2004 Election : what now ?

Stayed up all night watching the US election? I didn't have time to read the rest.
I'll be damned if I'd lose a wink of sleep wondering who the next grand poobah of Ireland will be.
Limmerickman, buddy, pal, find something more amusing to do with your time. This is really sad.
Have a great day!
Enjoy your life!

limerickman said:

I watched the coverage of the US election - stayed up through the night in fact, and watched wall-to-wall coverage on BBC, ITV and our own national stations, with cut ins from those bastions of impartiality ABC, NBC and CBS.
(For our American friends - you're political analysis on all stations is inferior.
For your own sakes - you ought to get some control on the outlandish stuff that your media presents you with. Amateurish at best.)

Couple of quick comments : Local channels here were hopping in and out of CNN coverage.
At 03.30 hrs GMT (22.30 EST), Joe Lockhart of the Democratic Party tells some bloke from CNN "we will win Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa....."
He tells us that the basis for this epiphany is that "our exit polls........."

One hour 45 mins later : Florida goes to Bush and Ohio is "leaning" to Bush.
So much for exit polls and Mr.Lockhart.
So much for CNN indulging Mr.Lockhart.

Then, on the basis of Lockharts predictions - we have a CNN muppet colouring-in states on a map with either red/blue to show us the predicted outcome, based on Lockharts analysis !
The upshot being that CNN and Lockhart looked stupid - and indeed they appeared to be delusional.
And all this going on, while Ohio and other states are still voting !

Democracy indeed - media people talking through their collective arses while
people are still voting and could be influenced one way or the other.

Wouldn't get Dimbleby or Paxo doing that kind of stuff here.

Anyway - the result is now in.
To the future.

My question :

The rest of the world now need to make a choice.

Bush's policy - given it's strengthened endorsement in the result - presents
Europe, Asia and Anzacs with a choice.
Should the rest of the world move away, politically from the USA, given the
result ?
Or should we stand "side by side" with the USA, in the hope that perhaps
we may be able to influence USA policy going forward ?

Thoughts from those outside of the USA appreciated. (Yanks can reply also
if they so wish)

szbert said:

I didn't have time to read the rest.

should read "I haven't the ability to read the rest".

Literacy, I know, it's a second language to you, Marion.

Whatever limmerdude.

Have a good one!

limerickman said:

should read "I haven't the ability to read the rest".

Literacy, I know, it's a second language to you, Marion.

limerickman said:

I watched the coverage of the US election - stayed up through the night in fact, and watched wall-to-wall coverage on BBC, ITV and our own national stations, with cut ins from those bastions of impartiality ABC, NBC and CBS.
(For our American friends - you're political analysis on all stations is inferior.
For your own sakes - you ought to get some control on the outlandish stuff that your media presents you with. Amateurish at best.)

Couple of quick comments : Local channels here were hopping in and out of CNN coverage.
At 03.30 hrs GMT (22.30 EST), Joe Lockhart of the Democratic Party tells some bloke from CNN "we will win Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa....."
He tells us that the basis for this epiphany is that "our exit polls........."

One hour 45 mins later : Florida goes to Bush and Ohio is "leaning" to Bush.
So much for exit polls and Mr.Lockhart.
So much for CNN indulging Mr.Lockhart.

Then, on the basis of Lockharts predictions - we have a CNN muppet colouring-in states on a map with either red/blue to show us the predicted outcome, based on Lockharts analysis !
The upshot being that CNN and Lockhart looked stupid - and indeed they appeared to be delusional.
And all this going on, while Ohio and other states are still voting !

Democracy indeed - media people talking through their collective arses while
people are still voting and could be influenced one way or the other.

Wouldn't get Dimbleby or Paxo doing that kind of stuff here.

Anyway - the result is now in.
To the future.

My question :

The rest of the world now need to make a choice.

Bush's policy - given it's strengthened endorsement in the result - presents
Europe, Asia and Anzacs with a choice.
Should the rest of the world move away, politically from the USA, given the
result ?
Or should we stand "side by side" with the USA, in the hope that perhaps
we may be able to influence USA policy going forward ?

Thoughts from those outside of the USA appreciated. (Yanks can reply also
if they so wish)

We are very concerned as to how mighty Ireland aligns itself politically. LMFAO

Seeing that Ireland pretends to be neutral, they would fall clearly into the "I don't give a rat's ass, column."

skydive69 said:

We are very concerned as to how mighty Ireland aligns itself politically. LMFAO

limerickman said:

Should the rest of the world move away, politically from the USA, given the result ?

Or should we stand "side by side" with the USA, in the hope that perhaps
we may be able to influence USA policy going forward ?

