Ahhh yes, it's presidential election day here in the U.S. of A., and I am so happy it's finally here.
This morning Mr. Ops and I will drive to the polling place past a ridiculous number of signs littering the roadway. You'd think we would have been able to see the first hundred identical signs with the same message, but I guess they are afraid we might have missed them. We will park the car and walk by little clusters of cold people gathered around tables of the opposing parties. They will call to us on behalf of their preferred candidates, We will be cordial and noncommittal. Hands will be shaken. Doughnuts will be waved at us, as if that might change our minds. We will take pre-printed ballot sheets from each person that accosts us and toss them in the trash the moment we get inside.
We will stand in a short line. This is because we live in a small town. Even in a huje turnout year we generally do not have to wait long to vote, thank TGE. We'll be asked for our names and addresses and IDs by people that know us. We will go to a booth and will vote. We will get little "I Voted" badges and wear them for the rest of the day, as talismans against those who would try to change our mind with more doughnuts and hand-shakings. Too late: I Voted.
We will have some lunch and congratulate ourselves for exercising our rights, even if it is futile.
This evening we'll watch the news and see if anything we voted for is ahead. We will likely go to bed before we know any results.
Tomorrow we will wake up and it will be over: the incessant robo-calls and grating political ads on TV. Someone will have won, but even if it is not our candidate, life will seem just a little more quiet for a little while. We will have to cope with the outcome, no matter what happens. But we'll know we tried.
Given the (deliberately stoked) chaos in many swing states it could take a while before the final results are in. And many a voter will have to stand in line for maybe even eight hours (and may then learn that (s)he cannot vote for a vast number of often ridiculous reasons). And the results will be contested whichever side ostensibly wins (maybe even by the winning side).
As I said in another thread, I already took care of this business and happily we didn't have to wait at all (the early bird...), sadly not everybody in the state can say the same, in Miami there were long lines up to late hours to be turned down as our wonderful governor refused to extend polling hours during early vote (which was shortened by non other than the state GOPhers, Quelle surprise!).
Nate Silver predicts a 92% chance of Obama winning and Florida is a tossup with .2% margin. We'll see at the end of the day if all the attempts to discourage the vote failed or succeded.
But I'm with Opas: I'm happy this nightmare is over regardless of who wins this thing, no more garbage in the mail, no more robocalls and robopolls, no more litter in the streets (that will remain for a few more days, I'm afraid), and we can go back to our lives, and the pundits to explain why they were wrong...
In truth, me living in the reddest of the red states*, there really is little point in my voting in a national presidential race.
However, there are any number of other issues to vote on, in which my vote actually means something, so I'll go in for those-- I haven't voted yet, but I'll get out in a bit, for some lunch & to cast my meaningless vote(s) (thanks, Forefathers, for creating an election system wherein your average citizen's vote means nothing). But I'm not really hungry yet, so I'll wait a bit.
I don't expect to have a long line in the voting booth-- I never do, even though I live in a reasonably sizable city. But I also live in a predominantly minority district, and the ReThugs have been out, busily removing people's right to vote by any means they can; including spreading lies about what you'll face at the polls, in an attempt to keep honest voters away from the polls.
Sadly, many of the lies being spread work all too well.
So I don't expect to face long lines today, even though it's a meaningless** national election.
*sigh*
In truth, I'm only getting out to vote for two reasons: bragging rights, and to vote on the strictly local issues.
That way, if the antichrist horrible monster Reagan 3.0 Mitt-the-wishwashy gets elected, I can brag that I did not vote for him..... as I stand in the long-long lines at the unemployment office along with the idiots who did vote for the snake***.... meh.
But I do wish there were a $1000 an hour fine for anyone who's left those annoying street signs up one minute past the closing of the polls tonight. Some will remain on public grounds for weeks. Until the hardworking (and mostly immigrant) city workers come to mow the area.
Soon.
_______________________
* Oklahoma has the single distinction of being the only state in the US, who's every single county voted against Obama, in 2008.
** Oklahoma is still suffering under the all or nothing clause with it's Electoral College delegates, meaning your average vote counts for nothing.
*** Apologies to anyone who appreciates our legless reptile friends, for comparing Mitt to those fine scaly animals.
I'm back. I voted. It's done.
I was amazed to see quite a long line of people waiting to vote this time. We actually waited in line for about 45 minutes before getting to vote. Quite unusual for here.
I usually have no waiting time at all despite liiving in a large city. In and out in less than 5 minutes, that's the standard.
It does not even matter that everyone here is automatically registered and has a national ID card and that we use paper ballots counted by hand.
There are simply enough polling places and we vote on Sundays (=not on a working day). Poll working is a civic duty like jury duty, so there are always enough poll workers.
Quote from: Swatopluk on November 06, 2012, 06:23:49 PM
I usually have no waiting time at all despite liiving in a large city. In and out in less than 5 minutes, that's the standard.
It does not even matter that everyone here is automatically registered and has a national ID card and that we use paper ballots counted by hand.
There are simply enough polling places and we vote on Sundays (=not on a working day). Poll working is a civic duty like jury duty, so there are always enough poll workers.
