Politics Romney - Is he ready?

Baraka_Guru, I respectfully disagree.
Sooner or later...people are going to figure out...it's not what you are...it's what you DO.

And both Dems, The Media & GOP will be scritch-ing their heads until they get that through their heads.
As "why" someone went this way or that...for the most part, it's about who you believe in overall.

I think Obama did...he embraced whomever he could...looking for those who shared his efforts more. You could see it in his tone.
Even to this day, he doesn't emphasize his race/color in his communications...amongst other things.
At least he does this...I don't know about his campaign advisors though

 

Is that so? I won't hold my breath. I don't recommend you do it either.

We categorize things. It's what we do. That's not to say everything and everyone is categorized and that it's all kept neat and tidy and that's all there is, but I doubt you'll ever see categorization go away. It's inevitable, especially among Americans, who tend to think in black and white terms—so much binary thinking.

We are what we are; we do what we do.

It is what it is. (j/k )

Maybe Obama only comes down to single issues when he's pressed. I never viewed him as anything but comprehensive in his approach.

 

They can all move to Winterpeg for all I care. That will learn 'em!

No, but seriously...let them come. They're in for a culture shock.

We had our first gay military wedding seven and a half years ago, and you guys haven't even had a female president yet.

 

We had a female prime minister for a short while.

Kim Campbell - (Prime Ministership) Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And not to rub it in, but we've had a female head of state for 60 years now.

 

Well, actually...I really didn't grow up with any formal religion...and only really started getting into it when I married my wife.
My wife is "militant" Jewish, meaning Reform with an "attitude"...and she's politically ultra conservative...but by action, fairly liberal.

And growing up in the Northeast was fairly irrelvant, the small town I was in was conservative,
so if I learned any "liberal" values...it was from my Mother, who's a bleeding-heart liberal.
But I think for the most part, she just showed me integrity and to consider all sides. I don't favor her viewpoints always.

I think it depends on the person...some do exactly as they've been told by repetition over time, whether they know it or not. (ex. My wife)
Some decide by experience and watching all the angles...gaining their own preferences. (ex. myself)

Those who do as they are told, Dem or GOP, think they are deciding for themselves...but if you watch them, they do as others do.
Those who decide by exposure...well you can't normally categorize them, because they think for themselves...and are willing to change.

That's why the powers that be are getting more confused. The old cliches and definitions don't pan out anymore.
People are starting to live how they want to live...not as others tell them.
They are constantly absorbing more info on the new media...sooner or later, more & more will figure out what THEY want or like.

I guarantee you...the pundits and political advisors will keep getting more off base.
Unless they are ones truly keeping an open mind about people.
It's less about the image, more about the idea.

And if anything, this election proved it more...the ones where most come out, for the Prez cycle, not mid-cycle.
If the GOP doesn't start give plans...giving details...thinking about the crowd...then they are going to lose more and more.
Because people aren't the suckers they use to be.
There's too much info to compare...and they're thinking for themselves more.

Same with the Dems...they can't absolutely depend on the Unions, etc...

It's about getting the good candidates...having the open ground game...having the info...giving them something to vote FOR.
It may not be absolute now...but it's certainly trending that way.
And the powers that be are actually going to have to come up with something than just a catch-phrase...and you can't pigeon-hole anymore.

They're going to have to fix the primary system...that's an extreme base, because the average joe could give a shit about it,
most only wait until the election...and that breadth of populus doesn't fit the molds anymore.

OMG! They're actually going have to think & work, instead of hustle.
No more judging by covers. But that's SO hard.

 

I know, right?

But if you want something more relevant, in our federal election last year, we elected a record number of women to parliament: 76 our of 308 seats were filled by women (or 25%). That was up from 69 seats in the 2008 election.

I just realized that the U.S. has just elected a record number of women to Congress this time around: 20 out of 100 in the Senate will be women, and at least 81 of the 435 members of the House of Representatives will be women. That puts the ratio at 19%. Not bad, but the U.S. still lags Canada in that department. I'll admit that both could still use improvement.

Both Canada and the U.S. have histories of women in top-level government jobs, if not the top job itself, which is good. My overall point is that it's one step in the right direction to prove that positions of power in a nation don't belong to the old boys' club.

That's one step. I see, too, that a lesbian was elected to office this time. That's another good step.

The fact remains, though, that the U.S. is a bit behind when it comes to gay rights when compared to other developed nations.

Bottom line: Traditionally minded American conservatives would have a bit of a culture shock coming to places like Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal, just as I would have a culture shock going to some small town in the Bible Belt.

Jesus, could you imagine? We could to a reality show on that. I could go live with Lordeden and CinnamonGirl for a while or something.

 

a goal...a pure meritocracy...

but not one by paperwork...that's often as irrelevant.
but judging by your background, skill, talent, ideas all within the context of the situation.

unfortunately, this takes energy, thought and time...much of which people aren't willing to give...
much less, often even be aware of.

but we're getting there...bit by bit.

 

Tully, don't get me wrong. It's not that people should get the job because they're women or gay or black or brown or Muslim or atheist. It's that they shouldn't be impeded or overlooked or denied positions because they are any of those things.

Women make up more than half the population, and there is nothing about their sex that suggests they aren't suitable for politics. Just as I'm sure there are closeted gays in the political system for obvious reasons. There may even be closeted atheists too.

 

Yes, and voting against those things is another thing.

We can't expect all Americans to be like you where they vote as it makes sense.

Though it would be nice if we could.

 

That's interesting, Tully. I was a bit surprised to see the reaction on the right to the Republicans' "shellacking" (as Rachel Maddow put it). They had a lot riding on Romney, and that Obama was simply someone who "must go." I'm not sure if they saw Romney as a sure thing, but they seemed to have placed very high hopes and expectations on his winning.

As has been mentioned countless times now, it appears that this occasion marks a very serious crossroads for Republicans and the right. The game as they're playing it isn't a winning strategy, and in some cases it does far more harm than any prospect of good. The country is slowly changing one way, and they've been heading in the opposite direction far too quickly.

And the damn assumptions they are making already! So many on the right are blaming half the country who voted for Obama because they "want stuff." (The leeches are taking everything and producing nothing in return!) It's like they're caught in some allegorical alternate reality patched together from too many readings of Atlas Shrugged and Free to Choose.

 

I look at it as an "Us vs. Them" mentality.
As if they are rooting for a sports team...with all the related hype and colors that go along with it.
Their brand, their team...you've got to root for that "team" no matter what the score is...do or die...win, win, win.

Except that in ideal form...it shouldn't be in that mind-frame.
You should be looking at the policy, the person, the background...and each can be different...and should be evaluated EACH time.

My wife takes the "team" view...like she does for the Yankees.
Or my father does it according to the "echo-chamber" from his friends and associates.

Yes, it takes time to review each...every time.
Yes, it takes energy to think about the person and situation...especially over time and watching the trends.
Yes, it's easier to do what your friends think.

But until most everyone starts put the effort into it...and gets into the habit of looking at all the angles,
then the politicians are going to keep putting the easy bullshit out there.
And you're going to get the same quality too.

If you don't like your politicians and government...then people need to start looking at themselves,
we vote them in.