在有些英国报纸评论来看,美国大选胜负已定。各类专家已经开始给他找失利理由了。
奥巴马经过了民主党艰难初战,被希拉里给彻底锤炼了一把。迄今止为看开上去确实举重若轻,胜似闲庭散步,极少再犯错误。不简单。
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/10/he-hasnt-lost-y.html
The McCain excuses begin
He hasn't lost yet, but the post campaign assessment is beginning. Already pundits are asking the question why might did McCain lose?
Here's what's on offer just today:
Karl Rove suggests (a popular one this) that the campaign should have started beating up on Obama much earlier:
Mr. Obama's troublesome friendships with Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko and (especially) Rev. Jeremiah Wright are important. But only 12 days remain. These relationships should have been highlighted by the McCain campaign in the spring and summer.
Froma Harrop argues that the Sarah Palin pick broke the heart of centrists:
Once on her own, she quickly displayed a shocking ignorance of world affairs and a general inability to talk coherently on policy matters. Her habit of dividing America - even individual states - into good and not-as-good sectors comes off as downright weird.
Meanwhile Joe Klein argues that Obama is winning rather than McCain losing:
Barack Obama has prospered in this presidential campaign because of the steadiness of his temperament and the judicious quality of his decision-making.
My own view, for what its worth, is that both Harrop and Klein have it a little bit right. McCain needed to keep his reputation with independents and didn't (with Sarah Palin being one big reason for that). And he needed Obama to screw up. And Obama didn't.
But this is only a little bit right. Because it is too small an explanation.
The American electorate has changed. And the Republicans have not changed with them. They need to appeal to liberal, urban, middle class America and to new immigrant groups.
At the moment they are drifting away from voters. And a million miles away from realising it.
They need a leader who can help them make that change. McCain proved not to be that leader.
Posted by Daniel Finkelstein on October 23, 2008 in John McCain | Permalink | Comments (38) | TrackBack (0) | Email this post
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/25/2008
I think the end results may be very close especially for battleground states. For quite some battleground states, Obama's lead is only a couple of point.
I do believe Obama would prevail in the end... - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/25/2008
l令胡,岂不知轻敌是兵家最大的忌讳~~~
我没有那样乐观。布什的两次当选让我觉得美国大选什么都可能发生,不要低估美国人创造奇迹的能力,嘿嘿。。。
xy wrote:
I think the end results may be very close especially for battleground states. For quite some battleground states, Obama's lead is only a couple of point.
I do believe Obama would prevail in the end... - posted on 10/25/2008
星光 wrote:
l令胡,岂不知轻敌是兵家最大的忌讳~~~
我没有那样乐观。布什的两次当选让我觉得美国大选什么都可能发生,不要低估美国人创造奇迹的能力,嘿嘿。。。
这种事情,往往是他山之石,可以攻玉。美国人倒是身在此山中,云深不知处的担忧。英国人比美国人还了解美国和美国人。这个记者的teams,亲眼目睹了基层组织对黑人选民的疯狂动员,历史上从来没有见过的民间政治暗潮在汹涌澎湃,其势难当。
特别是奥巴马个人也显然感受到了自己这次占尽了天时。是他的时候了,渐渐形成了成竹在胸的大气,手不抖,心不慌,不再犯大错误,给对手以任何机会。他现在甚至都不用再主动出任何新招来讨好选民,也就是说,都无须在讨好任何人了,翻来覆去说老一套就够了,招数中不会再有漏洞。
当然,如果真出意外,美国不但有了一个完全靠种族偏见上台的疲态总统,而且种族对立矛盾激化为联邦范围的表面冲突。衰落的是美国,得益的只能是中国和欧洲。也不是坏事,看得从哪个角度看了。:) - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/25/2008
对。初选中每次媒体民调他大胜时,几乎总是失败。凡是预测接近的,他总赢。这就是美国大选好戏连台的地方。 - posted on 10/25/2008
ZT BBC 这篇关于Bradley effect的。还有,你们都不担心Obama的安全吗?我怎么特担心呢,他要是当选的话,是不是又杞人忧天了?
Will closet racism derail Obama?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7675551.stm By Laura Smith-Spark
BBC News
Two decades ago, Douglas Wilder watched as a 9% lead in the polls in the race to be Virginia's governor slipped to just one-tenth of 1% when the ballots were counted.
He still won the election - becoming the first African-American to be elected a US state governor - but the narrowness of his victory led analysts to speculate that he had been a victim of a white hesitancy to vote for a black man.
The theory goes that some white voters tell opinion pollsters they will vote for a black candidate - but then, in the privacy of the polling booth, put their cross against a white candidate's name.
And the fear among some supporters is that this could happen to Barack Obama on 4 November, when the country votes for its next president.
The phenomenon is known as the Bradley, or Wilder effect.
Tom Bradley was an African-American mayor of Los Angeles who, running for California's governorship in 1982, saw a sizeable eve-of-polling lead evaporate on election day, giving victory to his white rival, Republican George Deukmejian.
In 1989, the year Wilder became governor of Virginia, David Dinkins was elected the first African-American mayor of New York - but he also saw an 18-point lead in the polls shrink to a winning margin of just two points on the day.
Charles Henry, a California professor who was among the first to research the Bradley effect, says Mr Obama would need a double-digit lead to feel confident of victory.
Other pundits have suggested a six- to nine-point cushion may be sufficient. Mr Obama currently has a lead of about this size, according to most polls.
But Mr Wilder, now mayor of Richmond, Virginia, and a supporter of the Obama campaign, told the BBC News website that he believes racism will not have a major impact this time.
"Will there be some effect? Yes. Are there some people who just cannot bring themselves to vote for an African-American? Yes."
But, he said: "America has grown, people have grown."
Controversies over race have cast a shadow over this campaign.
Popular conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh has referred to Mr Obama as the "little black man-child" and Fox News has called his wife, Michelle Obama, his "baby-mama".
One Republican senator described Mr Obama as "uppity", a word formerly used to describe blacks who had ideas above their station.
Reports of racist jibes among audiences at some recent McCain rallies led John Lewis, a Democratic congressman from Georgia, to accuse Mr McCain and his running mate Sarah Palin of "sowing the seeds of hatred and division" - a charge they deny.
The surfacing of videos showing Mr Obama's former pastor, the Rev Jeremiah Wright, preaching "God Damn America!" for its treatment of blacks, did nothing to promote the process of racial reconciliation.
