Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
All interesting points, but...
The first real growth period was probably the Industrial Revolution (1870-1900) after slavery was abolished. It took place mostly in northern states where low cost labor was available.
The 100%/100%/100% can only be explained not rationalized. One of the strongest voting blocks (people who actually vote) would be seniors. The way they vote was ingrained more than 40 years ago.
And yes when the majority switches there will be a period of "payback".
Was the farmers contribution equal to the scientist? What was important was the contribution. During America's immigration boom, mostly all believed they were coming to a place of freedom and opportunity and in some ways we grew together as a nation, as Americans. That was displayed during WW II.
I know why the first Catholic was elected president and I know why the last Catholic candidate was not. I do not know why any others were not elected. What was the platform they ran on, their message for the country?
Read some of Justice Thomas opinions and the idea of PR might change. And since most presidents seem to listen advisors opinions, I'm glad President Bush put the smartest people he could into key positions.
Very few if any parts of our society actually reflect the nations demographic makeup. Who does? Sometimes stereotypes have to be broken or shattered before progress can be made.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
It's nice that both Seamus and Romulas took the time to address so much of my post and answer with rational debate.
I don't see the bias towards Euro-males changing in the near-future. I don't believe candidates are chosen by the populace, but by the party powerful, very heavily weighted towards rich whites. It's a closed club. Even if a Jackson, a Powell, or a Rice could get elected (no chance), they would be controlled by the legislature.
I think neither Powell nor Rice have had any true power or decision-making impact on the US government. I like both of them better than Bush (way better), but they are de facto ineffectual. Even Powell himself expressed frustration with being left out of "the loop".
The representation of women was really the foundation of this debate, and the 100% male advantage in the presidential list can have no explanation than just anti-female bias. This bias is reflected in the low numbers in the legislature and the bench as well.
Justice Thomas was no better than other candidates for his position. It is no coincidence that he entered that position immediately after Marshall left. Why no overlap? Why no gap?
I disagree on the Catholic population of the US. From the stats I've read, it's about equal to the Protestants.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
jealous envy.
Would you like a little truism with your tautology :dizzy2:
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Would you like a little truism with your tautology :dizzy2:
Sure try :laugh4:
You walked into it and now you are seeming to have a problem with it.
Just wipe your shoes off from stepping in your own poo. :laugh4:
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romulas
All interesting points, but...
The first real growth period was probably the Industrial Revolution (1870-1900) after slavery was abolished. It took place mostly in northern states where low cost labor was available.
The 100%/100%/100% can only be explained not rationalized. One of the strongest voting blocks (people who actually vote) would be seniors. The way they vote was ingrained more than 40 years ago.
And yes when the majority switches there will be a period of "payback".
Was the farmers contribution equal to the scientist? What was important was the contribution. During America's immigration boom, mostly all believed they were coming to a place of freedom and opportunity and in some ways we grew together as a nation, as Americans. That was displayed during WW II.
I know why the first Catholic was elected president and I know why the last Catholic candidate was not. I do not know why any others were not elected. What was the platform they ran on, their message for the country?
Read some of Justice Thomas opinions and the idea of PR might change. And since most presidents seem to listen advisors opinions, I'm glad President Bush put the smartest people he could into key positions.
Very few if any parts of our society actually reflect the nations demographic makeup. Who does? Sometimes stereotypes have to be broken or shattered before progress can be made.
While a greater percentage of America's senior citizens vote in any given election it is the Baby Boomers that constitute the decisive voting block and the last time I checked they generally vote middle-left instead of middle-right. Now at first glance this might signify an impending, massive shift in American politics once the last of the pre-war generations finally passes away (i.e. "payback") however the general trend is for people to become more conservative as they advance with age.
On an aside I work for one of... ok, the biggest media corporation in the world and virtually all the research and buzz coming out of marketing and ad sales is devoted to Baby Boomers; how they think, feel, spend, etc. Their impact on America's political & socio-economic landscape is undeniably huge. The one surprising statistic about subsequent generations (especially Gen X'ers) is that despite the media and pop culture hype and their horrid spending habits, questionable ethics, lack of morals etc. they actually vote right down the middle with no discernable lean towards either party. One thing for sure is that among the post war groups voter participation decreases with each successive generation. It's conceivable that should the Boomers fall into the general trend of voting more middle-right as they grow older the political landscape of the U.S. won't change much over the next 20-30 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tachikaze
I don't see the bias towards Euro-males changing in the near-future. I don't believe candidates are chosen by the populace, but by the party powerful, very heavily weighted towards rich whites. It's a closed club. Even if a Jackson, a Powell, or a Rice could get elected (no chance), they would be controlled by the legislature...
