In which Tuomas learns the ways of Americans

Your innocent questions about why Americans are the way they are and do the things they do: ask them here!

fuck fastening a hubcap!

tell me about tipping

red states = right wing

blue states = left wing

wtf

Yeah, that's always been weird to me, since red is obviously the traditional colour of the left.

that confuses me too but it makes sense if you think of all the manly red things like red meat and blood and fast cars and other things republicans like

Yeah, lols to be had when the right wing nutbars are using commie colours. Makes bugger-all sense to me too

Well at least it means you can say there's reds under the bed and it has been true for the last 4-8 years...

But more seriously, my question about black voters was genuine: if one of the key reasons for the Obama victory is that he managed to mobilize them better than previous Democratic candidates, how can the candidate after Obama do the same?

Oh Americans, while you're there, how do people like your current bell-end of a president not get shot when he's spent the past eight years clearly begging for it?

See there's this little thing called the Secret Service...

Shhh, they're a SECRET!

Clearly, because nobody would own up to taking a bullet for that fuck.

But more seriously, my question about black voters was genuine: if one of the key reasons for the Obama victory is that he managed to mobilize them better than previous Democratic candidates, how can the candidate after Obama do the same?

Being awesome is going to help.

bill was pretty awesome then everyone got upset about a blowjob and forgot how unawesome life can be

then learned again real fast

well, if you call 5+ yrs fast

this has probably been pointed out before on this board, but the "blue states, red states" thing came about during the ordeal of 2000 (I think). It just so happens that during that year, the Democratic states were colored blue. In US it makes an intuitive sense, since blue conjures up images of water and red connotes hotter or drier places (or religious fervor).

But more seriously, my question about black voters was genuine: if one of the key reasons for the Obama victory is that he managed to mobilize them better than previous Democratic candidates, how can the candidate after Obama do the same?

― Tuomas, Tuesday, November 4, 2008 6:46 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

uh KEEP MOBILIZING THEM. this is essentially the second time you've answered this same question yourself

Secret plan for victory in 2016:

1. Be awesome
2. Be latino

Eric Garcetti would fit the bill nicely, but will probably be too busy being Gov of California.

i want more tuomas questions

uh KEEP MOBILIZING THEM. this is essentially the second time you've answered this same question yourself

Yeah, but what sort of candidate can mobilize them in the same way? Are they gonna choose a black candidate again.

Oh yeah, and what's the deal with Americans and nudity?

we only like it in the movie "porky's"

I haven't seen that, what makes the nudity so special?

we don't like nudity because we have a lot of fat people here

actually i wish i knew the real answer to this, i have wondered for a while. not every state makes it illegal for women to go topless, but it is frowned upon. i also don't get why people get mad at public breastfeeding

Actually I was referring to this thread, one of the first ones where I learned the ways of Americans:

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=40&threadid=22267

But I can continue this while I'm a bit less tired and more sober.

tuomas we are a nation of x-ians who are totally pure and shit, and also - the fat thing has some merit

It's kinda sad if only thin people feel comfortable naked though.

thin people with hairless nipples!

fatness is not the real reason though! this is like an ask dr. freud question. i think dr. freud would have a good answer.

i mean america has serious body image issues but there is just general weirdness about nudity that can't be explained by that. actually maybe both of these things have a common cause that involves christianity and other things.

puritan heritage

actually i wish i knew the real answer to this, i have wondered for a while. not every state makes it illegal for women to go topless, but it is frowned upon. i also don't get why people get mad at public breastfeeding

― horrible (harbl), Tuesday, November 4, 2008 9:31 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i wish theyd make men going topless illegal. i dont want to see that shit.

everyday can't be xmas you know

sigh. yeah.

oh, and naked is bad because it make you think about sex which is lust which makes baby jesus cry.

his name rhymes with two hummus

Oh Americans, while you're there, how do people like your current bell-end of a president not get shot when he's spent the past eight years clearly begging for it?

Dick Cheney. The horror...

