Obama

[ChicagoBlue]

Correct.

Obama...Bush junior...Clinton...Bush senior. All the same side of politics. Ironically the last even half way revolutionary president was old Ronnie.

You are missing the fact that America is, by its nature, more conservative than Britain, so a "left wing" politician in America is, by necessity, far more centrist than the term implies in Britain. You can't simply throw out the claim above without realizing the underlying policies that make people see left and right.

In addition, the separation of powers in the US (Republican democracy with THREE branches of government) makes politics vastly different from the Parliamentary system enjoyed in Britain, whereby the "party in power" (something that very rarely happens in the US, although we are about to see it!) controls both the policies and the votes that enable them to quickly become law and practice. In the US, change has traditionally been very slow, especially when liberals are in power, because of the conservative nature of the populace.

In short, being a right winger means you will probably not see any power. Bernie Sanders is the ONLY avowed "social democrat" in Congress. He is labeled "socialist" byball and sundry, even though he is light years from what you would believe that word to mean. Indeed, he does NOT run as a Democrat for his seat, but as an Independent, which he has returned to now the election is over. He was a Democrat only torun against Hillary, which might give one an inkling as to why the Democratic political machine was allowed genes with her, not him....just as the Republican machine was aligned with "Anyone But Trump," because he is a Democrat who wanted to run against Hillary and whose fiscal policies are more geared to Republican dogma, but who is social far more liberal (regardless of what he said to get elected).

 

[Magicpole]

Yes utter disgrace. He had no right to say that to try and influence another country's democratic referendum.

Just as our politicians had no right to comment on who they would back in the US election.

Now are you going to come up with a reason why he was okay to comment or are you going to carry on not making a point?

He did it in the Scottisf Ref too. Can't remember too many people who voted no and subsequently Brexit booing then.

Just saying.

 

[purplenose]

Errr...freedom? Is free speech a good enough reason?

If not, how about he felt that as the country with whom the US has a "special friendship," He felt that maintaining an open ECONOMIC border with Europe was better for that relationship?

Open your mind, man, and understand that until the shock of Brexit actually happening, it was a very normal, widespread, cosmopolitan belief. It wasn't exactly going out on a limb to suggest that maintaining a strong economic link with the continent was a good thing....unless, of course, you were blinkered to the fact.

And, FWIW, I was in favor of Brexit. I think sovereignty comes before closer economic ties, and if the cost of such ties is the loss of sovereignty, then it is too high of a price....just as I thought maintaining one's own currency and not joining the Euro was a good thing years ago. Hard to be independent when someone in another country controls your fiscal policies.

No matter how you present it Obama tried to influence a vote, and lets not fall for the special relationship, Obama has done his upmost to dampen that down in his time in office. The special relationship was only mentioned once he appeared like some kind of American insurance salesmen intent on bullying the British people to sign on the dotted line. Now he is crying and squeeling because he thinks Putin may have done the same to him. The man is a Tool.

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

No matter how you present it Obama tried to influence a vote, and lets not fall for the special relationship, Obama has done his upmost to dampen that down in his time in office. The special relationship was only mentioned once he appeared like some kind of American insurance salesmen intent on bullying the British people to sign on the dotted line. Now he is crying and squeeling because he thinks Putin may have done the same to him. The man is a Tool.

Yes he did. I dont think anybody disputes that, do they?

 

[ChicagoBlue]

No matter how you present it Obama tried to influence a vote, and lets not fall for the special relationship, Obama has done his upmost to dampen that down in his time in office. The special relationship was only mentioned once he appeared like some kind of American insurance salesmen intent on bullying the British people to sign on the dotted line. Now he is crying and squeeling because he thinks Putin may have done the same to him. The man is a Tool.

You cannot be helped. I have no use for you or your completely blinkered opinions. I hope the sun always shines in your universe.

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

No matter how you present it Obama tried to influence a vote, and lets not fall for the special relationship, Obama has done his upmost to dampen that down in his time in office. The special relationship was only mentioned once he appeared like some kind of American insurance salesmen intent on bullying the British people to sign on the dotted line. Now he is crying and squeeling because he thinks Putin may have done the same to him. The man is a Tool.

Actually he was incredibly forward thinking and he showed his strategic awareness months before the event (the referendum). He foresaw that Cameron had made a balls up and it was possible/increasingly likely, that Britain would vote to leave. He foresaw that this would fly in the face of Scottish opinion, and may well lead to Scotland again wishing to break up the union. He saw that this would attract the attention of the Catalans for instance, and general instability in Europe would likely result. This framed against the need to have said stability, because Putin is crazy and dangerous.