The ReThugs would hate such a system, and do everything they can to prevent such measures from taking place in the US.
They (correctly) see it that easy access to voting would likely increase the voter turnout, and that such increase would quickly get them out of positions of power.
The disconnect between voter turn out, and national polls is pretty obvious, in that national polls rarely match up to how those that turn up and vote, actually vote.
Another difference is that we have a mix of majority and proportional system, not the pure winner-takes-all. Two votes, one for a candidate and one for a party. The winner of the first has a guaranteed seat (Direkt-Mandat), the votes for the latter are distributed proportionally nationally (Listen-Mandat).
One problem is of course that this way the parties have much more say about who gets a seat even if the list candidate happens to be very unpopular.
I'll be grateful when the hideous attack ads stop (perhaps at midnight tonight?) on the local radio stations. I know exactly which party the candidate belongs to by the voice doing the ads, even if I've never heard of them before. I think it's part of the dog-whistle nature of these ads, exacerbatd by a voice that oozes malice and innuendo. We've been pummeled with the message that farmer/rancher=guns==god-fearing christian=patriotic. ick. I've never heard relentless ads quite like this before moving here, and will be grateful to not hear them until the next congressional cycle!
I hears ya! And yet, I am sad to find that our television reception is completely gone, tonight. No channels! I blame the GOP.
The attacks will of course proceed, though not necessarily as ads. And the next election is merely two years away, so at the latest the campaign will restart in 6 months.
Don't remind us. But at least the next presidential election is four years away, and they are the worst.
I'm watching the updates here. (http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/results)
Quote from: Opsa on November 06, 2012, 10:50:10 PM
Don't remind us. But at least the next presidential election is four years away, and they are the worst.
I'm watching the updates here. (http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/results)
I just want it to be
over. This way, I can see if I need to flee for Canada or not,
before the crowd.
As if Mitt the Twit gets the nod? Good bye to civil rights, and certainly good bye to freedom
of from religion...
... but most importantly? I'll likely see my job sent overseas,
like everything else Mitt the Twitt has had a hand in.
Voting is compulsory in Oz. The elections are held on Saturdays and Mrs Blue an I usually work as temporary electoral officials for the poll. We use paper ballots which are counted by hand. At the polling booths I have worked at, the count is usually completed within 2 or 3 hours of closing time. We have a bicameral parliament, members of the lower house (House of Representatives) are elected by a preferential voting system, one member per electorate. All electorates have approximately the same number of voters within specified minimums and maximums. The upper house (Senate) is elected on a state by state basis. Everyone votes for the same candidates within their own state and seats are allocated on a proportional basis with each state having the same number of Senators (12) and the two territories having two. Lower house members are elected for a nominal 4 year term and senators are elected for 8 years. At a Federal election all the lower house seats are vacated and half the Senate, although the two elections can come out of sync if the government calls an early election as may be the case if the current government calls an election early next year. This happened back in the late sixties early seventies and was only re-synchronised when the Governor General prorogued Parliament and called a double dissolution election in 1975 after the government failed to secure supply. There are no limits on the number of terms a Prime Minister can serve and our longest serving PM was Robert Menzies who held the position for a total of over 18 years in two terms, the second being over 16 years far and away the longest term for an Australian PM so far.
Aussies tend to look on US elections with a bit of a sense of bemusement. Firstly we don't get the voting on Tuesday thing. It seems bizarre that you conduct such an important part of the life of a democracy on a working day, when many people clearly would have difficulty attending. Secondly we find the electoral college thing rather quaint and the various rules for how these are allocated differing between the states a matter of some puzzlement. Lastly we find the whole hoopla that surrounds US elections somewhat distasteful. It is considered something of an insult over here to say that someone is conducting their election campaign here in a "presidential" fashion. So, in the end, I hope you get the president you actually voted for - I note that this did not seem to happen on one of The Shrub's elections. Good luck all you USians, enjoy the next 4 years as well as you can...
Well, the early news is that Obama's leading, but it's very early yet.
Update: Romney's ahead with two states (KY and IN) to Obama's one (NH).
The Tuesday voting made sense when it was introduced. Sunday voting was out for religious reasons and polling places were sparse. It was expected that the average rural voter (only landowners could vote, remember) would need a day's travel to reach one. So, Sunday going to church, Monday travelling to the polling place, voting on Tuesday morning and being back home late on Tuesday or early Wednesday. Factory workers with a tight work schedule were not affected because they could not vote anyway.
That it has not been changed can be clearly attributed to the fact that even trvial changes to the constitution are extremly difficult and in this case would not match the the intentions of too large a political faction that would love to go back to the non-universal suffrage.
Quote from: Opsa on November 06, 2012, 11:07:14 PM
Well, the early news is that Obama's leading, but it's very early yet.
Update: Romney's ahead with two states (KY and IN) to Obama's one (NH).
Yeah... the East Coast is typically more blue than red.
Its the ignorant mid-west that is deeply into the Kool-Aid... red Kool-Aid, naturally.
