2005 - winners and losers

Brother None

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
There was a funny little article in the Volkskrant a while back enumerating the "biggest winners and losers of 2005". It makes for a neat little list. Summarized:

First the ones who are double-noted, both winners and loser, I'll add notes on what these people do for those that don't know;
Hu Jintao (president of the People's Republic of China), poking up the economy but hanging on to communism
Tony Blair (prime minister of the UK), failure at grand rebirth of the EU, but one of the last succesful politicians in a big EU country + he did manage to get something done with the EU
Vladimir Poetin (President of Russia): financial and political gains made from Russian gas, but autocratic reign is raising more and more heckles
Nicolas Sarkozy (French conservative politician): furious comments raise doubts, but popularity is not in question
Ruud Lubbers (former UN commissioner for refugees): fallen guardian of the world's flock becomes celebrated pop show preacher

Endlist; the worst:
Runner-ups: Mahmoud Abbas (president of the PNA), Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (president of Iran), José Manuel Barroso (president of the European Commission), Dick Cheney (vice president of the US), Gerhard Schröder (former German chancellor), Julia Timoshenko (former prime minister of the Ukraine), George Weah (presidential candidate for Liberia)
5. Osama bin Laden (former? head of Al-Qaida) Dead or alive, his position as number one man of Terror Inc. has been taken over by Abu Musad Al-Zarqawi, president-director of the Jordanian-Iraqi branch.
4. Jacques Chirac (president of France) EU constitution referendum became a big personal slap in the face. During the riots the Elysée appeared to be shut down. But he still has to last 1.5 years, without the support of his devoted Berlinian friend.
3. Jean-Claude Juncker (prime minister and finance minister of Luxembourg, former president of the European Council) Prototype of the European federalist who only wants what's best for his people, as long as they don't get in the way of policy-making. His proposed EU-budget didn't make it. Even in his own Luxembourg 4 out of 10 voters voted against the Constitution. Has been cranky all year.
2. Bashar Assas (president of Syria) Has taken Syria into deep isolation. Misses the tactical talents of his father. Hold on Libanon weakened severely. Nobody talks about the Golan-heights anymore.
1. George Walker Bush (president of the United States) Victory triumph quickly petered out. Faith in the Iraq-War much the same. Katrina also caused a dyke-breach in the White House. Only comfort: the popularity score of daddy as well as Bill Clinton have both had lower points than his.

Endlist; the best:
Runner-ups: Martti Ahtisaari (negotiator of peace-treaty of Atjeh), Mohammed ElBaradei (director general of the IAEA, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005), Patrick Fitzgerald (American Attorney), Ellen Johnson Sirleaf (next Liberian president, first female president of Africa), Junichiro Koizumi (prime minister of Japan), Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI), Condoleezza Rice (US Secretary of State)

5. John McCain (US Republican Senator) The Senator didn't budge in his confrontation with the White House concerning a ban on torture. Has the necessary believability and stature to take the 2008 Republican presidential nomination - if circumstances allow.
4. Bono and Bob Geldof (rock stars) There's a lot to halt the jubilation of the debt relief for the poorest countries, but what politicus could get millions of people moving on such a theme?
3. Ali Khamenei (Supreme Leader of Iran) Iran's highest leader is loaded with (oil)money. Reformers have been sent off. Iraq as a rival power has been temporarily removed from the picture. President Ahmadinejad is taking the brunt of the toss and throw-game. Nuclear program intact, Europe powerless.
2. Ariel Sharon (prime minister of Israel) One-sided move out of Gaza turned out to be a master stroke (with due thanks to the loser, Bush). Has relieved Israel of the necessary pressure. This old go-getter now appears to be the only with the actual road-map to peace.
1. Angela Merkel (chancellor of Germany) Sturdy Trabant transformed into a smooth BMW. Frau ohne Eigenschafte surely seems to posses the necessary flexibility as well as a willingness to act. Germans pleasently surprised, European partners as well. In her performance at the EU-top the Financial Times saw "the resurrection of Germany as the central power in the EU." You can take that to the bank and cash it, Herr Schröder.

Thoughts?
 
Uhm... Germans PLEASANTLY surprised about Merkel?

Nobody really wanted Merkel -- the only thing speaking FOR her was that she's a woman (well, she's not technically male).

The coalition will probably result in a standstill at a time when progress is what we need. Great job.

Nobody elected the coalition. The majority just elected "something else" and punished the major parties with awful electoral results. Now we have both major parties: the one people wanted to vote out and the one people didn't want to vote in.

Seems like the people has lost again.
 
Declaring Bono and Geldof winners is a bit odd, though. They are do-gooders, whoopdi-doo, why not Bill and Melinda Gates as well, then, they won that 'People of the Year Award' at least.

Sharon has seen a remarkable turn-around, though.

And Merkel isn't exactly a winner after letting the SPD get back and more or less forcing her to start that coalition.
 
Third Party

The Third Party


S.Of S.:
5. John McCain (US Republican Senator) The Senator didn't budge in his confrontation with the White House concerning a ban on torture. Has the necessary believability and stature to take the 2008 Republican presidential nomination - if circumstances allow.
Click to expand...

Recall in the Republican Primary of 2000, McCain was the only challenger to Bush. Third party agents resorted to an American campaign tradition of character assassination, McCain was whispered to be a ""dangerous psychopath"". McCain supporters retaliated.

McCain's
... believability and stature ...
Click to expand...
were instantly tar brushed and a ... (another) ... Vietnam Veteran made a person TO FEAR.

Blessed are the DEAL makers. May they never be seen in harmful UV and be profiled as compromisers and lose the zealots, and marketing momentum, of the present 'Values Addled' coalition.

Republican Party peace was made before the America media circus could consider rewriting the larger campaign script. The approved choreography of the political convention(s) was in teasingly 'virtue-al' danger.

Media feeds best at the bottom. Media sells best when it mocks, when it waves the 'safe' ( approved) dirty laundry. Media serves best, serves the corporate owners and 'the public' audience and the (paying) political sponsors best, when (especially) information is packaged as entertainment. No business like show business.

Gore was to become the exaggerator, the self aggrandizing 'joiner' of popular (populist) band wagons. A wind shifting politician. A liar.
Bush was to be scripted as the 'lovable (born again) goof'. The poor little BORN AGAIN rich boy. The former (Connecticut carpet bag) (- born again) governor of a oil rich SOUTHERN state, the son of a former U.S. Senator - President, and more importantly: Old Money Republican Brahmin, was to be a political waif, an outsider, not "'OF THE BELTWAY'', ready to wag a correcting (white out) finger at the money changers in the temple of American political ideologies.

This day. There's enough political, historical baggage in Bush's impedimenta train that his personnel veracity has to be continually fine tuned by the spin meisters. The price, the not so hidden cost, of getting what he wanted WHEN he wanted, whether he 'really' wanted it. or not.
So we might consider, not if a politician lies, but when, whether ''it'' sticks to the consumer packaged persona, or gets spinned, bagged and land filled.


... - if circumstances allow.
Click to expand...

The Republicans that make the 'feel good' press now are those that stand up to "the power' in Washington, a.k.a. Bush. One can always score points like McCain has done by opposing 'The Man" and tickling the populist fear of any government that openly justifies the institutionalization of torture instead of just getting the job done. Later to say, ""so sorry"" , after the omelets are eaten, for all the broken ... bodies.
Whether the present backers of Bush will back McCain in 2008, and preserve this 'Coalition of the Will-full", or whether the ex-POW can construct a team that is 'independent' of the 'third party' power interests, ... that would be an interesting political process to document. If possible.


In the spirit of Serling, consider for your examination, that the United States is not limited to a 2 D reality, of stage left and stage right, a two party political system. That is the show on center stage. Beyond the focused lights, behind the back drops and curtains lives ''The Twilight Zone"" of the third party. It's this coalition of self motivated, self interests that will pledge some of their money and risk some of their property, and our lives to an entertaining, hero worshiping 'party game' of musical chairs.



4too
 
Spawn of Santa said:
(US Secretary of State)
2. Ariel Sharon (prime minister of Israel) One-sided move out of Gaza turned out to be a master stroke (with due thanks to the loser, Bush). Has relieved Israel of the necessary pressure. This old go-getter now appears to be the only with the actual road-map to peace.
Click to expand...
He certainly have had a bad start on this year. I wonder if he will manage a winner status or a comeback after this surgery.
 
BTW, Sharon just had a massive stroke.

With some luck, he'll kick the bucket.
 
I missed the thread that was posted recently, read about it about two hours ago.

You you you.

Seriously, I hope Israel comes up with a better leader than that sleaze.
 
Ashmo said:
Nobody elected the coalition. The majority just elected "something else" and punished the major parties with awful electoral results. Now we have both major parties: the one people wanted to vote out and the one people didn't want to vote in.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make ANY sense. Together the two coalition parties have about 70% of the seats in your house. How is that not electing them? How can you say the majority wants something else if the majority elected those two (or three) parties?

Yes, they were punished, yes, they lost seats, that's a bad sign, but like Labour in GB they still won the elections, together.

Wooz said:
Putin? Even considered for a "winner" ?
Click to expand...

Hell, Beslan was last year, Russian economy has been great. Putin hasn't been doing well since the reactionary Moscow group grew in strength, but the Russian economy is still doing well. See them punishing Ukraine by means of gas for an example. If that ain't power...

Sander said:
Declaring Bono and Geldof winners is a bit odd, though. They are do-gooders, whoopdi-doo, why not Bill and Melinda Gates as well, then, they won that 'People of the Year Award' at least.
Click to expand...

Dude, the Times' Peoples of the Year were Bill and Melinda AND Bono. Pay attention.

It's not odd to list them as winners. Without them, there's no way that G8 would've even paid the slightest attention to Africa. They shoved the whole process along a good deal further, further empowering Africa and its position by speaking directly to the people. Like the article says, what politician can do that?

4too said:
The Republicans that make the 'feel good' press now are those that stand up to "the power' in Washington, a.k.a. Bush. One can always score points like McCain has done by opposing 'The Man" and tickling the populist fear of any government that openly justifies the institutionalization of torture instead of just getting the job done. Later to say, ""so sorry"" , after the omelets are eaten, for all the broken ... bodies.
Whether the present backers of Bush will back McCain in 2008, and preserve this 'Coalition of the Will-full", or whether the ex-POW can construct a team that is 'independent' of the 'third party' power interests, ... that would be an interesting political process to document. If possible.
Click to expand...

It does make sense. Bush has been riding the wave of fear and anger following 9/11. That's all he's done. His internal policies are a mess, Iraq is a mess, Al-Qaida is still going strong, relationships with Europe have falled, China and Russia prefer the EU to the US, he's building a massive debt. Fuck, he's not doing anything right. Neither can he go for the true and tried policy of giving gifts through tax cuts at the end of the term, as he doesn't have any money left.

The Republicans will have to swing around. I don't see any other way than a de-Bushilisation based on the Soviet model.

They'll prolly lose to the Democrats anyway.

Depends, though, in the end the US elections are only about who has the prettiest face. Democracy? Pah.

CCR said:
That's a goddamn good list Kharn.
Click to expand...

Not mine, note. This is from the Volkskrant. A left-liberal Dutch newspaper.

Someone pen an alternative list. I'd be curious to see it.
 
They'll prolly lose to the Democrats anyway.
Click to expand...
Rule #1 of American politics: If the Democrats can fuck up, they will fuck up. I mean, for fuck's sake, they are going to run Mrs. Clinton.
 
Kharn said:
Ashmo said:
Nobody elected the coalition. The majority just elected "something else" and punished the major parties with awful electoral results. Now we have both major parties: the one people wanted to vote out and the one people didn't want to vote in.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Intent and effect, my dear.

Only a miniscule minority wanted a coalition to happen. Most voters didn't want the SPD to continue, but they also didn't want to vote the CDU back in.

It's a bit illusory to attempt to vote one major party out without voting the other in, but that's essentially what most people wanted to archieve -- hence why neither party was able to form a coalition with minor parties.

So essentially the majority of voters got buttfucked. The SPD (which was heavily criticised for being too conservative) continues to be part of the government coalition and the CDU replaced the Greens (and then some, as both parties have a pretty much equal share).

The major parties OTOH got what they wanted -- the SPD stayed in office and the CDU got an officially recognised share (unlike its "shadow" role in the past couple of years, when it had the majority in the (federal) Bundesrat, which the public tends to be a lot less aware of than of the (national) Bundestag).
Even though probably neither leadership had seen THIS comming.

Anyway. It may be irrational to expect to vote against BOTH major parties at once, but judging by the result of the election and the attitude of the general public at that time, that was exactly what most people wanted.
And when has the public ever been known to be rational in the first place.

Just remember Dresden: the NPD (de facto nazi party) suddenly experience such an increase that it got seats in the local parliament. The reason? Upset voters.
The vast majority of those who voted for the NPD that day didn't want them to get any seats, they just wanted to protest against the major parties by voting for a radical minor party.
That the minor party received enough votes to get some seats was the logical consequence, but unexpected enough to shock even those who voted for them out of spite.

Ending up with a coalition with THE conservative party of Germany was very likely not what most voters intended to happen when voting against the SPD for having become "too conservative and neo-liberal".

Good thing I already lost my idealism. I don't expect democracy to work out anymore. Not if an irrational mass is expected to act rationally. Only reason electoral campaigns work anyway.
 
John Uskglass said:
Rule #1 of American politics: If the Democrats can fuck up, they will fuck up. I mean, for fuck's sake, they are going to run Mrs. Clinton.
Click to expand...

Too true. Most of the time they make me think they don't really want to win anything, they just want to make a statement (Bill Clinton aside). As much as I dislike the republicans, at least they take it seriously and do what they need to do to win. At the moment, the democrats are the Ringo Starrs of the government; they're just happy to be along for the ride and occasionally get center stage.

If McCain doesn't run though, the republicans are pretty much screwed though even if Hillary gets picked. Mitt Romney is the only republican candidate I've seen besides McCain, and he's a joke - everyone knows he has no chance of winning except him, apparently.

I really hope McCain does run, despite my hatred of his party. There's not a democrat alive that would get my vote over him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top