Scepticism
Nonetheless, Mr Wilder remains optimistic about Mr Obama's chances for a number of reasons.
"I do think there is going to be a so-called 'reverse Bradley effect' because I think there are some Republicans who won't openly say they are going to vote for Barack Obama, but will," he said.
The 77-year-old puts that down in part to discontent with Republican President George W Bush, with polls suggesting that up to 90% of registered voters believe the country is on the wrong track.
Recent elections do seem to indicate that the Bradley effect could have gone into reverse.
Research by psychologist Anthony Greenwald and political scientist Bethany Albertson of the University of Washington, suggests Mr Obama benefited from a reverse Bradley effect in 12 states during the primary elections, while the Bradley effect itself was noticeable in only three.
A study by Harvard researcher Daniel Hopkins of 133 gubernatorial and senatorial elections from 1989 to 2006 also showed no recent significant Bradley-Wilder effect.
Other polls, meanwhile, suggest that white Americans have steadily become less reluctant to vote for a black person in the last few decades.
A recent Gallup poll suggested that 9% of Americans would be more likely to vote for Mr Obama because of his race, compared with only 6% who said they would be less likely to vote for him.
'Masterful job'
Mr Wilder also believes Mr Obama is picking his way through the minefield of racial - or post-racial - politics with consummate skill.
He says he gave Mr Obama guidance a year ago - and the Illinois senator seems to have followed it.
"He never mentions race as such. He doesn't speak to race other than that particular speech, [a speech in March addressing the Jeremiah Wright controversy] in which he did a masterful job," Mr Wilder said.
"He's not running to make history. Is that going to help you [the voter] with your livelihood, pay for your kids' education?"
Mr Wilder also advised Mr Obama not to become too closely allied with longstanding African-American political figures, such as civil rights leaders the Rev Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
The key for Mr Obama now is to continue to present the same message of change to all voters, black and white, Mr Wilder adds, and the American voter will be "smarter" than to fall for last-minute attacks on his character.
"If things stay as they are, with effort and commitment and determination and drive he will win," he said.
"I always say to people, I hope the Wilder effect takes place in this election, because Wilder won - so if that's the effect it has, Obama wins."
- posted on 10/26/2008
从有关总统选举的民意调查的历史看, 除了到最后几天, 从来都是相当不准的. 而且总是高估民主党候选人, 低估共和党候选人. 当年卡特一直领先福特两位数字. 但是最后只赢在一位数字. 里根赢卡特时候,接近两位数(9+%).但是, 选前很长时间内民意测验显示,两人很接近.互相领先.里根领先的次数可能多一些. 老布什赢杜州长7个百分点. 但是民测的时候, 他从来没有领先到7个百分点.克林吨最后以多出6点几的百分点击败老布什,但是民测在最后一个月时他经常有两位数字的领先. 小布的情况就不必说了. 大家都熟悉.
Poll到了最后几天,相对来说是比较准的, 但仍然要打上一点折扣-民主党要扣一点, 共和党要加一点. 原因就是一些基督徒选民(主要就是200万evangelical)不参加总统选举民意测验. 2004年的选举结果和之前的民测结果的差距正好是他们造成的.所以后来他们成了媒体攻击的目标.
所以, 如果根据conventional wisdom推测的话, 假如最后几天的poll是平手或民主党候选人领先不超过2%, 那可能就是共和党候选人赢. 如果poll的结果是民主党候选人领先2-5%, 最后结果很难说.如果是5%以上, 肯定是民主党候选人赢.
浮生提到的Bradley效应, 要发生的话, 主要发生在PC比较严重的北方和西海岸.那里的很多人往往把种族情绪和思想藏在心里不说. 在南方和中部, 人们往往直接显露出来. 其实, 根据我个人的体会, 美国的种族主义观念主要集中在50,60岁的人(40多岁的人也有一些), 然后是外来移民. 三十多岁以下的年轻人中, 种族偏见要少的多, 情况和他们的上辈的人比, 要好得很多.
我对poll的看法不在它准不准, 而在于poll的泛滥, 特别是媒体搞的poll. 我把poll的泛滥看成一种corruption.
第一, poll确实影响很多人的决定. 长期地看,这对国民个人的独立思考独立判断独立决定的素质提高没有好处.
第二, poll 会带来不公平. 比如, 如果我所在的地方的poll显示, 一方比另一方占有绝对优势. 结果, 两个候选人都不来和选民见面了. 一方take it for granted, 另一方give it up. 两人都把金钱和经历花在争夺激烈的地方(swing states). 这太不公平. 你不是竞选那几个州的总统, 你是竞选全美国的总统. 和选民见面, 接受选民的询问或质问, 是每一个地方的公民应该有的权利, 而不只是那几个州的公民有这份权利. 如果没有poll, 让候选人对更多的地方心里没有底,或放心不下, 他就会更公平地对待每一个地方.
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/26/2008
浮生 wrote:
...你们都不担心Obama的安全吗?我怎么特担心呢,他要是当选的话,是不是又杞人忧天了?
我也想到这种可能。马英九当选之前台湾也有人有这种担忧。 - posted on 10/26/2008
gz wrote:
浮生 wrote:我也想到这种可能。马英九当选之前台湾也有人有这种担忧。
...你们都不担心Obama的安全吗?我怎么特担心呢,他要是当选的话,是不是又杞人忧天了?