Reposted from the election thread:

I find it interesting to compare your election to the local elections in here. In the last two elections Social Democrats, traditionally the largest leftist party iin Finland, have been losing votes because they've had a hard time winning new, young voters. Whereas the rightist party (and the Greens even moreso) have won new votes partly because they have a youthful, forward-thinking image. Of course the difference between the Finnish rightist party and the Republicans is that the Finnish rightists are economically right-wing but otherwise quite liberal. So I was wondering, how can the American two-party system contain all the differences that are found within, say, "rightist" or "leftist" voters? Wouldn't it make more sense for the Republican party to split into two, with the socially and economically conservative forming their own party and the economically right-wing but socially liberal having their own? How did the two-party system in the US come about anyway?

― Tuomas, 5. marraskuuta 2008 18:01 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

So I was wondering, how can the American two-party system contain all the differences that are found within, say, "rightist" or "leftist" voters?

it can't.

i love when tuomas repastes stuff and the months are like

― Tuomas, 5. marraskuuta 2008 18:01 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

So I was wondering, how can the American two-party system contain all the differences that are found within, say, "rightist" or "leftist" voters?

it can't.

How come you've had it for so long then?

because no enough people are interested in voting for crackpots. more to the point, there is no proportional allocation system in the house and senate so anyone who wants to make it in as, say, a green party senator must do so under his or her own political skill

the economically right-wing but socially liberal having their own?

most "conservative" folks I know under 40 fit this description to varying degrees. I think if the libertarians could find somebody who's not nutty, economically naive and possibly racist (Ron Paul), or an unpersonable turncoat weirdo (Bob Barr), they could very well have a shot at winning over lots o this demographic.

but i mostly just want to see the republicans wallow in failure for at least 8 years.

this has probably been pointed out before on this board, but the "blue states, red states" thing came about during the ordeal of 2000 (I think). It just so happens that during that year, the Democratic states were colored blue.

Yeah, I believe the networks used to switch off from one election year to the next, but only in 2000 did people start referring to "red states" and "blue states" based on the map used that year. The association between color and party is now so entrenched that it's not likely to change any time soon. And very few people in the U.S. think of red as "the color of the left" -- at least not our left.

Even though you used to have slogans like "better dead than Red"?

There must just not be enough (mainly young) economically conservative, socially liberal voters to make a difference nationally in the Republican party, much less a third party. (xpost)

Yes, even though we used to have slogans like "better dead than Red".
xpost

My dad has written a lot of non-fiction children's books. One of them, about X-rays, had a drawing of a boy (wearing underpants) that, when you held it up to the light, showed his skeleton (printed on other side of page). For the US edition they had to add a singlet so that you couldn't see his nipples.

http://www.zimbio.com/WrestleMania+XXIV/articles/20/Orlando+Orders+Male+Nipples+Erased+WWE+Billboard

matriarchy controlling mens bodies, yo (xp)

xpost, now that's just creepy.

lol america

Is Tuomas learning much here?

One of my female friends said that she and her parents moved to Germany for a time when she was just beginning to bud, and while there she wore a top no more than boys did. I will have to ask what she wore. (Also, the Germans were befuddled by the concept of a "training bra.")

In fairness, Germans are also often befuddled by the concept of a "bra."

The Büstenhalter, you mean?

Or is that a make of grand piano?

Why would Germans be befuddled by the concept of a bra?!

There's definitely bras in Wagner

Why would Tuomas be fuddled by the concept of a computer?!

I'm moving to DC early next year! For a research/science/technology funding and management related job. I'm too excited to ask any specific questions. Just tell me stuff.

you are not tuomas but good for you

ljubljumbla we have a thread again

Brad Pitt Has Your Secret Shit: Rolling DC

see we ran out of movies but then they made another one

Tombot: eh?

The title of every DC thread is a reference to a movie set in DC; this one references the recent Brad Pitt/Frances McDermott/John Malkovich movie by the Cohen Brothers.

ohhhh! Thanks, see you on there. Over to Tuomas.

tuomas you just need to visit the US, obv

he totally does! i will take him to quaint places like church and folk dances.

Come to K1ng's Ch4p3l in Boston! My wife and I sing there almost every Sunday during the academic year!

i think he needs to visit places like chugwater, WY

you won't be able to see any cool art or cathedrals or anything but damn do they have great chili

http://insearchoftheweird.com/photos/wyoming/chugwater1.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/88/209806722_b1930cc075.jpg

welcome!

we can do country on a day trip from boston. there's a road sign in western mass for "al's truck caps & square dance apparel," i bet that's a good place to start. also, there's a town in nh with an award-winning pumpkin catapult, it's pretty awesome.

