http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIDWgqDBNXA (christina aguilera)
okay that's another workweek wrapped up --- nowadays we do wed/thurs/fri and then sunday -- so now will have monday and tuesday off.... one of the customer's tonite was a funny girl -- she seemed to have an odd accent, maybe sweedish or brazilian or sthg -- not uncommon in sydney -- especially in bondi where there are some swedes and brazilians... so asked this girl if she was one of them and she said she was an aussie, so why do u have that accent? asked her..... then she said, putting on a rasping whiney aussie accent: how do u like my kangaroos mate? she was funny --- she really sounded sweedish or brazilian or sthmg like that
anyway moving on... there was a good article recently about the u.s. presidential election system and how it works vis-a-vie the electoral college... here's an explanation.... most people know that dirty plastic fame whore, conan o'brien, right? you know the guy that would milk five cocks simultaneously (using his toes if he has to) plus have another 5 piss all over him rather than miss out on being on tv every day........ yeah that guy, okay imagine he is cloned 99 times for a total of 100 conans... now put 2 conans on every american state, that's their upper house of parliament (congress): the senate........... teeny tiny states like rhode island and delaware get 2 6-year serving senators same as big giant states like california and texas and new york, completely retarded --- if that's in the constitution it should be changed already
each state has 2 electoral votes as per their obriens (senators) + 1 vote as per their reps, therefore florida (see above) would have 25 reps, california 53......... the highly unusual things about this system is that it's winner takes all for every state except nebraska and maine or some such little states.......... no-one need even pretend that this system is 'constitutional' as otherwise it would be the same system for every state and nebraska and maine wouldn't be exceptions....
let's say california does the unthinkable for a blue state (pro-donkey party) and votes in favor of romney by a margin of two votes.... (out of maybe 30 million counted), then romney would get 55 electoral votes and obama zero as it's winner takes all in every state except nebraska and maine --- this is a highly unusal system........
there are some 'bellweather' states - e.g., missouri, that typically reflects how all of the u.s.a is looking, however nothing is certain and no polls are entirely accurate -- there was even a famous election about 60 years ago where the newspapers printed out 'dewey wins' or sthmg like that expecting dewey to win and truman won (or something like that, maybe the names are wrong) --- there's no telling.......... also the journalists left and right are bigots and chickens so they cannot always get things right anyway (vis-a-vie polls, fact checking, etc -- no two journalists can even agree on basic numbers like how much donkey party spent in 3 year period)
with 60 days left, romney has gone undercover for 2 days to 'practice debating' (lame)..... now romney is coming out and making sounds like he will keep parts of obama's healthcare plan instead of outright scrapping it all:
"I say we're going to replace Obamacare. And I'm replacing it with my own plan. And even in Massachusetts when I was governor, our plan there deals with pre-existing conditions and with young people," Romney told "Meet the Press."
this means he is already starting to look nervous............ people ask why the candidates for president don't just say what they're gonna do........ becoz they'd end up making promises like, 'no new taxes' that they cannot keep......... why can't they keep them? because they won't know what will happen 2 years after their (the presidential) election when the house of representatives (lower house) is changed around............ before the iraq invasion, all americans were careful to vote republicans into the lower house in the 2002 elections so that the then republican president would have a stronger mandate
if obama wins the presidential election (as per electoral votes above - must win approx. 270 out of approx. 538 electors) it's highly unlikely that the lower house would be donkey party (it wasn't since two years after obama's election in 2008 anyway).... the reason being that americans wouldn't want obama to go spending all kinds of money again........
alot of real dumbarse people under age 35 will vote for obama, these are people that watch basically every single television program made for their demographic which are all extremely moronic, you name the sitcom or channel and benji bashes the moron buzzer button (imagine a big red one, you saying the 'cultural item' and benji slamming the button and saying 'for morons' or 'moron fare')....... these under 35 morons will vote for obama --- these are the people paul ryan was talking about looking up at faded obama posters in their parents' home into their post-university years)............ to clarify this beyond all doubt, there's a radio dj in los angeles called ryan seakrest [sic] -- he is a bigger plastic dummy than conan o'brien by about a trillion times, you're guaranteed if you pull seacrest's pants down there'd just be smooth plastic there like on a ken doll instead of a dick.......... people in america (and australia!) are actually so dumb and soulless, they actually listen to this seacrest guy, this demagraphic is definitely infidels, no doubt about it............ all of these clowns will vote obama
on top of that, the moron 'evangelicals' who normally vote republican, who are equally moronic as the seacrest plastic crotch crowd, will be baffled by romney's mormonism........ and mightily annoyed by obama's handling of the economy --- neither of these two demagraphics necessarily can tip the election one way or another
this could be a very close race and the outcome will be interesting to see --- also with regard to the house of reps (lower house).........
