U.S. 2012 Election

[Dean]

I don't understand why we get bombarded with the US election ****.

[Wyld]

I don't understand why we get bombarded with the US election ****.

Wait. What?

[Dean]

Does my vote effect their election?

[Auld]

Does my vote effect their election?

No but their election effects most of the modern world. Like it or not America exerts an influence on policy in your country.

[Dean]

Does my vote effect their election?

No but their election effects most of the modern world. Like it or not America exerts an influence on policy in your country.

Well, yes

[Auld]

For the record, I don't like it

[Sathias]

Obama pledges to veto SOPA bill

http://www.cso.com.au/article/412468/ob ... pid=959105

[cyclobs]

wow... someone with power actually knows something about technology

[Nekosan]

Obama pledges to veto SOPA bill

http://www.cso.com.au/article/412468/ob ... pid=959105

Pffft, we all know he's only doing it because half the planet got pissed off.

[skitzor]

Pffft, we all know he's only doing it because half the planet got pissed off.

and what's your problem with that? I don't understand your objection. what was he supposed to do? oppose it when no one wanted it opposed? push it through when so many people opposed it?

that's democracy working. granted, it was a bit slow, but it worked.

[Nekosan]

Pffft, we all know he's only doing it because half the planet got pissed off.

and what's your problem with that? I don't understand your objection. what was he supposed to do? oppose it when no one wanted it opposed? push it through when so many people opposed it?

that's democracy working. granted, it was a bit slow, but it worked.

What should happen is that he represents the public ALL THE TIME, rather than just when he can't get away with not doing so, it shouldn't take massive pressure to put the interests of the people first over the interest of corporations.

[Kremmen]

Obama pledges to veto SOPA bill

http://www.cso.com.au/article/412468/ob ... pid=959105

This is also the same Obama that said he would close guantanamo.
He also said he would veto the Military ability to detain US terrorist suspects without trial

Barack Obama has abandoned a commitment to veto a new security law that allows the military to indefinitely detain without trial American terrorism suspects arrested on US soil who could then be shipped to Guantánamo Bay.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/de ... tion-obama.

[Tydus]

Pffft, we all know he's only doing it because half the planet got pissed off.

and what's your problem with that? I don't understand your objection. what was he supposed to do? oppose it when no one wanted it opposed? push it through when so many people opposed it?

that's democracy working. granted, it was a bit slow, but it worked.

What should happen is that he represents the public ALL THE TIME, rather than just when he can't get away with not doing so, it shouldn't take massive pressure to put the interests of the people first over the interest of corporations.

Are you talking about Obama in general or on this particular issue. As far as i understand it, this bill is a long way from the presidential veto stages, and whilst Obama coming out now and saying that he would veto the bill if it reached him in its current state is a very bad sign for those advocating the bill, (especially since he disagrees with its fundamentals) the bill it self still has to get through congress and the senate and is libel to change significantly through debate before it reaches his desk.

My point being, I imagine its far more common for a veto to occur further down the line, which i suppose both supports and disproves your argument. It shows that he probably did speak out early due to the insane public pressure against this bill, however one cant argue that he spoke out only because of the public pressure as for all we know he would have opposed it after it passed through the senate in its final draft, as i imagine is the norm, had the bill not had the public following that it had.

I do only have basic knowledge of the American political system, so i reserve the right to be wrong >.>

[skitzor]

What should happen is that he represents the public ALL THE TIME, rather than just when he can't get away with not doing so, it shouldn't take massive pressure to put the interests of the people first over the interest of corporations.

to be fair, I don't even know if the majority of people oppose this bill. I would say the majority of people educated on the implications oppose the bill, but that's not the same as the "everyone". (it could even be argued that it's not technically the President's job to represent the majority of the public, as that's not how he wins elections (eg. can win popular vote but not win election) ).

I still think what you're asking is unrealistic. whatever his stance is on any issue, there will be people that disagree. he can't always be representing the public's interests because the public's interests are never one side of the issue.

He also said he would veto the Military ability to detain US terrorist suspects without trial

what I've heard on this issue is that certain people in the house/senate used bureaucratic trickery/loopholes to insert these small provisions to the main defence bill, and there was no way for him to take it out. he either signs the bill, or vetoes the whole thing. vetoing the bill that controls all defence spending at this point in time would be catastrophic.

he has publicly come out and said he will never use those provisions of the bill, showing he doesn't support them, but rightfully so many people aren't really happy with this "promise".

[Nekosan]

to be fair, I don't even know if the majority of people oppose this bill. I would say the majority of people educated on the implications oppose the bill, but that's not the same as the "everyone". (it could even be argued that it's not technically the President's job to represent the majority of the public, as that's not how he wins elections (eg. can win popular vote but not win election) ).

True but he's elected to put the country first, not to automatically just favour the corporations.