选举民主关键时刻确实火候不容易精确控制。有时候似乎很简单的常识理智,但选举结果却偏不一定附和你这种理智。这种投票,要是由联合国组织,问谁应该当美国总统才其实更能对美国本身更有利,那我估计世界各国人民79%认为当然选奥巴马,另有20%拿不定主意究竟该不该是选奥巴马。剩下1%的人会说不喜欢黑人当总统,但是另外那个老头叫什么名字来着?中国就没有这种民主烦恼,总能很精确地控制选举结果。
ZXD和老圣的说法也很准确,似乎是一种被验证的规律。我觉得这里面,民意调查也有一个不光彩的角色,就是心理暗示的使用,但搞不好,就成了激将法。比如,苦瓜、老虻假设是黑人,本来铁定投票奥八马,但最后一直听说他以10%以上的优势领先。也就不觉得那么迫切了。第二天有点事,孩子要逃学,只能带着去迪斯尼,心想,嗨,又不缺我这一两票,我上那么多闲心干嘛。但要是听说就领先1%,误差3%,那孩子们即使不愿意上学,也得拉着过来排一天对,说死也要把那选票填好了。这大概就是比数接近时,该胜出的必定大胜。所以支持共和党的民意调查机构,在关键洲应该尽力夸张奥八马的优势,麻痹铁杆选民,激发白人选民的同仇敌忾之心。
大选前一周,联邦法律应该禁止发布这种民调操纵。 - posted on 10/26/2008
我也有点担心。选举前,选举后都很会。纽约是个自由大都会,纽约
乡下就大不一样了,比如犹太人,同性恋,少数民族。选举是台面上
的东西,但政治,台面下的东西太多了,想起来都。。。
令胡冲 wrote:
gz wrote:选举民主关键时刻确实火候不容易精确控制。
浮生 wrote:我也想到这种可能。马英九当选之前台湾也有人有这种担忧。
...你们都不担心Obama的安全吗?我怎么特担心呢,他要是当选的话,是不是又杞人忧天了? - posted on 10/26/2008
犹太人在这次选举中的动作耐人寻味,他们的态度非常暧昧,一方面,有以色列的压力,另一方面黑人很不喜欢犹太人。但似乎有钱的犹太人比较倾向奥巴马。
我的exex这次不知给共和党又捐了多少,他这次肯定是热血沸腾地投入政治运动了吧。呵呵,他曾经可是梭罗的fan,没想到也这样入世:)
圣哥哪里懂touche,他这次要是不选奥巴马,或者弃权,咖啡店名字也倒着写。这样吧,咖啡来个有奖竟猜,猜猜他到底选了谁?我这次真是意外,少见他这样。
阿姗来个咖啡匿名投票好吗?到底看看到底有多少马侃的supporter。
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/26/2008
我们的town就在斯坦福旁边, 只见Obama的Lawn signs。 见不到麦坎的。 儿子学校举行了Mock voting。 欧巴马60%胜出, 小小孩懂什么? 还是家里大人的意思。 支持麦坎的估计都不敢公开。
我儿子投弃权票, What do that say about me as a parent? 正想呢。 - posted on 10/27/2008
除了坚守犹太教义的一批,很多的犹太人很liberal的,最liberal的也基本上是犹太人,世上各种各样的主义(那些叫做...nism的)一般都是犹太人弄出来的。犹太人受的苦很多,所以思索的也多,很就有很多人在寻求各种出路,才有了那么多的主义。
我们的town也有很多犹太人,属于富裕犹太人的town。town整体是democratic,不过town里的乡村俱乐部(golf club)却是republican。不知道其它类似的town也是这样的情形?从红蓝分布图来看,纽约州和加州基本总是选民主党总统,但是这两个州占有民主党加税和均富对象的大部分人。从公开的政治捐款数据看(e.g. http://www.campaignmoney.com),特别富裕的人家基本上双方都捐。
我女儿铁杆支持Obama,说麦坎太老。这里偶尔见到有Lawn signs的也是Obama的多。
不论谁上台,特别如果是Obama,希望他依旧高谈不为,不添乱就好,所谓talk big and do no harm。
草叶 wrote:
我们的town就在斯坦福旁边, 只见Obama的Lawn signs。 见不到麦坎的。 儿子学校举行了Mock voting。 欧巴马60%胜出, 小小孩懂什么? 还是家里大人的意思。 支持麦坎的估计都不敢公开。
我儿子投弃权票, What do that say about me as a parent? 正想呢。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/27/2008
rzp wrote:
不论谁上台,特别如果是Obama,希望他依旧高谈不为,不添乱就好,所谓talk big and do no harm。
Good pt, from Obama's track record, he always talked about big ideas, but really did nothing. His action seems more predictable than his mouth, basically, nothing.
But given the control of congress by demo, and widely held perception that the rich is getting richer at the expense of the poor, all this could change.
- posted on 10/27/2008
美国是英国的衍生产物--按照最近听金融专家解释金融危机的说法,由于衍生产物慢慢就有了自己的生命,就不受母体的控制和理解了(就是为什么现在谁也不知道金融系统到底坏到什么程度,到底为什么坏,没有人有big picture)--英国记者的推论,不足以解释美国社会的现象。
佩林的出现,原来觉得比较特殊,好比小布什能连任两届美国总统,让人觉得逻辑上找不到根据。其实是自己对美国缺乏了解。美国盛产这种不着调的人,也盛产为其捧场的人。美国的状况,还是输得起,烂得起。所以,还可以一错再错。那天碰到台湾同胞,跟我说:台湾真可怜,怎么就碰上不是陈水扁就是马英九这样的总统。道理一样,台湾输得起。当然最输得起的是日本,每周换一个首相,日元现在最牛。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/27/2008
苦瓜 wrote:
当然最输得起的是日本,每周换一个首相,日元现在最牛。
日元牛只是因为过去很长时间以来日元利率很低。投机的人可以借日元出来,到其它利率较高的货币资产中去倒腾。现在unwind这个过程,从其它货币出发,去换出日元,供不应求,当然日元就牛了。
这跟选举政治没有关系吧。难道日本首相换得勤,日元就升值?那意大利里拉应该价值最高。
:) - ATF foils plot to assassinate Obamaposted on 10/28/2008
gz wrote:
浮生 wrote:我也想到这种可能。马英九当选之前台湾也有人有这种担忧。
...你们都不担心Obama的安全吗?我怎么特担心呢,他要是当选的话,是不是又杞人忧天了?
ATF foils plot to assassinate Obama
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081027/NEWS/81027054 - posted on 10/28/2008
我们的town也有很多犹太人,属于富裕犹太人的town。town整体是democratic,不过town里的乡村俱乐部(golf club)却是republican。不知道其它类似的town也是这样的情形?从红蓝分布图来看,纽约州和加州基本总是选民主党总统,但是这两个州占有民主党加税和均富对象的大部分人。
加州不是总选民主党总统. 76, 80, 84, 88, 连续4届, 加州选的是共和党候选人福特, 里根和老布什. 尽管福特败给卡特. 甚至00和04, 加州只能算leaning Democrat州, 而不是strong Democrat. 你从最后的popular votes可以看出. 加州大部分县都是选共和党.加州两党的选民的数量差距不大. 加州选民主党和liberal的名声主要是由于旧金山和落杉讥. 从Orange county到圣地亚哥,共和党选民占绝对优势. 中部沿海(真正的加州) 共和党选民占微弱优势, 沙漠和山区, 共和党选民占绝对优势. 加州近年政治面貌向偏左的改变和移民有关, 主要是西裔选民态度的转变, 也和冷战后国防工业萎缩有关.