Are you two fighting over who gets Tuomas?

btw if tuomas comes to the U.S.A., specifically MPLS, i am sure that i and other ilxors will get him drunk

^^^based on tuomas' stories that sounds like the kind of situation that would end with 'sexy' results

shut your mouth

pff, we can get tuomas drunk in any city. or EVERY city.

we can do country on a day trip from boston. there's a road sign in western mass for "al's truck caps & square dance apparel," i bet that's a good place to start. also, there's a town in nh with an award-winning pumpkin catapult, it's pretty awesome.

― Maria, Friday, November 7, 2008 6:11 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

LOL at "doing country" in Western Mass.

Tuomas -

2-party system is structural. It's not formalized anywhere in the Constitution (and was not anticipated by the Framers) but its emergence and continuation are ensured by several factors:

1. Most importantly, as other posters have pointed out, Congressional seats are awarded on a winner-take-all basis in each district. If a seat is won by Candidate X 51-49, it's won by Candidate X. If it's won by Candidate X 45-40-15, it's still won by Candidate X. Third parties have trouble getting traction in such a system - imagine that the 15 there is the Green party; people sympathetic to the Green agenda may still say "Wait, I'm ensuring the election of Republicans, with whom I disagree far more than the Democrats. The Green candidate will never win, so I should throw my chips in with the Democrats."

(Third-party movements that do acquire some momentum tend to be absorbed by one or the other party, or have their most pressing agenda items co-opted.)

2. Provisions for runoffs are not included in all races, and instant-runoffs are essentially unknown. There is no runoff provision for the Presidency, for example. This reinforces the effect discussed above - it's not like you can vote Green in the general election and then hop on board Democrat for the runoff, or list "Democrat" as your second choice. The pressure to vote for the lesser of two evils mounts up.

3. Changes to the above would require the involvement of the major parties themselves. There are very limited provisions for citizens directly amending Constitutions (at the state or federal level - and constitutions are basically what establish these electoral procedures). It's not clear what the incentives would be for parties in government to make it easier for other parties to push them out of government - unless those sitting are really tired of pretending to be Republicans when they wish they could just run as Libertarians, or alternately Christians In Government or whatever.

The US has had large third parties in the distant past, particularly regional or one-issue parties. In the 20th century, they tended to be one-man bands: Teddy Roosevelt's party, George Wallace's party, Ross Perot's party, and have not really sustained themselves beyond being spoilers in individual races.

Ralph Nader's 2000 bid is widely regarded as a spoiler enabling the Bush presidency, and he has received next to no support in his two subsequent presidential bids: under 3% in 2000, .38% in 2004, .5% in 2008.

I was hoping that would be a Nabisco post.

;_;

the two-party system is not specific to america. it's a consequence of proportional representation electoral systems. it's called duverger's law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

backwards! single-member districts tend to two-party system. proportional representation tends to multi-party systems.

oh i see it's already been covered by someone less drunk. at least you know what it's called.

Actually, that's helpful! Thanks for the name/link.

am0n = Doctor Casino

― ᑥ ᑥ ᑥ (libcrypt), Friday, November 7, 2008 12:46 PM

i will get in so much trouble for this one....

Go proportional representation!

???!?? Uh - I don't get it, where's that comparison quote from?

tuomas you just need to visit the US, obv

― homosexual II, 7. marraskuuta 2008 23:07 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

he totally does! i will take him to quaint places like church and folk dances.

― Maria, 8. marraskuuta 2008 0:17 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I've actually been thinking for a while that I would love to visit the US. Maybe next summer, if I manage to save enough cash? The only problem is that I don't know what part of the country to go to. Obviously it would be nice if it was a place with some ILXors, who might want to act as native guides and show me around...

my offer to take you to church and folk dances stands! (i live in boston now, as does dan, apparently, but i don't know what other ilxors. ny, dc, and chicago have their contingents though.)

So, is this thread going to be made into a BBC3 SkyTV Virgin late night documentary or wot?

Thanks for the offer Maria, I will consider it.

Tuomas I think you need to visit California for proper WTF's

NY, DC, LA, Boston, SF/Bay Area, Chicago all seem pretty well represented here - I'm sure any local ILXors would love to show you around