...The representation of women was really the foundation of this debate, and the 100% male advantage in the presidential list can have no explanation than just anti-female bias. This bias is reflected in the low numbers in the legislature and the bench as well...
Your argument regarding a Euro-male bias might hold water if the United States wasn't overwhelmingly of European ancestry. Per the last census report if you take into account Hispanics who classify themselves as 'white' the overall European population of the U.S. is around 80-85%. What kind of representation do you expect to take place in this country? It's not as if the U.S. is being run by a small ethnic minority that possesses a virtual stranglehold on the economic and political landscape (read up on the dominance of ethnic Chinese in pre 21st century Malaysia & Indonesia). Over the last few decades more non-European, non-Sub Saharan African ethnic groups are getting involved in U.S. politics however there are some groups that don't seem to be as interested in exerting a political influence as others. Americans of East Asian ancestry are seriously underrepresented in American politics and yet they are racially speaking, number one in terms of socio-economic standing and academic achievement. Clearly their not being fairly represented in government hasn't hurt their ability to succeed in this country.
Regarding your male bias I hate to break it to you Tachikaze but the general human trend is to look to alpha males to lead the tribe, not alpha females. You need a little more than a scant hundred years of women in the workplace, feminist studies programs and metrosexual attitudes to alter several million years of primate psychology. There is a natural inclination for primate females to look to males for aggressive, decisive leadership, not other females. I've lost count of how many times in the workplace where I've heard women openly cited their preference to either work for men or have men working for them. Try to remember that we're primates and not tabula rasa humanoid spirits wandering through the feelgood ether of the universe.
Wondering why more women don't run for office is a bit like wondering why more women doctors don't become cutting edge specialists instead of becoming general practicioners or pediatricians. You need to look at the underlying evolutionary psychology at work.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
my main prob with hilary, is she just rubs me the wrong way. she seems to have that aura about her, you either love her or hate her, and me, well id rather shave with a cheese grater than be in the same room with her... and its just her, ive gotten to meet ole billy boy, and despite not caring for him politically, he is really a nice guy..
and tachi, i can understand wanting a female, or even a minority president, as you said were overdue, and imo opinion we are, and i feel its safe to say well have a minority male, before a female pres, and that person will be a conservative, mark my words, you cant change things in this coutry that fast, you gotta give people a chance to get used to new things.
just have patience my friend the old ways are dying out, the younger generations are always more tolerant of change than the older ones. just try and remember that. their will be a day when we will hear madame president.. but it wont be hillary, im sorry. if she gets elected, im calling in canadien citizenship and moving there.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
In my opinion, if the democrats want to waste another election, they should go wtih her.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spino
Regarding your male bias I hate to break it to you Tachikaze but the general human trend is to look to alpha males to lead the tribe, not alpha females. You need a little more than a scant hundred years of women in the workplace, feminist studies programs and metrosexual attitudes to alter several million years of primate psychology. There is a natural inclination for primate females to look to males for aggressive, decisive leadership, not other females. I've lost count of how many times in the workplace where I've heard women openly cited their preference to either work for men or have men working for them. Try to remember that we're primates and not tabula rasa humanoid spirits wandering through the feelgood ether of the universe.
I would give more credit to your post, but a few pages back, I was pointing out that the US was behind other countries in electing a female head of state. So, I'm not just complaining that we haven't had one, but that Pakistan (et al) beat us to it. Pakistan and the others I listed earlier decided they could have an alpha female. Hell, even Japan had Himiko 1300 years ago.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrock
my main prob with hilary, is she just rubs me the wrong way. she seems to have that aura about her, you either love her or hate her, and me, well id rather shave with a cheese grater than be in the same room with her... and its just her, ive gotten to meet ole billy boy, and despite not caring for him politically, he is really a nice guy..
and tachi, i can understand wanting a female, or even a minority president, as you said were overdue, and imo opinion we are, and i feel its safe to say well have a minority male, before a female pres, and that person will be a conservative, mark my words, you cant change things in this coutry that fast, you gotta give people a chance to get used to new things.
just have patience my friend the old ways are dying out, the younger generations are always more tolerant of change than the older ones. just try and remember that. their will be a day when we will hear madame president.. but it wont be hillary, im sorry. if she gets elected, im calling in canadien citizenship and moving there.
Did I ever welcome you back, Jayrock of the North?