说到地理分布. 除了大学是liberal占压倒性优势的地方, 美国的liberal主要就是东北部和和旧金山两个地方. 其中, 东北部的liberal是货真价实的liberal, 我管他们叫作洋liberal. 其它地区的liberal我称之为土liberal. 加州的liberal就是土liberal. 土洋有什么区别呢? 洋liberal是liberal里的精英. 骨子里具有欧洲精英思想.他们其实是看不上其他人的, 很精神贵族化. 和美国其他地方是disconnected. 加州土liberal其实很追求物质享受, 讲吃讲穿, 开好车. 落衫讥是美国人造美女之都. 他们没有真正继承欧洲贵族的那种精神. 究其根源, 加州人都是中西部过来的. 你随便问加州人, 你会发现他们的老家都是俄亥俄,槟州, 伊州, 堪蕯斯, 密苏里等地方的人.所以,尽管是liberal, 他们也保留了那种美国原始精神, 发家致富, 实现美国梦. 和东北部的liberal比, 他们还是粗糙.
rzp wrote:
- posted on 10/28/2008
Obama/Biden vs McCain/Palin, what if things were switched around?.....think about it.
Would the country's collective point of view be different?
Ponder the following:
What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the stage, including a three month old infant and an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter?
What if John McCain was a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
What if McCain had only married once, and Obama was a divorcee?
What if Obama was the candidate who left his first wife after a severe disfiguring car accident, when she no longer measured up to his standards?
What if Obama had met his second wife in a bar and had a long affair while he was still married?
What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became addicted to pain killers but also acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
What if Obama had been a member of the Keating Five?
(The Keating Five were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s.)
What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
What if Obama couldn't read from a teleprompter?
What if Obama was the one who had military experience that included discipline problems and a record of crashing seven planes?
What if Obama was the one who was known to display publicly, on many occasions, a serious anger management problem?
What if Michelle Obama's family had made their money from beer distribution?
What if the Obamas had adopted a white child?
You could easily add to this list. If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.
Educational Background:
Barack Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Joseph Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
John McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Sarah Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Education isn't everything, but this is about the two highest offices in the land as well as our standing in the world. You make the call.
Be well - Vote Smart
- posted on 10/28/2008
liaokang wrote:
You could easily add to this list. If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.
此言甚是,与吾甚有共鸣。这亦是我前面所谓,如果麦凯恩上台,那是纯粹被种族主义偏见给选上去的。
两人的学识、精力、脾性、生活相差如此的悬殊,竟然还有人争论谁会更有利于美国本身。在外界看来,本身就是不可思议的争论。这还有什么好争的呢?
美国有很多人象Joe或Samuel一样假装传统和保守,虚构一些幼稚的问题讨大众欢心,哗众取宠,说25万以上收入多征点税让他担忧。大男人装cute,脸不红吗。但国家社会的财政状况是羊毛出在羊身上,社会的进步与和谐难道不是个人财富的一个重要保障吗,难道不就是个人财富的一部分吗。减税,或者即使国家有破产的危险也敢许诺不加税,这种轻巧的哄傻子玩的讨好方式,有谁不会许诺?但那会让美国的预算赤字再也无法回头。不幸的是,这一代选民要承担过去讨巧的后果。应该说,公开直言给25万以上的人收税,是需要一种真诚无畏的政治勇气的。一般竞选人都不敢拿所谓高收入开刀的,尽管只是象征性的。就个人而言,如果我的收入折算超过25万美元,说心里话,我不在乎多交几千块钱税,丝毫影响不了我的生活。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/28/2008
25 w is not rich in many high-cost areas in US.
By the way, how much is the tax rate for people in 10-25 W in Britain?
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
廖康问得好。是抄来的还是自己编的?为什么不贴到伊甸去羞一羞为力?你若不肯动手我可要代劳了。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
tired of this liberal/conservative nonsense.
Americans do not think education defines one person, which is not too surprising if you remember Gates, Dell, etc.
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
令胡冲 wrote:
此言甚是,与吾甚有共鸣。这亦是我前面所谓,如果麦凯恩上台,那是纯粹被种族主义偏见给选上去的。
amazing. vote for 麦凯恩= 种族主义???
which reminds me of Bush's famous assertion: You are either with me or against me. - posted on 10/29/2008
真让人看出书呆子可爱的一面,毛泽东什么学历也没有,他怎么控制中国许多年呢?我猜到你会说:苹果和桔子不能相比。对吗?
liaokang wrote:
Obama/Biden vs McCain/Palin, what if things were switched around?.....think about it.
Would the country's collective point of view be different?
Ponder the following:
What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the stage, including a three month old infant and an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter?
What if John McCain was a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
What if McCain had only married once, and Obama was a divorcee?
What if Obama was the candidate who left his first wife after a severe disfiguring car accident, when she no longer measured up to his standards?
What if Obama had met his second wife in a bar and had a long affair while he was still married?
What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became addicted to pain killers but also acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
What if Obama had been a member of the Keating Five?
(The Keating Five were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s.)
What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
What if Obama couldn't read from a teleprompter?
What if Obama was the one who had military experience that included discipline problems and a record of crashing seven planes?
What if Obama was the one who was known to display publicly, on many occasions, a serious anger management problem?
What if Michelle Obama's family had made their money from beer distribution?
What if the Obamas had adopted a white child?
You could easily add to this list. If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.
Educational Background:
Barack Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Joseph Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
John McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Sarah Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Education isn't everything, but this is about the two highest offices in the land as well as our standing in the world. You make the call.
Be well - Vote Smart
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
文兄比喻的好,如果老马这会儿稳操胜卷,我们当然要这么看。这里比的并不是名校教育,而是聪明才智。教育背景不过是替智斗中的表现作一个脚注说明罢了。鹿死谁手还不一定,老马还在作最后一搏。若无超常表现稀里糊涂就赢了,那就是所谓Bradley效应了。
文取心 wrote:
真让人看出书呆子可爱的一面,毛泽东什么学历也没有,他怎么控制中国许多年呢?我猜到你会说:苹果和桔子不能相比。对吗?