Lookin' bad right now at almost 9pm : Obama's got 70 electoral votes to Romney's 82 and that's with the east coast having voted. Yeesh. I didn't think it would be this bad. I think I'll go to bed and read.
Quote from: Opsa on November 07, 2012, 01:55:25 AM
Lookin' bad right now at almost 9pm : Obama's got 70 electoral votes to Romney's 82 and that's with the east coast having voted. Yeesh. I didn't think it would be this bad. I think I'll go to bed and read.
Aaah, carp.
California, anyone? That will surely go to Obama, and as I recall, has a buncha electorials.
No worries, for a moment it looked like Virginia was going to Zomney but it turn out to be a false alarm. Everybody is calling Ohio and FL 'too close to call', but FL looks safe at the moment and OH will likely will be in the blue box too. In fact everybody and their cats are calling it for Obama.
Sleep well. :) 8)
The Monastery abruptly disappeared earlier, but I'm checking before calling it a day and we're back! I took a peek a Opsa's page and see Obama: 303 vs Romney: 203.
:fireworks_spread: :fireworks_toss: :stars: :fireworks_toss: :fireworks_spread:
Mr. President, I humbly urge you to take the opportunity of the next four critical years to stop being Mr. Bend-Over-Backwards-Being-Nice-to-Rethugs Guy. Drink some milk to toughen your spine and do what the peeps clearly want you to do. Please.
Aaaand there was much rejoicing. (and we didn't even have to eat the mistrals of Sir Robin)
Congratulations, Murkns, you got the better one. Not great, say I, but preferable.
Quote from: Sibling DavidH on November 07, 2012, 09:36:32 AM
Congratulations, Murkns, you got the better one. Not great, say I, but preferable.
Oh, without a doubt-- the US could not have survived as it is, with another ReThug war.
Has anyone else noticed that every Republican Pres'dint since Reagan has enmired the US in some sort of foreign war?
One that the follow-on Democrats had to deal with the aftermath for?
... meh. We dodged a serious bullet on Tuesday.
Unfortunately, this will probably mean the same gridlock like in the past years.
But at least Warren is in and Akin and Mourdock are not.
Let's just hope that Obama's preemptive cave-ins will again be refuted by the GOP congress because they will not take yes for an answer.
Over the cliff, gentlemen! Maybe this time the Dems show that they can play that game to their advantage too.
Pessimist and cynic that I am I expect the senate to get lost in 2 years and the presidency in 4. Hopefully the reforms have taken strong enough roots by then to survive on their own.
Now let's get ready for the fight for non-insane SCOTUS replacements.
Quote from: BobHas anyone else noticed that every Republican Pres'dint since Reagan has enmired the US in some sort of foreign war?
Ironically, Obama may soon have no choice but to do the same.
Congratulations USA! :)
The rest of the world let out a sigh of relief this morning (especially the womenfolk).
I read some of the twitters Donald Trump made (screen-shots in Swedish papers) after Obama was declared the winner.
The poor man has it all wrong (but no news there I guess); the world laughs with America now when Obama has won, and would have cried with her if Romney was declared the winner...
USA is, I suppose, often pictured as the most powerful land in the world (especially in it's own media..) but the impact on the rest of the world isn't as mush related to it's (military) power as to it's culture and politics, and by politics I don't mean the American foreign politicises, I talk about domestic politics. As an example, if it is all-right to question women's rights to abortion in USA about 5 years later we will have the same movements here... Our conservative parties copy a lot from their counterparts in the States. The sad thing is that USA politicians often is allowed to lead the way even when they are back-pedalling. Hence my relief.
Also. Yay for the first openly gay senator being selected!
Personally I still have problems to wrap my head around the election and polling system of USA. To me democracy is "one person one vote" and on paper so it easily can be recounted if needed not to mention that one can just take a new ballot and make a new cross and then put it in the envelope if one put the pen down on the wrong candidate at the first slip. ;)
:toasty:
"Vote early, vote often!" as they say in Northern Ireland.
Wow Darlica, I had no idea that our political floppings had much effect on other countries. I generally think of US as having our heads up our arse, but I do still love my country and was greatly relieved to hear that Obama has been reelected. When I went to bed last night I was not too sure, and it was depressing.
Now we'll have all the sore loser squawking to contend with, but that's natural. The Dems would have squawked if they had lost by such a narrow margin. They'll sort it out.
We also have this financial cliff looming in front of us. I can only hope that the sore losers will not block what's best for the country in spite, but they have done so before, so it would be no big surprise, just a horrible disappointment and scary slide downhill for the country. I am hoping that the Obamastration will feel empowered enough to fight harder for what is best.
But right now I will enjoy the quietude that accompanies the sudden cessation of pestering phone calls and bitter, doomsday attack ads. For right now we'll just tuck in and weather out the nor-easter storm as the political campaign storm peters out.
Cocoa, anyone?
Watched the whole thing unfold. Relieved sanity prevailed. Always bemused by the US's "self-importance" in the speeches - cannot imagine our polliticians ever making speeches like this.