romney seems to be a practical kind of populist who is willing to compromise on basically anything -- this means everyone in the media that hates him will call him a flip-flopper....
if romney can convince people that he can turn the economy around there he might win, so called 'issues' like abortion, are irrelevant to the masses and only mentioned so often by the journalists as they are (somewhat) incompetent or else catering for the entities they get paid by and the latter's biases and politics
both competitors will have election teams which will strategize how to effect a victory, basically, both sides will focus on 'swing states' -- those states where the electoral college votes are up for grabs (there are about 10 of them) being that certain states are most likely to go a certain way and will not be highly contested........ the 'super pacs' representing each candidate will have theoretically unlimited money to spend on advertisements in these swing states, to curry favor with the voters......
furthermore, as a kind of wildcard, that 'mainstream' media (mostly left wing but with fox news, more right wing) will seek to influence voters (sometimes by informing them)......
many voters will see through the mainstream media's (including fat people like jay leno) bullshit and the people are savvy enough to know what is going on......
why team romney would spend time/energy/money on advertisements not about the economy and fixing the economy is anyone's guess
big issues on the horizon are the big global slowdown we're seeing.... growth in china is slated to slow down to 7% and europe is actually contracting in alot of formerly rich places like england....... america has always had a robust and unique economy, averaging 3% growth even when other 'fully developed' economies considered 2.3% growth good and normal......... however this recession may continue almost indefinitely in america......... romney/ryan should make it a priority to run on ending this recession as soon as possible......... bigger issues looming in this century will be petroleum depletion and drinking water supply
in fact, petrol/gasoline depletion is the big giant elephant in the room, and with so many geniuses out there writing books about every great topic under the sun, it's amazing that people do not make it their business to talk about this
in a way, obama did try to take this on, but it just showed everyone how laughable (expensive/unfeasible) green energy is when it's not really the mother of invention yet (the necessity for it)........ obama really leaves himself open to attack with his record on green energy - however his government's new rules for gas consumption in cars in america is barely touched on in the tv/mass media but really is a very big deal........ cars in only 10 years time are supposed to have approx. double the capability (mpg) as now.......... big order for a bunch of people who have enjoyed burning petrol capriciously over the previous 50 years
and now the big rush to go green? are these people insane?
in foreign policy, romney should either come out strong on syria pledging something even ephemeral like 'taking charge' there or keep his mouth mostly just shut -- romney seems like he's a bet hedger always hedging his bets, not the impulsive type.... he definitely shouldn't start bashing russia or even really palestine........... if he wants a missile shield in europe he should go ahead and say so and if he doesn't like obama's policy on iran he should say why loud and clear
actually, how romney or anybody else hasn't come out against obama's policy of sitting back on syria is anyone's guess..... what's the point of all that activity in iraq and then nothing on syria -- we understand with obama it's because he wants to end the war wherever and everywhere........ but this is not republican policy, is it? so why the silence?
part of the whole 'missile shield' in europe was just a way of sticking it to the russians anyway, regardless of all the koombiyah my lord talk about saving the commie europeans and western european eurotrash from the big bad iranians, so why not just stick it to russia by taking charge in syria already?
the average voter in america cannot be expected to come up with anything intelligent vis-a-vie anything involving a moslem country --- for this moron, if it's a moslem country, they are all bad guys, but if it's a christian country sometimes they are good (coz they're christians) but wait a second, all those europeans calls soccer football and that's bad --- in a word 'confusion' --- americans are not clear on moslem foreign policy and need to be led by someone......... obama isn't really leading on the moslem world -- he just has hussein for a middle name and is black -- that's his leadership style, plus he does nothing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_QYmcUYe8I (some doors cover)
No comments:
Post a Comment