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
听我们这里帮奥巴马竞选的人说,投票当天,每个投票站会有奥巴马义工拿着联系过的选民名单,逐一核实投票人,上午十点时还没有投票的会立刻接到电话,下午一点和四点还各有一次。奥巴马他们这次是要和共和党拼投票人数。据说前两次布什都赢在支持者出来投票。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
老生常谈了,从来都是得 C 的治人,得 A 的治于人。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
文取心 wrote:
真让人看出书呆子可爱的一面,毛泽东什么学历也没有,他怎么控制中国许多年呢?我猜到你会说:苹果和桔子不能相比。对吗?
唉,是啊。假如再来一次选举,为了中国--自己国家的前途,你还会再选毛泽东吗?
说来说去不就是这么个简单的问题嘛。怎么有同志就拎不清或不愿意拎得清呢?
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
pepper wrote:
amazing. vote for 麦凯恩= 种族主义???
which reminds me of Bush's famous assertion: You are either with me or against me.
Sounds scaring, isn't it - but that's how outsiders view it, unfortunately. :)
Ask yourself - if McCain is an old balck and his name is Obama, and Obama is a white and his name is McCain - do you still need to think hard to make a decision? Does the black stand any chance?
- posted on 10/29/2008
I always perfer the one who is more moderate. Between the two devils, I choose the one who is better known.
LHC wrote:
pepper wrote:Sounds scaring, isn't it - but that's how outsiders view it, unfortunately. :)
amazing. vote for 麦凯恩= 种族主义???
which reminds me of Bush's famous assertion: You are either with me or against me.
Ask yourself - if McCain is an old balck and his name is Obama, and Obama is a white and his name is McCain - do you still need to think hard to make a decision? Does the black stand any chance?
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/29/2008
令胡冲 wrote:
就个人而言,如果我的收入折算超过25万美元,说心里话,我不在乎多交几千块钱税,丝毫影响不了我的生活。
可是,如果你的收入的36%已经缴联邦所得税了,然后每年你还要付几千到几万元的财产税(property tax),有的州又要交百分之三的个人所得税,有的城市还要额外缴税,还有你上街买东西又要交8%的销售税,你在此之上奥巴马又要你每年再多交几千块钱税,你真会不在乎吗? - posted on 10/29/2008
哈哈一笑 wrote:
可是,如果你的收入的36%已经缴联邦所得税了,然后每年你还要付几千到几万元的财产税(property tax),有的州又要交百分之三的个人所得税,有的城市还要额外缴税,还有你上街买东西又要交8%的销售税,你在此之上奥巴马又要你每年再多交几千块钱税,你真会不在乎吗?
I don't.
Currently people like me pay 40% tax on any income above a threshold (I don't even remember how much was it for me last year); 11% NI. I pay some council tax too. There is 17% VAT but I don't know how much tax on each goods or service exactly. I heard there was a special rate on earning above 50K but I use on-line tax return and didn't notice it. And do you hear about stories on how much things cost here in UK? :))
In a word, I'd love to pay all above, earn >25K US dollars and live in US. :) - posted on 10/30/2008
I don't.
Currently people like me pay 40% tax on any income above a threshold (I don't even remember how much was it for me last year); 11% NI. I pay some council tax too. There is 17% VAT but I don't know how much tax on each goods or service exactly. I heard there was a special rate on earning above 50K but I use on-line tax return and didn't notice it. And do you hear about stories on how much things cost here in UK? :))
In a word, I'd love to pay all above, earn >25K US dollars and live in US. :)
OK, you are paying higher tax but you don't live in the US. You live under a socialist benefit system. You don't have much medical expenses - government pays all. You don't have to worry about your retirement - the government gives it to you. Even your housing can be provided by the government. Best of all, you have government paid vacations - regardless you have a job or not. We Americans pay about 50% of our income to the governments (federal, state, county, city, etc.). What do we get? Medical? OK, if we are lucky we get some sort of insurance, but our out-of- pocket cost (co-pay) is anywher from $25 to $25,000 depending on what illness we suffer. Retirement? We are basically on our own. Government does nothing. Vacation? Dream on! 2-3 weeks paid vacation each year for most salary jobs and basically no paid vacation for most waged (hourly) jobs. People who earn around $250K in the US are not the Wall Street boys (they earn $1,000,000 or more), they are doctors, small layers, small business owners, top college professors, corporate low level executives, government low rank officials. These people are the backbone of the nation - not the middle class.
Hey, I would be happy to cut my salary to half if I get the same benefits you have in Europe. - posted on 10/30/2008
I have been following this line and the other ones all this time and found that you just contradicted to yourself in almost every point you're arguing about this election.
You want socialist benefit as that is in Europe and Canada and many other developed nations, yet you strongly opposed Barack Obama who may closely represent the system in other nations you admired.
What will be your definition for middle class? what is the proportion of Americans in this nation whose income is around $250,000? How much the income tax that proportion of Americans bring in to the country? How many Americans will fall into so-called middle class and how much that part of income tax to the country as, only as, compared to the portion of people who make around $250,000?
哈哈一笑 wrote:
OK, you are paying higher tax but you don't live in the US. You live under a socialist benefit system.
Government does nothing. Vacation? Dream on! 2-3 weeks paid vacation each year for most salary jobs and basically no paid vacation for most waged (hourly) jobs.
People who earn around $250K in the US are not the Wall Street boys (they earn $1,000,000 or more), they are doctors, small layers, small business owners, top college professors, corporate low level executives, government low rank officials. These people are the backbone of the nation -
not the middle class.
Hey, I would be happy to cut my salary to half if I get the same benefits you have in Europe. - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
April wrote:
I have been following this line and the other ones all this time and found that you just contradicted to yourself in almost every point you're arguing about this election.
April obviously mis-inderstood 哈哈一笑.
- posted on 10/30/2008
April wrote:
I have been following this line and the other ones all this time and found that you just contradicted to yourself in almost every point you're arguing about this election.
You want socialist benefit as that is in Europe and Canada and many other developed nations, yet you strongly opposed Barack Obama who may closely represent the system in other nations you admired.