Thoughts from those outside of the USA appreciated. (Yanks can reply also
if they so wish)

Not only politically, but economically, too. It seems that the world is all to happy to cede political power to the U.S. and I'm not sure why. Perhaps it was necessary post-WWII and during the Cold War era. But does it serve a purpose now? I'm not an economist, but it seems to me that the EU has the potential of becoming more of a major player in the world markets, too. The thing is: don't stand "side by side" with us if you don't like where we're going.

szbert said:

Stayed up all night watching the US election? I didn't have time to read the rest.
I'll be damned if I'd lose a wink of sleep wondering who the next grand poobah of Ireland will be.
Limmerickman, buddy, pal, find something more amusing to do with your time. This is really sad.
Have a great day!
Enjoy your life!

Jesus boy you're suck a fecking moron..... Limerickman: nice post! (as usual)

Regarding the question: I would hope that Europe moves economically, politically and militarily away from the States. We should move to isolate them now, not in a vindictive way but certainly in the interests of world peace. I read today that Blair had already said that Bust should make moves to have better relations with Europe but he can't do that if he doesn't change may of his policies (which he won't).

I'd like to see the EU (population 450 million), start to make a more positive effort to bring Bush into line (US Pop approx. 280 million). I see it happening but not for a while - the EU is in its infancy and will need time to develop uniformity at the policy level.

I know that this will get flamed ("you're such a EuroPeon Libo SuzyQ".... etc...) but am totally prepared for the idiots in this debate to make fools of themselves in front of the other, rational, normal people who like to be here...

SuzyQ the EuroPeon
😉

[Thoughts from those outside of the USA appreciated. (Yanks can reply also
if they so wish)[/QUOTE]

I am not a "Yank" I am from the south but seriously I will only respond by saying this is probably a good question to ask except the timing may be better in a week or so when severe polarization diminishes a bit.

It would be nice to see the rest of the world isolate the US politically and economically until it falls into line. But it'll never happen. Besides, America has something of a track record of taking by force anything it can't get peacefully.

On an aside: it's very sad to see that there are so many hateful, aggressive people in these forums. Maybe they're like that because they're relieved Bush won, or maybe they're just unpleasant people, but either way they make things crappy for those who want to behave in a civilised fashion (whether they support Bush or not).

Ssushi said:

Regarding the question: I would hope that Europe moves economically, politically and militarily away from the States. We should move to isolate them now, not in a vindictive way but certainly in the interests of world peace. I read today that Blair had already said that Bust should make moves to have better relations with Europe but he can't do that if he doesn't change may of his policies (which he won't).

I'd like to see the EU (population 450 million), start to make a more positive effort to bring Bush into line (US Pop approx. 280 million). I see it happening but not for a while - the EU is in its infancy and will need time to develop uniformity at the policy level.

I know that this will get flamed ("you're such a EuroPeon Libo SuzyQ".... etc...) but am totally prepared for the idiots in this debate to make fools of themselves in front of the other, rational, normal people who like to be here...

SuzyQ the EuroPeon
😉

I agree, but sadly, Bush and his insular administration give little thought as to what happens outside the borders of thier country..hence 9/11.

come to think of it, they give litte thought, full stop.

Ssushi said:

Regarding the question: I would hope that Europe moves economically, politically and militarily away from the States. We should move to isolate them now, not in a vindictive way but certainly in the interests of world peace. I read today that Blair had already said that Bust should make moves to have better relations with Europe but he can't do that if he doesn't change may of his policies (which he won't).

I'd like to see the EU (population 450 million), start to make a more positive effort to bring Bush into line (US Pop approx. 280 million). I see it happening but not for a while - the EU is in its infancy and will need time to develop uniformity at the policy level.

I know that this will get flamed ("you're such a EuroPeon Libo SuzyQ".... etc...) but am totally prepared for the idiots in this debate to make fools of themselves in front of the other, rational, normal people who like to be here...

SuzyQ the EuroPeon
😉

Yes, the knuckleheads here cannot distinguish between Ireand and/or Europe,
Asia and Anzacs.
I framed the question and asked should these entities (Europe/Asia/Anzacs)
move away from the USA politically.
Not individual countries with these entities.

Seems Marion's illiteracy has spead to his fellow travellers.

Ok, let's open this discussion.
Presently, the EU has 25 member states.
In respect of the EU's interaction with the USA - the major stumbling blocks are trade and tariffs, and Iraq.

On foreign policy, most EU countries have opted to let the USA go it alone - apart from Britain and Poland.
Most of the other countries in the EU are either neutral or have actively told the USA that they cannot/will not support the US invasion of Iraq.
So politically the EU has more or else has moved away from the USA on this policy.
Are you suggesting that the EU should follow this up in other ways ?
Perhaps look at scrapping trade and tariff agreements ?
Bush's most recent appeal through the UN for more international support in Iraq fell on deaf ears.
No one has come forward.