Quote from: Griffin NoName on November 07, 2012, 03:30:27 PM
Always bemused by the US's "self-importance" in the speeches - cannot imagine our polliticians ever making speeches like this.
I think that got out of fashion a few decades ago in Britain
I was quite amused to read the various headlines from the different newsies early this morning-- (I had me a headache about 5am my time, and got up to check).
The middle-of-the-road on-line papers were all about Obama & his win.
The right-wing nutters? Grudgingly admitted defeat, and praised how "cordial" Mitt the Twitt was in his concession, and went on to whine about how tough Obama's going to have it.
... meh.
Of course Mitt the super-rich Twitt was cordial: he gets to keep all his ill gotten campaign riches, and he doesn't have to do any real work again....ever.
There outta be a law that states the looser has to give back whatever's left of his campaign chest to those who contributed, proportionate to what they gave. If they gave cash, anonymously? They lose too-- if by some miracle, there's some left over? That goes back into the US Treasury's general fund to be applied against the deficit.
That would quickly change the tunes of Mr Richy-Rich like Mitt & co.
I heard one sore GOPher loser this morning on the radio saying how 'nasty' Obama had been in the campaign (the 'vote for vengeance' was one reference) as 'opposed' to Zomney. Those b@$t@rds reallly love to play victim and have a very odd sense of justice, but then again, nothing else can be expected from them, if they win by the slimmest margin (remember 2000?) it's a "mandate" but if the other side wins by the same or more margin, it isn't at all. They are so boringly predictable...
At least I know that the guys at The Daily Show & The Colbert Report will make fun of them in the evening.
Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on November 07, 2012, 05:59:24 PM
I heard one sore GOPher loser this morning on the radio saying how 'nasty' Obama had been in the campaign (the 'vote for vengeance' was one reference) as 'opposed' to Zomney. Those b@$t@rds reallly love to play victim and have a very odd sense of justice, but then again, nothing else can be expected from them, if they win by the slimmest margin (remember 2000?) it's a "mandate" but if the other side wins by the same or more margin, it isn't at all. They are so boringly predictable...
At least I know that the guys at The Daily Show & The Colbert Report will make fun of them in the evening.
I am so looking forward to Jon Stewart's take on all this-- and I may drop by Rachel Maddows' show too. Just for laughs.
Quote from: Opsa on November 07, 2012, 02:36:44 PM
Wow Darlica, I had no idea that our political floppings had much effect on other countries.
Up here, we are almost completely at the mercy of US culture and (lately) politics. While we remain stubbornly Canadian in many aspects, we are bombarded with USness daily.
:o Oh carp, may I apologize for the entire US to Canada?
We are at the mercy of the European market, though, so it guess it's just a big snorting mess wherever you go.
Mr. Ops says he heard a guy on the radio complaining that the election was won by "greed, vanity, and a sense of entitlement". We both had a good laugh over that comment.
You would think that some soul searching was required but the moderate republicans either left or were ostracised by the party long ago, and the fringe that is in charge is simply unable to admit that there is something wrong with them. Now the common theme is an expanded 47% (to 50% according to O'Reilly), and they don't get that that was what made them lose in the first place! :D ;D :mrgreen:
I don't think that they necessarily have to admit that there's anything wrong with them, but they ought to accept defeat more gracefully. It is embarrassing even to me to hear them whinging and carrying on like this. And even worse is their threats to throw us off the financial cliff at the end of the year to punish us for not hiring their candidate. Talk about sense of entitlement!
I wish we'd get a real government here that actually accomplishes things to help our country.
The so-called "fiscal cliff" is a paper tiger, yes, it will slow the economy (marginally IMO) but will finally force higher taxes and less military spending, which IMO are necessary. And once the date passes without an agreement most repugs would be more willing to negotiate.
The sad thing is that the military industrial complex has so many interests in the status quo that they will manage to at least keep military spending while everything else is subject to cuts. Even Obama has said that he doesn't want those cuts so I'm very skeptical on the subject.
Well, the sane minds say that the US should go over that specific cliff since it puts the better cards into Dem hands. If nothing is done, Bush's tax cuts expire and then one does not need a majority to increase but to lower taxes. And this short after the election GOP threats about the next would ring hollow.
Their incentive would be that they do not have to violate Grover's Pledge (which only forbids them to rise taxes). And this time the threat of government shutdown would more likely backfire on them as long as the Dems keep their nerves. There is lot of room for concessions on the Dem side that still would leave the situation better than it is now, so the Dems can 'extend the hand' of compromise (for real or just pretending to make the GOP look bad for refusing). So, from the point of pure tactics: Off the Cliff!
Btw, Congress would have a whole month before anyone had to pay a single cent more of the 'rised' taxes at the end of January.
It ought to be interesting for sure.
Another aspect of irony that I'm enjoying is that Obama had a much stronger majority than Bushy 2 did-- yet Bushy 2 claimed he had a "mandate". I've no doubt Obama's folk will make the same claim.
If only. *sigh*
Once of the brighter spots from Tuesday is that all but one of the ugly rape-language ReThugs was ousted.