What will be your definition for middle class? what is the proportion of Americans in this nation whose income is around $250,000? How much the income tax that proportion of Americans bring in to the country? How many Americans will fall into so-called middle class and how much that part of income tax to the country as, only as, compared to the portion of people who make around $250,000?
Hey Nice Young Lady,
Are you a cop or something? How much did I pay you to track my postings? I would dream to have an aid like you - following me everywhere. Do you want my IP address just in case?
That's kidding. I love your questions. However, your questions are not really accurate. In America, there are may types of tax - income tax, property tax, sales tax, etc. I assume you are asking the income tax. Let me try my answers:
Q: What is the proportion of Americans in this nation whose income is around $250,000?
A: Around 4-5 % or less - that includes people who earn more than $250K per year. Remember, Obama wants to increase tax for prople who earn $250K and more, not just the people who earn exactly $250K.
Q: How much the income tax that proportion of Americans bring in to the country?
A: The 4-5% people who earn $250K or above pay about 44-46% of total income tax in the US.
Q: How many Americans will fall into so-called middle class ?
A: Around 80% (or less).
Q: How much that part of income tax to the country as, only as, compared to the portion of people who make around $250,000 (or more)?
A: About 52% or less.
Any more questions?
Let me give you some latest information:
***The top 1% Pay More Income Tax Than Bottom 90%
See http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/10/top-1-pay-more-.html
***
Taxes paid by highest incomes
The top 1% pay 22.7% of taxes.
The top 10% pay 50% of taxes.
The top 20% pay 65.3% of taxes.
The top 40% pay 84.3% of taxes.
Taxes paid by lowest incomes
The bottom 20% pay 1.1% of taxes.
The bottom 40% pay 6.1% of taxes.
See http://constitutionalconservative.wordpress.com/myth-the-rich-dont-pay-their-fair-share/
That's why I will not vote Obama. - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
Can you explain the last two answers? 80% in the middle of what curve?
The tax raise for 250K+ will affect small business a lot more than individual families.
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
To people in Europe, Americans pay too little taxes, but they don't realize Americans do not get much benefit in return.
To me, you can only choose either less tax or more benefit. You cannot choose both.
Obama seems to have found a clever way around the dilema, so people can enjoy both less tax and more benefit at the same time. That is, tax more on those earn 25w and more.
Will it work in the long time? I am very doubtful.
- posted on 10/30/2008
A rare critical piece from AP
Obama's prime-time ad skips over budget realities
WOODWARD, Calvin Woodward, Associated Press
Writer – Wed Oct 29, 9:18 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was less than upfront in his half-hour commercial Wednesday night about the costs of his programs and the crushing budget pressures he would face in office.
Obama's assertion that "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond" the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by "eliminating programs that don't work" masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are — beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
A sampling of what voters heard in the ad, and what he didn't tell them:
THE SPIN: "That's why my health care plan includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year."
THE FACTS: His plan does not lower premiums by $2,500, or any set amount. Obama hopes that by spending $50 billion over five years on electronic medical records and by improving access to proven disease management programs, among other steps, consumers will end up saving money. He uses an optimistic analysis to suggest cost reductions in national health care spending could amount to the equivalent of $2,500 for a family of four. Many economists are skeptical those savings can be achieved, but even if they are, it's not a certainty that every dollar would be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.
___
THE SPIN: "I also believe every American has a right to affordable health care."
THE FACTS: That belief should not be confused with a guarantee of health coverage for all. He makes no such promise. Obama hinted as much in the ad when he said about the problem of the uninsured: "I want to start doing something about it." He would mandate coverage for children but not adults. His program is aimed at making insurance more affordable by offering the choice of government-subsidized coverage similar to that in a plan for federal employees and other steps, including requiring larger employers to share costs of insuring workers.
___
THE SPIN: "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost."
THE FACTS: Independent analysts say both Obama and Republican John McCain would deepen the deficit. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Obama's policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years — and that analysis accepts the savings he claims from spending cuts. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, whose other findings have been quoted approvingly by the Obama campaign, says: "Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next 10 years." The analysis goes on to say: "Neither candidate's plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified."
___
THE SPIN: "Here's what I'll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the U.S. over the next two years and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Help homeowners who are making a good faith effort to pay their mortgages, by freezing foreclosures for 90 days. And just like after 9-11, we'll provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open. "
THE FACTS: His proposals — the tax cuts, the low-cost loans, the $15 billion a year he promises for alternative energy, and more — cost money, and the country could be facing a record $1 trillion deficit next year. Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged — although not in his commercial — that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals."
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
讨论到后来都跑题了,不选奥巴马的要点不是种族因素,不是他的资历,也不是他的税率,虽然民主党出名地会浪费,你就是交再多的税到头来还是不够用。不选奥巴马最主要的,是信不过他对美国的忠诚度。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
昨天连培林都在电视采访中绝疑定调,认为奥巴马与麦坎同样爱国。你是不是认为你比奥巴马还忠于美国?不容易啊! ;)
文取心 wrote:
讨论到后来都跑题了,不选奥巴马的要点不是种族因素,不是他的资历,也不是他的税率,虽然民主党出名地会浪费,你就是交再多的税到头来还是不够用。不选奥巴马最主要的,是信不过他对美国的忠诚度。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
我有自己的脑袋,不用跟着电视上的什么人转。你还是继续吃你的薯条吧。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
这不是随便什么人,而是你们的副统帅培林妈妈啊。 ;)
文取心 wrote:
我有自己的脑袋,不用跟着电视上的什么人转。你还是继续吃你的薯条吧。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
touche wrote:
这不是随便什么人,而是你们的副统帅培林妈妈啊。
那你捧了奶瓶继续喝吧。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
在美国这个政治正确的地方,除非放弃竞选,否则就得说政治正确的话。
文取心是普通美国人,他可以说自己认为正确的话。
当然,人们可以把女佩林吊起来没罪;把黑小马吊起来,就是不行。:))
唉,真没想到老氓还有当“大左派”的一天。:))
touche wrote:
这不是随便什么人,而是你们的副统帅培林妈妈啊。 ;)
文取心 wrote:
我有自己的脑袋,不用跟着电视上的什么人转。你还是继续吃你的薯条吧。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
就是这个问题。奥巴马支持者激动地说,他将是第一位会讲印度尼西亚语的美国总统。一般美国人听了,心道,美国总统为什么要会讲印度尼西亚语?
