[thechat] Hiding from Elections Now

[Martin Burns]

On 27 Oct 2008, at 03:59, Matt Warden wrote:

>> Also, those supporting reform of the electoral process in general,  
>> and
>> funding of election campaigns in particular (of whatever political
>> flavour) are tremendously impressed with the Obama campaign's ability
>> to generate a mass movement on the ground, and funding through small
>> donations.
>
> Obama gets his money the same way McCain does.

Mean donation to the Obama campaign $85.

Mode will be someway south of that, I'd expect.

> Similarly, both McCain and Obama talk about ending dependence on
> foreign oil, just like the last 7 presidents have said they would do
> in their presidency.


Yeah, that's going to take some drastic measures that are unpopular in  
the short term.

Mind you, neither of them have the ties to Big Oil that Bush has.

> No one remembers the
> government intervention in the markets over the last couple decades,
> including increasing regulations encouraging and/or forcing risky
> subprime lending (that otherwise would not have happened) in the
> spirit of encouraging American home ownership.


Um no, that was regulation preventing banks from blacklisting entire  
areas, rather than scoring on individual circumstances (which is what  
is *supposed* to happen).

> Since the parties experienced the effect that Ross Perot had in
> 1992, they have both worked hard to marginalize true choice;

Depends on what you mean by 'true choice' of course, but within the  
Dem Party, there's been a real war going on: between the DRC  
Establishment (who wanted to carry on the Clinton way of winning - run  
as a centrist and only compete in the traditional Swing States to be  
sure of a small victory) and the Howard Dean wing (with the 50 state  
strategy). Dean took the chairmanship and set the direction, and the  
DRC candidate lost the primary. Only just, but still lost; mostly by  
ignoring non-traditional states, hence the rhetoric about "but *I* won  
the *important* states!".

The DRC's way of winning is exactly that of a traditional party in a 2- 
party FPTP system, which means that every election comes down to a few  
people in marginal areas like OH and FL. If you live in TX or CA, your  
vote is assumed, and not fought for.

> No one remembers that
> they all supported the Iraq War when it was ramping up and those
> against it were hippie anti-American idiots.


Don't know if you noticed, but Sn Clinton lost. It was in the news and  
stuff... ;-)

Cheers
Martin

--
 > Spammers: Send me email -> yumyum at easyweb.co.uk to train my filter
 > http://dspam.nuclearelephant.com/