(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/249381_4654257430416_1301812636_n.jpg)
(In case the image does not show:
Gov. Mitt Romney: "Let me say it. I'd be delighted to sign that bill [banning all abortions]."
Richard Mourdock, Indianna candidate: "I think that even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something God intended to happen."
Tom Smith, Pensylvania candidate: Thinks having a child out of wedlock is analogous to rape, claiming that it would have a "similar" effect on a father.
Representative Todd Akin: "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."
Representative Allen West, Florida Candidate: "We need to let these other women know on the other side of thes Planned Parenthood women, the Code Pink wome, and all of these women that have been neutering American men and bringing us to the point of this incredible weakness to let them know that we are not going to become subservient."
.... meh)
All ousted on Tuesday.
Quote from: Opsa on November 08, 2012, 02:19:55 PM
We are at the mercy of the European market, though, so it guess it's just a big snorting mess wherever you go.
Well that is one double-edged blade as we are at the mercy of the American and Asian markets... For example, our steel industry is on it's knees because we have no one to export to due to the state of the world economy.
Actually most of our industries that depend on exporting something is suffering right know which means lay-offs and lost jobs in a lot of bordering industries as well like logistics and transportation, manufacturing of packing materials, you all know how the rest of the chain reaction looks...
(This applies to Sweden The rest on Europe isn't exactly booming either...)
It's not one Economical market VS another, that's just bull****, It was true up till let's say 30 0r 40 years ago but now. Since the 70''s the economy has become more and more global just as "the market" wanted it to be. It's a now monster that creates synergy effects 1+1 not equals 2 but 3 or more. It's all dandy when it spirals us all towards a boom not so great when it has turned and heading for a crash. Who runs it? Well it's not you and I, that I'm sure of.
Quote from: Darlica on November 08, 2012, 03:24:50 PM
Quote from: Opsa on November 08, 2012, 02:19:55 PM
We are at the mercy of the European market, though, so it guess it's just a big snorting mess wherever you go.
Well that is one double-edged blade as we are at the mercy of the American and Asian markets...
True here too. And not just economically. One of our hospitals is tryiing to change their drug leaflets into American spelling :o :'( :'( :'(
QuoteRepresentative Todd Akin: "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."
I find it really really hard to believe he actually said this? Does anyone know what he can have been basing the statement on? I mean, where does one get such ideas from?
We repeatedly had a news interview (US) with a republican voter who said he was disgusted with what had been going on for the last four years. It was actuallly quite painful to watch/hear. Do people really think, for example, that it is disgusting for poor people to have health care?
Akin claimed a doctor told him
Quote from: Griffin NoName on November 08, 2012, 08:16:24 PM
True here too. And not just economically. One of our hospitals is tryiing to change their drug leaflets into American spelling :o :'( :'( :'(
So they're changing all the 'arses' to 'asses'? ::)
And colour to color...
:offtopic: :soapbox:
In Swedish school British English has been taught has the second language since the the end of WWII (before that German was the second language and British English the third language). UK being geographically closer to Sweden than USA that makes sense. Swedish kids today speak American English or are unable to separate the two variations.
:-\
Well, I myself mix it to my liking. I prefer 'ou' but also 'ize'. And I have no idea what a native speaker would say about my accent (when I am not deliberately imitating my surroundings in an exaggerated way).
Quote from: Griffin NoName on November 08, 2012, 08:16:24 PM
I find it really really hard to believe he actually said this? Does anyone know what he can have been basing the statement on? I mean, where does one get such ideas from?
We repeatedly had a news interview (US) with a republican voter who said he was disgusted with what had been going on for the last four years. It was actuallly quite painful to watch/hear. Do people really think, for example, that it is disgusting for poor people to have health care?
He said it-- I saw the clip where he said it to a reporter. Truly a repugnant excuse for a human being.
Quote from: Swatopluk on November 09, 2012, 12:02:06 AM
Well, I myself mix it to my liking. I prefer 'ou' but also 'ize'. And I have no idea what a native speaker would say about my accent (when I am not deliberately imitating my surroundings in an exaggerated way).
So do I, (I use movies instead of cinema of film for example) but we do it on purpose, because we have the choice. If nobody tells you there is a difference you don't get that choice, I sometimes avoid certain words or phrases because I'm aware that they can be interpreted in different ways and I don't want that.
I'm perfectly fine with American English, it's not a question about one language version being better or finer than the other. It's about not getting the choice. :)
Be careful when talking about suspenders ;)
:ROFL:
Don't worry about your accents. We USers usually find them charming, as well as any grammatical errors, as long as we know you're trying.
Quote from: Swatopluk on November 09, 2012, 12:45:56 PM
Be careful when talking about suspenders ;)
Yes, among other things... :-[ Never tried
that one myself though.
Quote from: Opsa on November 08, 2012, 02:19:55 PM
:o Oh carp, may I apologize for the entire US to Canada?
Decent Americans such as yourself (i.e. those inclined to apologize) have nothing to apologize for. Many up here are all too eager to embrace noxiousness, and as we are not inclined to produce quite enough of it ourselves, it must be imported.
