The US Election

[Budapest]

Good that you put photos of the candidates up, so that the Interpol can later identify them.

Dem and Rep politicos are a complete waste of space who will be very shortly swept away by the tide of history.

[Lateralthinking1]

In the meantime, it's Newt!

Is this the Lizard Race making a comeback?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16669714

"At the heart of Icke's theories lies the idea that the world is becoming a global fascist state, that a secret group of reptilian humanoids called the Babylonian Brotherhood controls humanity, and that many prominent figures are reptilian, including George H. W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, Kris Kristofferson, and Boxcar Willie."

(But not the Osmonds - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiNnDpIW918)

[johncorrigan]

It would be interesting if this is a sign, and not just a minor glitch, of the Repubs deciding to head out right and try to fight their battle with Barrack away from the Centre ground - this could get plenty dirty.

[Mahlerei]

Pond life for Prez!

[Lateralthinking1]

It would be interesting if this is a sign, and not just a minor glitch, of the Repubs deciding to head out right and try to fight their battle with Barrack away from the Centre ground - this could get plenty dirty.

Yes John, you are right.

The boundaries though are fuzzy with Mitt claiming to represent "true" Republicanism irrespective of his record and Newt, a right winger, saying he is speaking on behalf of all America. His is a clever strategy. He could run out of money so he needs to emphasise ideas. And he isn't even on the ballot yet in many states. Hillary Clinton suffered when running against Obama for that reason. The rules of individual states are difficult to fathom but there is a belief that strings can be pulled "if necessary".

I have been looking more closely at the 1968 election which is being cited as a parallel. I don't remember it and have found the education fascinating. During that year, when there was a Republican and a Democratic circus - LBJ announced that he wouldn't stand again - Reagan actually got more votes than Nixon but fewer delegates. He had been a Democrat until 1962. So just six years later he was running as a Republican presidential candidate. He did so again unsuccessfully in 1976.

But of more interest is the fact that Mitt's father, George, started out as a centre ground front runner. He then tailed off because of poor presentation and dithering in campaigning, ultimately finishing with hardly any representation at all. I think he came about ninth. He was a very nice man, at least in terms of politics, and did much for the poor and the under-represented. By contrast, Nixon was full of trickery. It really does look like history in some senses could be repeating here.

[johncorrigan]

Yes John, you are right.

The boundaries though are fuzzy with Mitt claiming to represent "true" Republicanism irrespective of his record and Newt, a right winger, saying he is speaking on behalf of all America. His is a clever strategy. He could run out of money so he needs to emphasise ideas.

Thanks for that Lat - I recall that Gingrich was a very strong operator when he was leader of the House - he proved to be a very sneaky yet strong adversary against Clinton - they said he was a firebrand, not afraid to challenge wrongdoing. I reckon he's one of these guys who in opposition is a great destroyer, though has no ideas of his own. That's why I'm interested in the Republican nomination race carrying on - with Gingrich around it's bound to get dirty. Mind you, I see there's a few skeletons creeping out from under the Gingrich stone.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2090417/US-presidential-election-Can-Newt-Gingrich-seduce-middle-America-tawdry-past.html

[Mahlerei]

Apparently Santorum was asked what he would say to a woman who has been raped and is pregnant: 'Accept what God has given you'.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/39815_Santorum_To_Rape_Victims-_Accept_What_God_Has_Given_You

This makes me feel physically sick.

[Mahlerei]

And Romney pays just under 14% tax on his massive earnings. How can that be right?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16696347

[amateur51]

Apparently Santorum was asked what he would say to a woman who has been raped and is pregnant: 'Accept what God has given you'.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/39815_Santorum_To_Rape_Victims-_Accept_What_God_Has_Given_You

This makes me feel physically sick.

Agreed Mahlerei

But well done Piers Morgan for winkling this answer out of the vile Santorum

[amateur51]

And Romney pays just under 14% tax on his massive earnings. How can that be right?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16696347

It's NOT right - and it's NOT surprising either

[Norfolk Born]

Any chance of a caption competition involving an inebriated Mr. Gingrich?

[Bryn]

Apparently Santorum was asked what he would say to a woman who has been raped and is pregnant: 'Accept what God has given you'.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/39815_Santorum_To_Rape_Victims-_Accept_What_God_Has_Given_You

This makes me feel physically sick.

Perhaps he's a particular fan of Stravinsky's The Rake's Progress. Did the composer not respond to criticisms of that opera's debt to Mozart with the 'quip', "rape may be justified by the creation of a child"?

[Lateralthinking1]

First, an apology. I had forgotten when I started this thread that one had already been posted by Mandryka. Here is the link to it -
http://www.for3.org/forums/showthrea...-Election-2012. Interesting to see peoples' thoughts in the light of what we know now.

Santorum. These latest comments add to my questions about his emotional suitability for leadership. The view he has is one thing - I agree with others' comments here - but absence of subtlety in his arguments is another. He is one who to me demonstrates a lack of thoughtfulness and diplomacy. There is too much of a knee-jerk representation in him of quaint interpretation. I find that worrying. It is as if he doesn't need to contemplate consequences because the message is being delivered by a higher power.

Romney. Much as I favour him among the remaining Republican candidates, I was gearing up to feel outrage about the tax issue. What I am seeing is the falling of a candidate because of dire campaigning. I assumed that what we would be hearing is that he had appointed accountants to enable him to exploit tax loopholes. But no. It appears that he has paid the right amount of tax and, if I am reading the figures correctly, the additional amounts he has given to charity show total payment well in excess of 40%.

American Crisis. These points are surely an indication of an American crisis of confidence. While we have a free vote on ethical issues like abortion, those are now crucial to a Presidential campaign. Arguably we could do with more scrutiny of personal ethics here. It is ludicrous though that issues of this kind can be so significant when the key national policy areas must be the economy and defence. As for the tax, the issue is essentially about the distinction between tax rates on earnings and investments. When even Republicans decide that individuals are reprehensible because they are just too wealthy, the US is clearly wobbling on its centuries of commitment to free enterprise. That Romney did not declare his tax returns earlier and the amount he has chosen to donate has been a tragic error. That is unless his team were of the view that basic American principles have lost popular support.

[Mahlerei]

That randy old dog Gingrich should be newtered.

[Ferretfancy]

His latest campaign promise is that "in his second term" he will have an American colony on the moon. An astro-newt, as Channel 4 News captioned it !