As regards Asia, the Chinese goverment foreign minister has said that Bush is
engaging in US imperialism, following Iraq.
Should Europe look to aligning itself with China - after all the Chinese economy will record the highest growth in the world for the third consecutive year ?

Judging by the reaction here in Europe, there is no appetite to work with a Bush administration that is emboldened by winning Congress and Senate and
Presidential votes.
German and French reaction to the Bush win is lip service.
The feeling here is that Bush might well become more rightwing in the period
2004-2008.

mjw_byrne said:

It would be nice to see the rest of the world isolate the US politically and economically until it falls into line. But it'll never happen. Besides, America has something of a track record of taking by force anything it can't get peacefully.

On an aside: it's very sad to see that there are so many hateful, aggressive people in these forums. Maybe they're like that because they're relieved Bush won, or maybe they're just unpleasant people, but either way they make things crappy for those who want to behave in a civilised fashion (whether they support Bush or not).

Did you ever consider that people take remarks like yours on a personal level and maybe respond emotionally. If you want individuals to act civilized use civility. Your remarks to me seem hateful and aggressive.
Please step back and take a broader view.
Just a thought.

jhuskey said:

[Thoughts from those outside of the USA appreciated. (Yanks can reply also
if they so wish)

I am not a "Yank" I am from the south but seriously I will only respond by saying this is probably a good question to ask except the timing may be better in a week or so when severe polarization diminishes a bit.[/QUOTE]

No offence JHuskey meant - in my using the term Yank.
Should have used ther term, American.

limerickman said:

I am not a "Yank" I am from the south but seriously I will only respond by saying this is probably a good question to ask except the timing may be better in a week or so when severe polarization diminishes a bit.

No offence JHuskey meant - in my using the term Yank.
Should have used ther term, American.[/QUOTE]

None taken! Just my attempt at humor.

The way things stand I think we'll see a real divide between Europe and the U.S. now Bush has been elected. I think there may have been some basic divisions even if John Kerry had got into office - simply because the U.S. has swung way to the Right over the last decade, while Europe has adopted more of a socialist political bent.
I think Tony Blair will do his best to try and unify the E.U. and the Bush Administration but don't rate his chances very highly. There is basicallly no way France or Germany will find any common ground with Bush - even if they want to.
However, I think Europe needs to get its act together. Europe is now the strongest economic power on the globe but needs to follow through the idea of a European intelligence network and organised military to rival NATO.
I also reckon that no matter how much you dislike Bush Junior, Europe still owes a kind of historical debt to the U.S. for investing billions of dollars on European defence during the Cold War. The Europeans were too lazy to invest money in their own defence and simply allowed America and Russia to build up their arms. They became mere pawns in the process so that only France is a nuclear power today (while all the other European countries are paper weights). If not for the U.S.A. we'd possibly all be communist dictatorships, of course.
But, at present, I think Europe will go in a different direction. And Bush won't take enough notice of the E.U. until we can pack a big enough puch to send troops out into trouble spots as well.
Good post Limerickman.

limerickman said:

I watched the coverage of the US election - stayed up through the night in fact, and watched wall-to-wall coverage on BBC, ITV and our own national stations, with cut ins from those bastions of impartiality ABC, NBC and CBS.
(For our American friends - you're political analysis on all stations is inferior.
For your own sakes - you ought to get some control on the outlandish stuff that your media presents you with. Amateurish at best.)

Couple of quick comments : Local channels here were hopping in and out of CNN coverage.
At 03.30 hrs GMT (22.30 EST), Joe Lockhart of the Democratic Party tells some bloke from CNN "we will win Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa....."
He tells us that the basis for this epiphany is that "our exit polls........."

One hour 45 mins later : Florida goes to Bush and Ohio is "leaning" to Bush.
So much for exit polls and Mr.Lockhart.
So much for CNN indulging Mr.Lockhart.

Then, on the basis of Lockharts predictions - we have a CNN muppet colouring-in states on a map with either red/blue to show us the predicted outcome, based on Lockharts analysis !
The upshot being that CNN and Lockhart looked stupid - and indeed they appeared to be delusional.
And all this going on, while Ohio and other states are still voting !

Democracy indeed - media people talking through their collective arses while
people are still voting and could be influenced one way or the other.

Wouldn't get Dimbleby or Paxo doing that kind of stuff here.

Anyway - the result is now in.
To the future.

My question :

The rest of the world now need to make a choice.