Quote from: Swatopluk on November 09, 2012, 12:02:06 AM
Well, I myself mix it to my liking. I prefer 'ou' but also 'ize'. And I have no idea what a native speaker would say about my accent (when I am not deliberately imitating my surroundings in an exaggerated way).
I have the luxury of blending English forms, given our neighbours and heritage. 'ou' remains standard here, but many other spellings are Americanized.
Quote from: Griffin NoName on November 08, 2012, 08:16:24 PM
We repeatedly had a news interview (US) with a republican voter who said he was disgusted with what had been going on for the last four years. It was actuallly quite painful to watch/hear. Do people really think, for example, that it is disgusting for poor people to have health care?
Yes, since 100% of poor people are poor by choice and wilful laziness, you know. They believe that the poor (includes the 'working poor' -- people holding multiple jobs with extremely low wages and no benefits through any of them) should be creating "personal health savings accounts" and pay all medical costs out-of-pocket, rather than 'breaking' business by expecting the benefits of group insurance through an employer (which are still ridiculously high, thanks to 'the best health system in the whole wide world!"). If they can't afford a fancy schmancy healthcare (e.g.: any health care) they should toughen up and forgo it.
I'm still not sure how that's supposed to play out with no birth control, no "no" option, gratefully accepting all the babies god gives you -- even in the terrible instance of rape -- and having them at home with the assistance of your guardian angel, because you're uninsured and haven't saved up enough for maternity care, I guess. But I digress....
The lesser classes should simply not rut so much. And with less energy wasted that way, they could actually improve the bottom line of the job creators that grant them employment.
^^ P09 - I should not have asked !
I always forget it is always their own fault that people are poor.
Especially as we are having lots of dead people dying when they are fit for work http://rogergodsiffmp.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/roger-calls-for-suspension-of-atos.html
Actually what IDS and Greyling are up to in our DWP is little short of mass murder (so some claim).
Poor people should die of hunger and disease as god intended, otherwise he wouldn't have placed them there in the first place.
Remember he who has will receive more and he who has little will lose the little he has.
This cartoon seems apropos for the current conversation:
http://chuckleaduck.com/comic/forget-the-title/ (http://chuckleaduck.com/comic/forget-the-title/)
(http://chuckleaduck.com/comics/2012-11-10CAD301ObamaCare.jpg)
___________________________
And in case the link doesn't work for your country?
The point is basically this:
Child to Adult: "I think it's silly to call it Obamacare."
Adult: "What do you think would be better?"
Child: "Weallcare. 'Cause we all do, don't we?"
............. :'( :-*
Out of the mouths of babes, an' all that...
So right, it's sad.
Quote from: pieces o nine on November 09, 2012, 11:51:43 PM
Quote from: Griffin NoName on November 08, 2012, 08:16:24 PM
We repeatedly had a news interview (US) with a republican voter who said he was disgusted with what had been going on for the last four years. It was actuallly quite painful to watch/hear. Do people really think, for example, that it is disgusting for poor people to have health care?
Yes, since 100% of poor people are poor by choice and wilful laziness, you know. They believe that the poor (includes the 'working poor' -- people holding multiple jobs with extremely low wages and no benefits through any of them) should be creating "personal health savings accounts" and pay all medical costs out-of-pocket, rather than 'breaking' business by expecting the benefits of group insurance through an employer (which are still ridiculously high, thanks to 'the best health system in the whole wide world!"). If they can't afford a fancy schmancy healthcare (e.g.: any health care) they should toughen up and forgo it.
Up here, employer-funded health care is a white-collar perk and not the usual for non-specialist blue-collar jobs, but the government health care is generally adequate, if going downhill fast (miraculous cures are to be had, but the cost of said cures and the resulting limited availability of equipment, specialists and pharmaceuticals necessitate long lineups). A little money to private healthcare outfits, and those times can be sped up. It's increasingly two-tiered, at the cost of the public health care system.
I'd support privatized medicine if it was regulated such that private clinics were obligated to give a certain percentage of their equipment and physician time to the public system... say, 10%, or roughly one afternoon a week. Fair deal, I say... fund private health care *exclusively* from the corporate buck, and add capacity for free. It'd also take pressure off the public system, to have an insurance-funded secondary system.
I'm Canadian and I support taxation in exchange for essential services and a caring country. Variable tax rates (most provinces) help ensure those who can pay more, pay more. I was happy to pay a whack of tax in years when I made a whack of money. I will certainly make less in the future and might need those services in years when I'm not contributing as much. The medical system has saved my life at least three times (relative to no treatment), and has prevented me from getting seriously ill dozens more, for free. Shit, raise my taxes if health care is starting to suck. I pay $64 a month based on last year's income (should be free this year, I can claw it back after filing taxes), and that stings, but bump up the income tax rate a % or two. More for higher tax brackets, please. :mrgreen:
The only downside is that the private system can often afford to outbid the public system for doctors (we have brain drain to the US already, so we have to import doctors for public positions). Regulate that, too... cap wages/fees and disallow competition, minus perhaps modest bonuses. Let business be competitive, but not
too competitive relative to the public system; this'll help shunt a greater ratio of slimeballs who are only doctoring for the dollar to the private system. ;)
That sounds incredibly common-sensical, what does emperor Harper think about it?
Quote from: Aggie on November 13, 2012, 06:25:06 AMUp here, employer-funded health care is a white-collar perk and not the usual for non-specialist blue-collar jobs, but the government health care is generally adequate, if going downhill fast (miraculous cures are to be had, but the cost of said cures and the resulting limited availability of equipment, specialists and pharmaceuticals necessitate long lineups). A little money to private healthcare outfits, and those times can be sped up. It's increasingly two-tiered, at the cost of the public health care system.
That's interesting. My son told me there was no private healthcare in Canada. ???
Quote from: Griffin NoName on November 13, 2012, 04:28:42 PM
That's interesting. My son told me there was no private healthcare in Canada. ???
He's in Quebec? They are better for providing public services than some provinces. According to wiki, they're the highest taxed jurisdiction in North America, and will also be getting about $7.4 billion from the rest of Canada in the next year. Rich provinces give money to less well-to-do ones, up here.
Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on November 13, 2012, 12:18:13 PM
That sounds incredibly common-sensical, what does emperor Harper think about it?
Hell, I'd get hollered at by both sides for voicing
that sort of opinion. ::)
Quote from: Aggie on November 13, 2012, 06:30:46 PMHe's in Quebec?
Yes. Do they get rich by speaking not quite French?
Ayuh, distinct society and all that. They get coddled a little, in the eyes of the f*cking Anglos... ;)
Quote from: Aggie on November 14, 2012, 04:20:00 AM
They get coddled a little, in the eyes of the f*cking Anglos... ;)
? who are you calling the F word Anglos? Moi?
Nono.... just a Québécois term of endearment for any English-speaking Canadian (Anglophone), or so I've heard it said. :P I think actual Anglos may not get cussed out in the same manner.
Uhuh! All clear.
They must get cussed out in French. ;D
With some frequency English speaking whites are called Anglos by Hispanics in the US. The tone isn't pejorative but descriptive (as in, those who speak English as opposed to us that speak Spanish), different from the term 'gringo' which has a pejorative origin*.
Perhaps while certain terms aren't politically correct the use isn't necessarily loaded, for instance it is common to refer to someone who is dark(er) skinned as 'El Negro' and that doesn't imply a pejorative use, although sometimes the associations are in themselves offensive as the common use of the term Indio (for indigenous peoples) that implies a low cultural level. In context, some people uses the term gringo without ill intention even if it is politically incorrect.
I would suspect that 'Anglo' alone is not a pejorative in Quebec, but from what I've heard, outside of the major centres English-speakers can be discriminated against, and many folks will flat-out refuse to speak English, and/or are not even close to fluent in it. In Montreal, it's much more of a mishmash of languages. I've heard many panhandlers know how to ask for money in at least 3 languages.
I've not been out that way, so it's all hearsay for me.
English schools have to speak French* half the time. So my grandchildren's one speaks English one week, French the next.
If a meeting has more than 7 people, then they have to speak French.
Crazy laws. From our perspective.
*actually of course not even French, but the wierd Quebec French
Road signs in English are also banned, I think. Quebec is allowed to get away with some things no other province would, but their beer is fantastic enough that I'll forgive them. ;) It may be the best place to hide out when the Yanks come for our oil. ;) ;)
We'll come for your beer too, if you keep bragging about it! ;)
Quote from: Griffin NoName on November 14, 2012, 06:27:06 PM
*actually of course not even French, but the wierd Quebec French
From what I understand? The Quebec are far more French than anyone who hails from actual France...
::)
:update:
Hooray! Tomorrow is election day. That means we can finally stop seeing all those rotten mug-slinger ads, and stop getting all those annoying campaign calls and just VOTE!
I sometimes feel that there is a conspiracy to make democracy a hassle. :(
We have our Mayoral run off election tomorrow as well.
I will be **sooo** happy to dismiss with the attack-ads.
But, if you've ever seen the South Park episode about elections and voting? Yeah... that's my dilemma too-- my choices are the same as in that episode (which I will not say here-- it's kinda NSFW).
... meh.
This time around, I'm simply voting for change-- any change in our local administration can only be an improvement.
We have a gubernatorial election here, and two real goobers to choose from. Bleah. I'm voting against the tea-party republican candidate.
At this point, the laptop has scooted itself mere inches from the tv, and I am watching the incoming across the board, results hoping that the tea party candidates are defeated in every single election...
(http://smileys.emoticonsonly.com/emoticons/v/vote-666.gif)
Looks like we narrowly missed voting in the loco tea party candidate here. *Whew!* He , of course, is still saying that his anti-Obamamcare message got through. Silly goose.
Every time I got a phone call from his party yesterday (and they were desperate- I got three, I think from him and none from my candidate) I would simply pick up the phone and say "You lose!" to the recording before hanging up. They didn't hear me, but it was fun, anyway.
The one you got is no prince, but not overtly eeeeeevil like his opponent.