文取心 wrote:
不选奥巴马最主要的,是信不过他对美国的忠诚度。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
奥巴马躲在黑人牌后面,使白人不敢批评他,怕被说成种族主义者。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
不管你们怎么天真,每个国家都有自己的国家利益,世界上无一例外。作为美国总统,如果国家利益不是第一位的话,他就不配。 - posted on 10/30/2008
奥巴马的优势正在于他对美国之外世界的了解和理解。这个问题是美国人最愚昧、最自以为是的地方。当然我不认为一个奥巴马能改变美国那么多年来积累下来的愚昧想法,但他至少领着很多人朝着正确的方向走了一步。这一步走得历尽艰辛也是应该的。
touche名震华人论坛,我一直没有参与震荡,这次发现很震,赞一下!
令胡到美国来,整一套水管工的工具,连执照都不用考,直接就挣25万刀了,呵呵。
没看出来奥巴马是要减税福利双丰收啊。那谁,觉得自己特富有会被加税吧?减穷人的税,加富人的税,把福利带给穷人和富人。你别混着说好不好。
美国的医疗系统反对全民健保,也只是为了维护自己的利益。哪个发达国家还象美国这样让医疗保险成为人民的头等困境。我以前的一个同事,孩子生下来有严重的病,要特殊治疗。从此他就不能换工作,很多东西新的保险公司就不管。我们还生活在旧社会啊。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
唉,你们还一个劲表扬touche, 我看他就坐吃老本,一开口还漏气,整个的包不住,我都不晓得这恶气从哪儿来?
另外实话实说,我是彻底的反共和党主张,但落实到个人层面,我对奥巴马的信心实在不足。昨天又复习了他的简历,越看越汗。
- Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
切,要是touch再包着,这个咖啡店该直接跟警察局挂钩了。阶级斗争复杂啊,你住在偏远地区,哪里知道大都市的灯红酒绿和阴暗角落。
你千万把票投给你信任的人。都长这么大了,要坚信自己的判断,大家都这样,可以减少很多社会问题。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/30/2008
I was excited when Obama was first elected senator. But he always looks a bit dubious and not so convincing upon close look.
Obama himself always avoids controversy, but his association with dubious figures such as Rev. Wright, the 60's bomber Ayers, the convicted Repka, leaves you wonder about what kind of person he is. His wife does not help with statements such as “this is the first time I feel proud of this country”, “I will gorge his (Bill Clinton) eyes out”
- posted on 10/31/2008
文取心 wrote:
不管你们怎么天真,每个国家都有自己的国家利益,世界上无一例外。作为美国总统,如果国家利益不是第一位的话,他就不配。
唉。这不是废话嘛。
爱国不是当总统的首要条件。那是做人的基本条件。总统的必备条件是视野和领导能力,怎么样能把国家搞好的能力。当总统就得会说,会讲,能鼓舞手下人,就足够了。除此之外,内心少些意识形态和原教旨主义,更注重实效,更能体会普通家庭的难处,就足够了。老麦几十年没有过普通民众的日子了。
一个政治家成功的关键之关键就是表里不一。嘴上民主自由人权,心里另有一种务实的念头。嘴上总能把你夸得心花怒放,心里其实清楚你究竟是个什么人有何长短。这样才能真把事情干好。表里如一就完蛋了。政治家的成败是以他领导国家取得了什么成就来衡量的,由后来的历史来书写的,这就够了。最爱国的人,不一定就是对国家最有益的人。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 10/31/2008
chloe wrote:
奥巴马躲在黑人牌后面,使白人不敢批评他,怕被说成种族主义者。
那当然了。白人你有理说理,问什么一定要说他是黑人呢?它黑,所以他政治上就不如你可靠吗?:)
chole有时候就象个英国的小姑娘。这有什么可抱怨的呢?在一个文明进步的社会中,每个人都是个案。你是华人,但你不一定就能代笔华人,或成为华人代表,不一定就有华人社会的任何不良或良好习惯。黑人也一样,完全是个人。
- posted on 10/31/2008
顶!令胡是真大侠。
当今社会,一个“真”字最难。
我和令胡兄弟都最痛恨假专家,假知识分子,假正义,假爱国,假......
令胡冲 wrote:
文取心 wrote:唉。这不是废话嘛。
不管你们怎么天真,每个国家都有自己的国家利益,世界上无一例外。作为美国总统,如果国家利益不是第一位的话,他就不配。
爱国不是当总统的首要条件。那是做人的基本条件。总统的必备条件是视野和领导能力,怎么样能把国家搞好的能力。当总统就得会说,会讲,能鼓舞手下人,就足够了。除此之外,内心少些意识形态和原教旨主义,更注重实效,更能体会普通家庭的难处,就足够了。老麦几十年没有过普通民众的日子了。
一个政治家成功的关键之关键就是表里不一。嘴上民主自由人权,心里另有一种务实的念头。嘴上总能把你夸得心花怒放,心里其实清楚你究竟是个什么人有何长短。这样才能真把事情干好。表里如一就完蛋了。政治家的成败是以他领导国家取得了什么成就来衡量的,由后来的历史来书写的,这就够了。最爱国的人,不一定就是对国家最有益的人。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 11/01/2008
就是。要像我们布什那样满口牛津英语才算美国的忠诚。
chloe wrote:
就是这个问题。奥巴马支持者激动地说,他将是第一位会讲印度尼西亚语的美国总统。一般美国人听了,心道,美国总统为什么要会讲印度尼西亚语?
文取心 wrote:
不选奥巴马最主要的,是信不过他对美国的忠诚度。 - posted on 11/03/2008
不要指望一个总统可以改天换地,他胜了, 也就带着三千多人进入
白宫中军大帐,其他老兵还是在那里干同样的事情。
不过,虽然选择好坏四到八年后才能见分晓,但奥巴马似乎能
给目前陷入内外交困的共和党政府注入些的活力。轮流坐庄,
是制度的 好处,让选民换个庄家,也许运气好些。
至于奥巴马忠诚美国,这是不应有疑的, 一个幼年失怙的非裔穷苦少年走到今天这步,
也只有在美国能发生。
老马因为利伯曼等支持堕胎而转而选择三权分立都不甚了然的佩林当搭档,初绚烂
很快变得黯淡,为何?盖进入极右派的 quaigmare了。 - posted on 11/03/2008
美国大选胜负已定? Not so fast! The opera is not over until the fat lady sings. :-) LHC should fly over and volunteer to drive Obama's people to the poll stations.