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tachikaze
Did I ever welcome you back, Jayrock of the North?
probrably, but its been a crazy time up here, lost my job of 13 years back in sept, and been looking for a new home so to speak for 6 mos now, thought i found it, but it was all hot air, and im currently hunting again...
but seriously it will happen, this nation is more ready for a minority pres, then it was even 10 years ago...
patience my friend, thats all i can say, allow the rest of the nation to catch up to the current culture and i believe both of us will be pleasently suprised for the future.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tachikaze
I would give more credit to your post, but a few pages back, I was pointing out that the US was behind other countries in electing a female head of state. So, I'm not just complaining that we haven't had one, but that Pakistan (et al) beat us to it. Pakistan and the others I listed earlier decided they could have an alpha female. Hell, even Japan had Himiko 1300 years ago.
I'm still not understanding the need for having a vagina or darker skin pigment in order to somehow be fair in the electoral process? Do you think there should be an affirmative action process in the electoral process now? If a candidate had six tits, a trunk, and three penises but supported my beliefs I'd vote for it. I think your loathing of the United States and its foundation only blinds you to a point that you consider any person white "European" as you say, Christian, or Conservative, you consider them sexist and racists because they don't elect anything except for whites (which isn't true except in Tachi's little Hate America agenda). I think you "misunderestimate" your fellow Americans. Maybe its not your fellow countrymen that are the true racists or sexists in this discussion.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tachikaze
I would give more credit to your post, but a few pages back, I was pointing out that the US was behind other countries in electing a female head of state. So, I'm not just complaining that we haven't had one, but that Pakistan (et al) beat us to it. Pakistan and the others I listed earlier decided they could have an alpha female. Hell, even Japan had Himiko 1300 years ago.
Fair enough but in the overall scheme of things those examples are still the exceptions to the rule. Regent by birth or per appointment by a body of nobles acting out of self interest is one thing but I find it interesting that as far as democracies are concerned it is countries like Pakistan, India, Israel, the Philippines, Indonesia, etc. that are leading the pack. Interesting in that all of those countries were or are places where women either by law or tradition are primarily relegated to the traditional role of homemaker. It seems men are more inclined to elect or support a female leader if their perception of the average woman is one of a moral, motherly figure and wife instead of a non-serious girlfriend or career path professional. Failing that voters of either sex seem to be more likely to support women who also espouse those same values (i.e. Thatcher & Merkel). I don't think it's that surprising. The west (especially America) may lead the world in terms of women's rights and the percentage of women in the workplace but with their newfound freedom western women also lead the world in terms of infidelity and practically corner the market on 'less respectable' careers like modeling, stripping, porn, etc. There also seems to be no shortage of women in the west who are single minded in their obsession with attracting the attentions of men by either dressing provocatively and adopting the growing trend of wearing as little as possible to clubs and wearing next to nothing at the beach, etc. It may be unfair to judge the average western woman based on the actions of a select few but if the rank and file of those few seems to grow steadily with each year since women were granted the right to vote I can understand how it may affect how the average western male views the opposite sex.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spino
Fair enough but in the overall scheme of things those examples are still the exceptions to the rule. Regent by birth or per appointment by a body of nobles acting out of self interest is one thing but I find it interesting that as far as democracies are concerned it is countries like Pakistan, India, Israel, the Philippines, Indonesia, etc. that are leading the pack. Interesting in that all of those countries were or are places where women either by law or tradition are primarily relegated to the traditional role of homemaker. It seems men are more inclined to elect or support a female leader if their perception of the average woman is one of a moral, motherly figure and wife instead of a non-serious girlfriend or career path professional. Failing that voters of either sex seem to be more likely to support women who also espouse those same values (i.e. Thatcher & Merkel). I don't think it's that surprising. The west (especially America) may lead the world in terms of women's rights and the percentage of women in the workplace but with their newfound freedom western women also lead the world in terms of infidelity and practically corner the market on 'less respectable' careers like modeling, stripping, porn, etc. There also seems to be no shortage of women in the west who are single minded in their obsession with attracting the attentions of men by either dressing provocatively and adopting the growing trend of wearing as little as possible to clubs and wearing next to nothing at the beach, etc. It may be unfair to judge the average western woman based on the actions of a select few but if the rank and file of those few seems to grow steadily with each year since women were granted the right to vote I can understand how it may affect how the average western male views the opposite sex.
Good post and a thought-provoking perspective.
Re: Poll: Thumbs Down on Prez Hillary Clinton
Well now, we have an interesting topic with intelligent and rational debate.
We are right were the Founding Fathers wanted us. From over 230 years ago they have managed to lead us down the right path. We as a country just have to open our eyes and get "back on the path". And we get there by working together.
