 |
|
 PoliticsForum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc.. As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself. Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!! *"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned." You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Pawn. Mode: Everyone can post
18. September 2009, 17:51:29 Subject: Ralph Nader  Bwild: For those who don't know much about him, here is a couple of links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader http://www.nader.org/ Reading a little about him, I found out that he is a lawyer. Since the late 1950s he has been involved in issues such as public safety, environmental protection, government corruption and legislation to support those and other issues. He has aligned himself with the Green Party. This party stands somewhere between the "liberal" parties (like the Democrats) and the European social democratic movement. I will not say that he is a socialist. That would be inaccurate. He is a populist reformer. He believes that legislation and good government can get rid of many of the problems people face today. Of course. all politicians will say the same thing. Considering the candidates he has run against from 2000 until now, I would say that for my liking he was probably the best one out there. Well, he comes closer to my left-leaning politics. He is certainly a very intelligent, very experienced politician. I would say his only weakness is his lack of experience in foreign policy. Other than that he seems to be one of the most capable politicians the US has had in the last 20 years. Most Republicans in the US dislike him, and Democrats blame him for tilting the balance in favor of George W. Bush in 2000. He attracted much of the left-leaning vote, and the Democrats think they lost because of him. Of course, the same can be said of the Reform Party, which attracts the right-leaning vote. I think that he is at least an alternative to two political parties that have become entrenched in their ideologies. I have seen no change coming from conservatives (Republicans) or liberals (Democrats) for the last 40 years. 19. September 2009, 03:56:08 Subject: Re: Ralph Nader  Übergeek 바둑이: Nader refused lobbyist campaign money. in fact was strongly against lobbyist, and vowed to abolish the practise. Soros invested heavily in Brazilian oil....then guess our man yomama..decides to do the same, diverting U.S. funds from U.S. soil...funds our country could surely put to better use. Soros was a large campaign contributer for the yomama team. 19. September 2009, 04:17:07 Subject: Re: Ralph Nader  Bwild: ROFL @ yomama 19. September 2009, 19:14:35 Subject: Re: Ralph Nader Übergeek 바둑이: ?? Are coalitions not legal in the USA? I would have thought (as has happened in the UK) that those who are roughly on the same side would club together and form a government. Interesting politics when that happens. 20. September 2009, 18:14:55 Subject: Re: Ralph Nader (V): I think the Us has not needed coalition governments since the mid 19th century. The Republicans were founded in 1854. The Democrats trace their roots back to 1792. Both parties have dominated American politics since the mid 19th century and for this reason the US did not need coalitions or had any other two political parties in power since then 20. September 2009, 20:26:35 Subject: Re: Ralph Nader Übergeek 바둑이: I wondered why I found it as being a 'rare' occurrence. Yet the make up now seems to be a 3 way split regarding votes and political allegiances. It's gonna be interesting next general election here, many independents will be running against the established two parties. And thanks to the expenses scandal, alot will get in. The papers made a field day of how MP's reacted to the news of the public's distaste at the way they'd been creaming it. And that some tried to bring criminal prosecution against the details been paraded.. they had no chance.  They live by the press, they die by the press.  20. September 2009, 22:07:04 Subject: Re: Ralph Nader (V): It is interesting with the UK because the dirty laundry is now being washed in public. I think at this point the UK finds itself in politically interesting times. On the one hand a lot of people have a bitter aftertaste of the many years of the Conservatives. There are bitter memories of the Thatcher years. Many people also have a bad impression of the Labour politicians and their handling of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is also all this mess with MP expenses. I think smaller parties have better chances this time around. I don't know if any of the Liberal Democrats have been dragged into the recent scandals but if the local elections of 2008 are a sign, they could unseat a lot of Labour and Tory MPs. Over the last 10 years the Liberal Democrats have made steady gains in vote percentages and I think the next time around they will win big if they can convince the public that a change is needed in the House of Commons. Here in Canada we have a some dirty politics going on now. The Liberals (similar to Labour in the UK) are trying to unseat the Tories and the National Democratic Party (more or less similar to the Liberal Democrats of the UK) are promising to hold off a no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister if the ruling Conservatives agree to some concessions in Parliament. People here are really fed up with the mess and I think that if the Liberals insist in forcing an election then the public will react by voting for the Green Party instead of them. We could see the Green Party rise from a small party to one of the big contenders. 20. September 2009, 23:14:53 Subject: Re: Ralph Nader Übergeek 바둑이: People in the UK have been getting pretty much tired of the major parties for a number of years. Technically, no government has had a majority for years, seeing as the voting level has dropped to 50% or there about's of the adult population. Before, it was how MP's always agreed on good pay rises for themselves despite Joe Public having to settle for half or less of the %. As for the Liberal Democrats.. not clean, but not as dirty as the main two. Labour came of the worst, yet the whole system has taken a bash and the necessary show of humility that needed to settle us voters fell far short of being acceptable. The Conservatives will not commit in essential areas (troop safety) which does not lie well with me, and Labour are not listening to the Army chiefs. I think the Liberal Democrats, minor parties and Independents will do very well. Especially in seats where current MP's have shown little or no remorse. "It was within the rules" is a line that does not stand well here at all. |
Date and time
Friends online
Favourite boards
Fellowships
Tip of the day
|
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved. Back to the top |