麦肯本来不是太糟糕,如果他要了李伯曼做副总统候选人,机会还是不错的。但他在竞选最后阶段极力讨好右派势力,向极右派急剧靠拢的做法让人疑心他的脊梁骨不够硬,而他明、后天翘辫子之后佩林做总统的可能性更是大大的隐患。
相比之下,奥巴马倒是一直表现出原则性。他的哥大、哈佛教育背景也比较让我放心,相信他会跟多数长青藤背景的人一样,坚持中庸之道。
我不喜欢奥巴马,但我更不喜欢麦肯。
各位切记: 在民主制度下选举领导人的原则是“两害取其轻”。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 11/03/2008
同意老八的这一贴。
要是麦凯恩真的输了,也是他自己丢掉中间派的形象,极力向极右势力靠拢;为了拉几个极右的选票,选了佩林这个连副总统的职责是什么都搞不清的花瓶来做副手的后果。。。
不管他以前的政绩如何,在这一年的大选中,他没有远见,放弃自己的形象,把本来倾向他的选民推给了对手。说不好听得,是他输给了自己。。。
- posted on 11/03/2008
文取心 wrote:
不管你们怎么天真,每个国家都有自己的国家利益,世界上无一例外。作为美国总统,如果国家利益不是第一位的话,他就不配。
令胡wrote:
唉。这不是废话嘛。
爱国不是当总统的首要条件。那是做人的基本条件。总统的必备条件是视野和领导能力,怎么样能把国家搞好的能力。当总统就得会说,会讲,能鼓舞手下人,就足够了。除此之外,内心少些意识形态和原教旨主义,更注重实效,更能体会普通家庭的难处,就足够了。老麦几十年没有过普通民众的日子了。
一个政治家成功的关键之关键就是表里不一。嘴上民主自由人权,心里另有一种务实的念头。嘴上总能把你夸得心花怒放,心里其实清楚你究竟是个什么人有何长短。这样才能真把事情干好。表里如一就完蛋了。政治家的成败是以他领导国家取得了什么成就来衡量的,由后来的历史来书写的,这就够了。最爱国的人,不一定就是对国家最有益的人。
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
令胡说的太好了,鼎! - posted on 11/03/2008
星光 wrote:
文取心 wrote:令胡wrote:
不管你们怎么天真,每个国家都有自己的国家利益,世界上无一例外。作为美国总统,如果国家利益不是第一位的话,他就不配。
唉。这不是废话嘛。
爱国不是当总统的首要条件。那是做人的基本条件。总统的必备条件是视野和领导能力,怎么样能把国家搞好的能力。当总统就得会说,会讲,能鼓舞手下人,就足够了。除此之外,内心少些意识形态和原教旨主义,更注重实效,更能体会普通家庭的难处,就足够了。老麦几十年没有过普通民众的日子了。
一个政治家成功的关键之关键就是表里不一。嘴上民主自由人权,心里另有一种务实的念头。嘴上总能把你夸得心花怒放,心里其实清楚你究竟是个什么人有何长短。这样才能真把事情干好。表里如一就完蛋了。政治家的成败是以他领导国家取得了什么成就来衡量的,由后来的历史来书写的,这就够了。最爱国的人,不一定就是对国家最有益的人。
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
令胡说的太好了,鼎!
我的帖子有半个字提到‘爱国’吗?你们如果连‘国家利益’和‘爱国’都分不清,那要你们理解再深一点的问题显然很困难了。我根本没说奥巴马爱国不爱国,我说得是他的纲领罔顾美国根本的国家利益。
令狐臭说的是独裁国家吧,看看美国历史,水门事件,拉链事件,表里不一的没一个有好下场的。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 11/03/2008
哇!奥巴马罔顾美国根本的国家利益,你跟大伙聊聊什么是“美国根本的国家利益”?美国人都搞不清什么是根本的国家利益,一个海外华侨倒搞清楚了。不容易啊!;)
文取心 wrote:
我的帖子有半个字提到‘爱国’吗?你们如果连‘国家利益’和‘爱国’都分不清,那要你们理解再深一点的问题显然很困难了。我根本没说奥巴马爱国不爱国,我说得是他的纲领罔顾美国根本的国家利益。
令狐臭说的是独裁国家吧,看看美国历史,水门事件,拉链事件,表里不一的没一个有好下场的。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 11/03/2008
哈哈,老虻好!好久未见.
老虻刺起人来,还是如此的犀利. - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 11/03/2008
算了吧,卵生类的都以为自己那张嘴如何如何厉害,还是经不得一巴掌。 - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 11/03/2008
我怎么一发帖,总是两个?郁闷! - Re: 麦凯恩输定了 ?posted on 11/03/2008
星光 wrote:
我怎么一发帖,总是两个?郁闷!
两相为害取其轻。星光共勉。
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
- 令胡冲
- #1 xy
- #2 星光
- #3 令胡冲
- #4 zxd
- #5 浮生
- #6 st dude
- #7 gz
- #8 令胡冲
- #9 xw
- #10 玛雅
- #11 草叶
- #12 rzp
- #13 pepper
- #14 苦瓜
- #15 令胡冲
- #16 gz
- #17 st dude
- #18 liaokang
- #19 令胡冲
- #20 pepper
- #21 zxd
- #22 pepper
- #23 pepper
- #24 文取心
- #25 zxd
- #26 chloe
- #27 gz
- #28 令胡冲
- #29 LHC
- #30 pepper
- #31 哈哈一笑
- #32 LHC
- #33 哈哈一笑
- #34 April
- #35 pepper
- #36 哈哈一笑
- #37 rzp
- #38 pepper
- #39 pepper
- #40 文取心
- #41 touche
- #42 文取心
- #43 touche
- #44 文取心
- #45 为力
- #46 chloe
- #47 chloe
- #48 文取心
- #49 苦瓜
- #50 老瓦
- #51 苦瓜
- #52 pepper
- #53 令胡冲
- #54 令胡冲
- #55 abc
- #56 SevenStar
- #57 废名
- #58 八十一子
- #59 星光
- #60 星光
- #61 文取心
- #62 touche
- #63 星光
- #64 文取心
- #65 星光
- #66 文取心
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation