy was hurting the rest of the world - until GWB took over, that is.
For an analogy, think buying power of large supermarket chains versus small farmers: sell your goods at the price I set or don't sell your goods.
And since the "mom and pop" stores don't have that power, they cannot force their prices down in the same way, so they end up more expensive - and even though their quality is probably better than that of the supermarket, they have trouble competing.
If the small farmers can't produce at lower cost than the chain offers, they can either sell at a loss or go under - or maybe find a mom and pop - but those might not buy enough.
(BTW: it's an analogy - this also happens in the EU and the UK - presumably everywhere there's a free market) I'm not calling it evil, just unfortunate.
Oh right, so it's political eh? Fine, noone answered my question so I'll answer it myself.
I think neither Bush nor Kerry even have a clue about what they are doing and hide it by slagging each other off at every oppotunity. The fact that Arnie can be a governer in America is a very telling sign that US politics are a joke. Bush makes a fool of himself every time he opens his mouth, are these two morons really the two people you want to represent the US? No wonder the whole of Europe ( apart from Blair aka "Lacky" ) laughs at the US, the man who represents you is so stupid that he can't even grasp the basics of the English language ( even with a speech writer! ).
The man who made this gem of a quote represents the whole of America and all of it's people:
I think neither Bush nor Kerry even have a clue about what they are doing and hide it by slagging each other off at every oppotunity. The fact that Arnie can be a governer in America is a very telling sign that US politics are a joke. Bush makes a fool of himself every time he opens his mouth, are these two morons really the two people you want to represent the US? No wonder the whole of Europe ( apart from Blair aka "Lacky" ) laughs at the US, the man who represents you is so stupid that he can't even grasp the basics of the English language ( even with a speech writer! ).
The man who made this gem of a quote represents the whole of America and all of it's people:
Diamond!Our enemies are innovative and resourceful,
and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people,
and neither do we
-
Guest
Since I know at least half of you aren't americans I'll throw in my perspective as an american citizen.
In my life I've seen only a few people running in the elections that "seemed" like a good candidate personnaly I liked clinton at least you know he was a real MAN bush however seems like a bit of a farie that goes for kerry too.
As an american you try to vote for the best of the usually bad candidates to try to get screwed the least if they do things right then your lucky.
personally I think bush and kerry are equally retarded and unworthy. so it really doesn't matter to me which one is elected. I just wish for once somebody with true morals and goals would run in the race.
I'm not a very political person though honestly I'm not very old but I have yet to vote for anyone ever... I'm waiting for somebody worth getting jury duty over.
O and one last note for tyn.. arnold is a great governer and has done alot for california you just think he isn't good because it's like seeing drew barry moore as a senitor..poop gotta go to work enough off topic wasting of time =P
In my life I've seen only a few people running in the elections that "seemed" like a good candidate personnaly I liked clinton at least you know he was a real MAN bush however seems like a bit of a farie that goes for kerry too.
As an american you try to vote for the best of the usually bad candidates to try to get screwed the least if they do things right then your lucky.
personally I think bush and kerry are equally retarded and unworthy. so it really doesn't matter to me which one is elected. I just wish for once somebody with true morals and goals would run in the race.
I'm not a very political person though honestly I'm not very old but I have yet to vote for anyone ever... I'm waiting for somebody worth getting jury duty over.
O and one last note for tyn.. arnold is a great governer and has done alot for california you just think he isn't good because it's like seeing drew barry moore as a senitor..poop gotta go to work enough off topic wasting of time =P
I haven't seen any proof to say Arnie is a good governer but then I haven't looked into it. Fact is that in no other country in the world would someone walk into a job by flashing a smile and repeating some catchphrases he didn't even write. Electing wrestlers and actors as you governing politicans is a joke, what other country would actually put important decisions in these peoples hands? We love footballers over here but the day Paul Gasgoine ( or G8 as he likes to be called now ) becomes the Mayor of London is the day I leave the country.
That's asking a bit, all I want from politicians is for them to actually do something positive and use their head inbetween lying between their teeth. It seems you can't even ask for that from your current two candidates.I just wish for once somebody with true morals and goals would run in the race.
Wasting time? This is a miracle, on a forum there has been a political discussion that has been pretty sensible for the most part and not ended up in two people flaming each other saying "My country is the best!". This forum never ceases to amaze me, I don't tend to get involved unless there's at least people with something worthwhile to say and most places I have seen people very rarely do.poop gotta go to work enough off topic wasting of time =P