I was also watching Texas: (http://www.caller.com/news/2013/nov/06/2013-texas-elections-roundup-water-referendum-wins/)
• apparently the residents are no longer content to rely upon prayer to fight drought:
Quotevoters statewide approved $2 billion to finance ambitious drought-fighting initiatives meant to help ensure Texas can meet the needs of its booming population and growing economy for the next 50 years
• the populace as a whole has not been cowed by anti-gay theocrats:
QuoteThe off-year Election Day's other big winner, meanwhile, was openly gay Houston Mayor Annise Parker, who took a majority of the votes cast despite facing eight challengers to secure a third and final term leading America's fourth-largest city.
With its about 2.1 million residents, Houston remains the nation's largest city led by an openly gay person.
• not clear yet whether the naked attempt to disenfranchise women and minority voters will succeed in delivering only Tea Party-sponsored candidates to office.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
On a related issue: what about Would-Be Leader of the Free World Rand Paul coming unglued under "haters" pointing out his long-term, flagrant plagiarism. Even worse denials, imho, than his dad's continuous protestations of shock! that a clear and persistent pattern of racism laced
his speeches and writing.
Quote from: pieces o nine on November 07, 2013, 03:29:33 AM
• not clear yet whether the naked attempt to disenfranchise women and minority voters
What?
You are aware of the brouhaha after the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, with traditionally problematic Southern states immediately enacting draconian voting restrictions "to prevent voter fraud" intended to disenfranchise minority voters.
Texas distinguished itself by implementing voter ID laws (http://www.npr.org/2013/10/30/241891800/texas-voter-id-law-creates-a-problem-for-some-women) which take advantage of traditional state regulations on how a woman is supposed to use married vs maiden names on various documents -- in effect using the regulations enforcing one set of rules to invalidate other forms of differently mandated (and required) IDs. Texas is also among Southern states attempting to circumvent federal regulations permitting students (http://www.thenation.com/blog/176792/texas-voter-id-law-discriminates-against-women-students-and-minorities) at out-of-state colleges or universities to vote where they attend classes.
Basically, these are the same (chicken hawk) people championing wars without end in the rest of the world, where US troops are mandated by god to go and "spread democracy" at gunpoint, if necessary, while methodically and calculatingly gutting voting in their own states. They are doing this because that is the only way that Tea Party Republicans can guarantee election wins in districts where they would lose to moderate Republican or Democratic candidates more appealing to majority populations of women, Blacks, Latinos, and Democrats. Some very hard-right candidates and their supporting machinery have attempted to block ballots cast by active duty military personnel. I am stunned that the feds are taking little notice of and action on this flagrant trampling of voting rights.
I bring up voting rights to outspoken, hard-line "2nd Amendment" types who bitch about "supporting all constitutional rights, not just the ones you like," asking whether they are disturbed by attempted "States Rights" curtailments of the 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments. They never are.
A standard argument is that the US are a republic not a democracy, so universal suffrage is not a necessary (or even desired) condition.
Quote from: pieces o nine on November 07, 2013, 06:13:57 AM
You are aware of the brouhaha after the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, with traditionally problematic Southern states immediately enacting draconian voting restrictions "to prevent voter fraud" intended to disenfranchise minority voters. .
No, I wasn't.
Quote from: Swatopluk on November 07, 2013, 10:36:15 AM
A standard argument is that the US are a republic not a democracy, so universal suffrage is not a necessary (or even desired) condition.
A clearly
plutocratic republic, I might add. ::)
Pluto got removed from its position of distinction, can't we do the same for plutocrats? :P
not as long as we allow money to equal power, we can't
I don't think it's coincidental that Pluto rules the underworld and Mammon the surface... >:(
We're really talking about Uranus here, aren't we?
Someone had to go there. Why is it always me?
I dunno, but we're all behind you...
(http://www.talkweather.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/rimshot.gif)
:ROFL:
Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on November 07, 2013, 06:05:19 PM
I don't think it's coincidental that Pluto rules the underworld and Mammon the surface... >:(
Same thing, possibly the same god:
Quote from: wikiPlato says that people prefer the name Plouton, "giver of wealth," because the name of Hades is fear-provoking.[11] The name was understood as referring to "the boundless riches of the earth, both the crops on its surface—he was originally a god of the land—and the mines hidden within it."What is sometimes taken as "confusion" of the two gods Plouton and Ploutos ("Wealth") held or acquired a theological significance in antiquity.
...and once again Aggie lifts us up from the underworld. :-*
I may have been implying the opposite to cast the Mammonites down. ;)
I still have the urge to build the World's Largest Needle somewhere in the Bible Belt, and offer camel rides through the eye for $1000 per person. ::) It's more economical than constructing a stairway to heaven. Should be an easy sell to rich literalists.
There are plenty of needles in Canada (Toronto, Vancouver, Niagara Falls...) you just need a permit for the camel...
;) :P :mrgreen:
---
Still I like your idea of a literalist park somewhere in the States, perhaps in Orlando next to HolyLandTM and I bet many patrons wouldn't notice the irony. :mrgreen: :devil2: