h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I heard on the radio that US voters are rejecting Al Gore because he's perceived as being 'too clever' and 'stand-offish' (because he excluded Clinton form his campaign. Leaving aside obvious question of why it would be undesirable to have an intelligent, principled President, could some of the US Hikers confirm or deny this report?

I'm not that interested in elections, here or in the USA, because if the electorate starts showing interest it just encourages the politicians and they take themselves even more seriously than ever. Still, it occurred to me that if you swapped the first letter of the candidates' names around, you would get a Gush(ing) Bore, which pretty-well sums it up for me.

I heard a comment on the TV last week where someone said "If God had wanted the US to have a presidential election, he would have given them a candidate!!" One can't help feeling that the reason Gore and Bush are 'neck and neck' in the poles, isn't because they are equally popular, but because they are equally un-popular.

However, the US elections have evolved from "May the best man win" into "May the wealthiest man win". The American citizens may still have the democratic right to vote, but the choice of candidates is far from democratic.

Why aren't there any female candidates?

While I haven't heard that exact report, Guy, many of the commentary one reads on tomorrow's (yikes!) election does seem to mirror that comment. Various idiots like Bush because he comes off as just an "average guy". If your definition of average is an oilman millionaire, that is. Americans are suspicious of people more intelligent than they are, and seem to be sick of so-called "policy wonks", i.e. the Clintons. They like people who rant a lot, blow off steam, and foam at the mouth. How else do you explain Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, or Jesse Ventura?
I encourage all Americans on this site to go to the polls tomorrow. However, instead of voting between Bush or Gore--corporate whores both--choose a third party candidate or substitute a write-in candidate. Don't vote your fears, vote your conscience.
Why are there no female candidates? Because, unfortunately, Americans aren't ready to elect a woman president. The first female president will not a liberal, she will be a conservative (see the Maggie Thatcher precedent). That is the only way her fellow citizens will stomach voting for her. Sad, isn't it?

Gore, clever, intelligent?
He can't even keep his lies straight.
I find it hard to find anyone who thinks Gore is clever. Stuffy, a liar, just plain annoying, yes, but clever no.

No the wealthiest dosn't alway win (otherwise we would have had Perot for a president).

BTW... Gore has gotten much of his money from the oil market and the rest from his Daddy also.

It doesn't have to be the weathiest individual, all that counts is the amount of soft and hard money political donations. If you think I'm favoring Gore, forget it! Just because Gore has a wealthy background and has told a few whoppers doesn't mean you should back Bush.

It's time for step away from the lowest common denominator candidate backed by the political party you march in lock step to.

Anyone whose conscience tells them to back Bush or Gore is suffering from a clear lack thereof.

I'm writing in the co-sponsors of the Campaign Finance Reform Bill, Sens. John McCain and Russell Feingold.

Applause!!

*graciouly gathers her skirts and curtseys deeply*

I'm probably voting Nader, as I want to see the Green Party get 5 percent of the vote so they can get a lot of money too for 2004.

Hmmm. Today's Doonesbury says:

"If you'd like to see abortion re-criminalized; if you're for unrestrained logging and drilling, and for voluntary pollution control; and if you favor more soft money in politics, then the choice today is clear.... Vote Nader."

I have a dreadful feeling he's right. Nader's support comes almost exclusively from the liberal wing of American politics, and therefore every Nader supporter is one less for Gore.

I really find it incredibly hard to believe that someone as vacuous as "dubyah" can be in such a position. I guess all you need to do is give your rich supporters a free hand, and they'll pay for the best campaign you can get.

"Vote for Bush - the best President money can buy!"

It's more than just a president we vote for...there are senate seats, judges ect. all the way down the line to each local area. No polititian is without an incredibly ugly side. Gore makes me gag, personally, but that doesn't make the other candidates more attractive. They all have dark secrets and public pleasing promises and we won't know until they've been in office for a while how it's going to be.

With the notable exception of Bush--what you see is what you get with that dodo. Not a "Commander in Chief" but an "Advisee in Chief". Anyway you cut it Dick Cheney will actually be the President.

Actually, I think the real president under Bush would be Hiram Q Gutbucket III, president of Pollution-U-Like.

I suppose in that respect at least you know up fornt that George W Bush is a spineless toady

Well call me a Republican, but I would vote Bush (If I was of voting age and Lived in america). Simply becuase he wants to remove american forces from Europe, and he might, might bring some fun to the world (well more the Gore the Bore).

BTW can any american's tell me, why, why your presidential candiates insist in strutting around in suits with out jackets? It looks awful. Its like they're Middle Management (with better suits of course) off for a swift half of stout down 'The Nag's Head'. Has anybody else noticed this or come to the same conclusions as I have?

As always in a world of his own

Anxer.

The only thing that frightens me more than the prospect of Gore being elected is Bush being elected. If Bush gets into the White House, the US can kiss its foreign policies good bye! Can any American forget the "Afghanistan" story?

All politicians have a darker side, more so than the average citizen for two reasons. The first is harmless - they get more press, so reporters do their best to dig up dirt on the people in power, to either slime them or to be "noble" and get a good story. The second reason is that they have power and money, and can do a lot more than other people. Which is not to say they are any more evil than any other human being. They're just more evil than any other human being without that much money. Are they any worse than the oil moguls, or Bill Gates, who try to gain monopolies in their respective businesses, to drive away competition and raise prices? I don't think so. We just don't see as much dirt on the others.

Bush is leading in the popular vote (last I saw), but Gore could still win the election. I'm no political analyst, but I think he's the lesser of the two evils. (I find it difficult to support someone who not only condones the death penalty but would pull the switch himself, if he could)

On NPR this morning pundits, pols, and other assorted "experts" were predicting Bush would win the popular vote and Gore would win the Electoral College. All you need, I believe, is to get 270 votes in the College, and the show is over!

Well, so you might think, but "dubyah" has outsourced all his thinking to his daddy's advisers (he is I thing in truth a way for Bush senior to regain power despite being too old these days). Gen. Powell is apparently of the opinion that pulling US troops out of Europe would be destructive to the NATO alliance, on which the US depends for much of its overseas reach (Q: What's the USA's biggest aircraft carrier? A: England.). So it wouldn't happen.

On the other hand, Texas has the worst record on pollution in the Union, partly because the regulations are written by the polluters but mostly because compliance with State environmental legislation is voluntary.

Bush also has a policy of recriminalising abortion except in tightly controlled circumstances, trying as adults juveniles who commit murder (idea (c) Saudi Arabia), and handing welfare over to the charity sector - i.e. allowing rich Americans to wash their hands of the poor by default.