Bush's policy - given it's strengthened endorsement in the result - presents
Europe, Asia and Anzacs with a choice.
Should the rest of the world move away, politically from the USA, given the
result ?
Or should we stand "side by side" with the USA, in the hope that perhaps
we may be able to influence USA policy going forward ?

Thoughts from those outside of the USA appreciated. (Yanks can reply also
if they so wish)

Carrera said:

The way things stand I think we'll see a real divide between Europe and the U.S. now Bush has been elected. I think there may have been some basic divisions even if John Kerry had got into office - simply because the U.S. has swung way to the Right over the last decade, while Europe has adopted more of a socialist political bent.
I think Tony Blair will do his best to try and unify the E.U. and the Bush Administration but don't rate his chances very highly. There is basicallly no way France or Germany will find any common ground with Bush - even if they want to.
However, I think Europe needs to get its act together. Europe is now the strongest economic power on the globe but needs to follow through the idea of a European intelligence network and organised military to rival NATO.
I also reckon that no matter how much you dislike Bush Junior, Europe still owes a kind of historical debt to the U.S. for investing billions of dollars on European defence during the Cold War. The Europeans were too lazy to invest money in their own defence and simply allowed America and Russia to build up their arms. They became mere pawns in the process so that only France is a nuclear power today (while all the other European countries are paper weights). If not for the U.S.A. we'd possibly all be communist dictatorships, of course.
But, at present, I think Europe will go in a different direction. And Bush won't take enough notice of the E.U. until we can pack a big enough puch to send troops out into trouble spots as well.
Good post Limerickman.

Carrera,

You raise some very interesting observations here.

Europe owes an historical debt to the USA, I agree - but not Bush junior though.

I would like to see the EU work closely with the USA but I think that it is impossible to work with a US govermentthat which acts unilaterally and on the basis of doctored evidence and lies (ie Iraq).
And we both agree that neither Germany/France and the majority of the EU could tolerate working with such a goverment and this is only right.

I'd like to see a EU military force as you point out - to counterbalance NATO and I would also like to see our intelligence agency here in Europe (the skeleton is in place with Interpol - just need to embellish it).

The EU is the major econoomic power in the world and we need to build on that power and to act as a trading block.
I'd like to see more engagement with China and other countries like India and to move.

Thanks for the reply, Carrera.

Europe owes a debt to the U.S. I confess.
We basically sponged off America for years which is something that irritates then now we seem to be so critical.
It's important to remember that Americans had to tighten their belts to be able to afford the arms build up they needed to secure to protect Berlin, France and Britain during the Cold War. Most of the burden fell on the American taxpayer's wallet but Europe should have invested in arms too. Then, there wouldn't have been a problem of unilateralism.
My ex-girlfriend is from L.A. (originally from Connecticut (did I spell it right) and I think she dislikes Junior as much as I do (or maybe as much). Last I heard she was voting for Bob Dole or someone or other.

limerickman said:

Carrera,

You raise some very interesting observations here.

Europe owes an historical debt to the USA, I agree - but not Bush junior though.

I would like to see the EU work closely with the USA but I think that it is impossible to work with a US govermentthat which acts unilaterally and on the basis of doctored evidence and lies (ie Iraq).
And we both agree that neither Germany/France and the majority of the EU could tolerate working with such a goverment and this is only right.

I'd like to see a EU military force as you point out - to counterbalance NATO and I would also like to see our intelligence agency here in Europe (the skeleton is in place with Interpol - just need to embellish it).

The EU is the major econoomic power in the world and we need to build on that power and to act as a trading block.
I'd like to see more engagement with China and other countries like India and to move.

Thanks for the reply, Carrera.

Carrera said:

Europe owes a debt to the U.S. I confess.
We basically sponged off America for years which is something that irritates then now we seem to be so critical.
It's important to remember that Americans had to tighten their belts to be able to afford the arms build up they needed to secure to protect Berlin, France and Britain during the Cold War. Most of the burden fell on the American taxpayer's wallet but Europe should have invested in arms too. Then, there wouldn't have been a problem of unilateralism.
My ex-girlfriend is from L.A. (originally from Connecticut (did I spell it right) and I think she dislikes Junior as much as I do (or maybe as much). Last I heard she was voting for Bob Dole or someone or other.

Concerning Berlin; that was the US commander in Europes fault for not following orders and moving on Berlin when Monty was supposed to. The following sequence of events and delays allowed the USSR to grap the east side of Berlin. I'm not having a go but think this is an important point, bearing in mind the recent topics on US military etc... the point is, if you ended up having to stay in Europe longer - you brought it on yourselves.

PS When does 'our dept' end? What about your dept to us for dropping you off in the land of hope and glory in the firest place? You dont hear us wittering on about that do you?