February 12th, 2008 Roshan
At one time I wondered why the world is always so interested in the United States elections. I know now, it matters to the rest of us because it can mean the difference between an America that’s rampaging through our neighbourhood, or an America that’s cutting off our economic blood. Okay, I’m kidding. In all seriousness though, the USA has a lot of influence with the world, they’re the people who count the most, so it’s only natural that we’re keeping a close eye on what’s going on there.
The US elections have a funny way of doing things, the main parties have Primaries where they decide who their Presidential candidate is, and then they go from there with the aim that the whole party backs one candidate. That sounds like a barely okay idea, and unfortunately, it gets worse. The people vote in the primaries but they don’t really choose the candidates, they vote delegates who are then supposed to reflect that voter support by supporting that candidate. That sounds like a needless complication but it’s necessary because of what’s going to follow. The delegates aren’t the only people choosing, there are also super-delegates - people like former Presidents, and the biggest movers and shakers in the party. There can’t be a lot of them, can there? Wrong, one fifth of the votes will come from super delegates. How about that, eh?
Now here’s the problem, CBS reported that Obama leads by just 3 delegates at the moment while BBC says that Clinton has 74 more super-delegates. So that’s why that guy has such a slender lead, that explains it. Very interesting, if that’s the way Democrats want to do it, then they can go right ahead, but having quite the interest in the elections, I’m just hoping that they can get their house in order. This delegate business is ridiculous, and the super-delegate business is retarded.
If I were there and could vote, I’d vote for Ralph Nader, but circumstances don’t seem to allow that, so I’m backing Barack Obama because the alternative is that nutcase McCain or Hillary Clinton. As to why I like Obama:
- Universal Health Care: We’re in the 21st Century for Christ’s sake, and there are still people starving in poor countries and dying of treatable diseases in rich countries. What’s wrong with our race? Are we stupid? Thankfully, he supports UHC
- Taxes: I’ve never understood the American fascination with taxes, I simply can’t see why they can’t have some sort of graded tax system so that it’s the rich that are taxed the most.
The gubmint steals ma taxes.
It’s quite sad that in the country that prides itself on being the Champion of Democracy, so few people can identify with a government that’s supposed to represent them. Something must be wrong.
- Immigrants: See, the fellow has a sensible stance, instead of the foaming-at-the-mouth crap about throwing illegal immigrants out. It’s always funny to hear that from what is, essentially, an immigrant nation. Nearly everyone there is a descendant of someone who came as an immigrant or a conqueror.
- Abortion: The only possible sensible stance, allow.
- Greenhouse emissions: The only sensible stance, cut back to 80% of 1990 levels. How? I don’t know.
- Homosexuality: Wait, what? There are people who still speak out against gay people? Thank god he’s not one of them.
- Gun Control: Ah, he must be evil, he doesn’t like semi-automatic weapons.
- Guantanamo: He says a lot, does nothing. Can’t say, but it’s better than supporting the place.
- Stem cells: Supports and puts vote where mouth is.
Why I still don’t like him:
- Military: He wants to make America’s army and navy bigger. He wants to strike inside Pakistan at people he thinks Pakistan won’t act on. Please, get lost, show some respect for another country’s sovereignty, even if it’s a screwed-up piece of crap like Pakistan.
- WMDs: Something about being committed to ensure WMDs don’t proliferate. If he were to become President, he’d be in control of one of the largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons and probably biological/chemical weapons too. No word on use of chemical weapons in Vietnam and such stuff. So it’s clear where he is on this: It’s wrong so long as it’s someone else.
- Palestine: Big talker, but Israeli apologist. No word on Israeli WMDs either, funny.
- Iran: Supports military action against Iran. Is he mad?! Are they all mad?! Let’s support moving out of Iraq and moving into Iran. Very smart.
Overall not great, but rather him than the others. It’s like choosing which shark to be eaten by. It doesn’t really matter. It’s quite clear what I don’t like militarism.
Posted in World | 4 Comments »