 

[Kazzydeyna]

You are missing the fact that America is, by its nature, more conservative than Britain, so a "left wing" politician in America is, by necessity, far more centrist than the term implies in Britain. You can't simply throw out the claim above without realizing the underlying policies that make people see left and right.

In addition, the separation of powers in the US (Republican democracy with THREE branches of government) makes politics vastly different from the Parliamentary system enjoyed in Britain, whereby the "party in power" (something that very rarely happens in the US, although we are about to see it!) controls both the policies and the votes that enable them to quickly become law and practice. In the US, change has traditionally been very slow, especially when liberals are in power, because of the conservative nature of the populace.

In short, being a right winger means you will probably not see any power. Bernie Sanders is the ONLY avowed "social democrat" in Congress. He is labeled "socialist" byball and sundry, even though he is light years from what you would believe that word to mean. Indeed, he does NOT run as a Democrat for his seat, but as an Independent, which he has returned to now the election is over. He was a Democrat only torun against Hillary, which might give one an inkling as to why the Democratic political machine was allowed genes with her, not him....just as the Republican machine was aligned with "Anyone But Trump," because he is a Democrat who wanted to run against Hillary and whose fiscal policies are more geared to Republican dogma, but who is social far more liberal (regardless of what he said to get elected).

Good post.

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

You are missing the fact that America is, by its nature, more conservative than Britain, so a "left wing" politician in America is, by necessity, far more centrist than the term implies in Britain. You can't simply throw out the claim above without realizing the underlying policies that make people see left and right.

In addition, the separation of powers in the US (Republican democracy with THREE branches of government) makes politics vastly different from the Parliamentary system enjoyed in Britain, whereby the "party in power" (something that very rarely happens in the US, although we are about to see it!) controls both the policies and the votes that enable them to quickly become law and practice. In the US, change has traditionally been very slow, especially when liberals are in power, because of the conservative nature of the populace.

In short, being a right winger means you will probably not see any power. Bernie Sanders is the ONLY avowed "social democrat" in Congress. He is labeled "socialist" byball and sundry, even though he is light years from what you would believe that word to mean. Indeed, he does NOT run as a Democrat for his seat, but as an Independent, which he has returned to now the election is over. He was a Democrat only torun against Hillary, which might give one an inkling as to why the Democratic political machine was allowed genes with her, not him....just as the Republican machine was aligned with "Anyone But Trump," because he is a Democrat who wanted to run against Hillary and whose fiscal policies are more geared to Republican dogma, but who is social far more liberal (regardless of what he said to get elected).

In short, you are all RWNJs

 

[Ban-jani]

Errr...freedom? Is free speech a good enough reason?

If not, how about he felt that as the country with whom the US has a "special friendship," He felt that maintaining an open ECONOMIC border with Europe was better for that relationship?

Open your mind, man, and understand that until the shock of Brexit actually happening, it was a very normal, widespread, cosmopolitan belief. It wasn't exactly going out on a limb to suggest that maintaining a strong economic link with the continent was a good thing....unless, of course, you were blinkered to the fact.

And, FWIW, I was in favor of Brexit. I think sovereignty comes before closer economic ties, and if the cost of such ties is the loss of sovereignty, then it is too high of a price....just as I thought maintaining one's own currency and not joining the Euro was a good thing years ago. Hard to be independent when someone in another country controls your fiscal policies.

Having the freedom of speech is obviously a great thing. I'm not disputing Obama should be allowed or not to say what he did... I'm saying he shouldn't have. With the freedom of speech comes a responsibility.

Come off it Obama has seen a steady decrease in our "special relationship" and Trump, whilst being a complete prat is better news for us than Clinton and Obama.

It's mostly in the way he did. It was a threat and a direct threat to a vote that he shouldn't be influencing.

I've not commented on him generally. I'm just talking about me personally hating the fact he threatened me at the time of the referendum, regardless of which way I voted.

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

Having the freedom of speech is obviously a great thing. I'm not disputing Obama should be allowed or not to say what he did... I'm saying he shouldn't have. With the freedom of speech comes a responsibility.

Come off it Obama has seen a steady decrease in our "special relationship" and Trump, whilst being a complete prat is better news for us than Clinton and Obama.

It's mostly in the way he did. It was a threat and a direct threat to a vote that he shouldn't be influencing.

I've not commented on him generally. I'm just talking about me personally hating the fact he threatened me at the time of the referendum, regardless of which way I voted.

You take these Yank people far too seriously and anyway he's a Kenyan, who smoked weed and everyone called Barry when he first went to America... he was like a shit version of Eddie Murphy in Coming to America.