I actually watched the last Republican debate. It was interesting.
At first I had a little bit of a problem of getting into it. It's kind of a culture shock. To understand the debate I first had to keep in mind that Obama is bad. Everything about him. Every single hair. He didn't make a single good choice ever in his presidency; probably not in his life. He's also bad at politics and generally dump.
Next I had to keep in mind that strength for a republican is one-dimensional. In a way it reminded me of Mr. Cameron. While I, personally, think that making other people say 'yes' is strength, he thinks that sticking his fingers in his ears and saying 'no' is strength.
While I think that winning the cold war without one nuclear explosion and then converting the Soviet Union to capitalism is strength, for a modern republican strength means “to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.“
Finally I had to get used to the constant smiling with extra-white teeth. The only guy not smiling was Gingrich and I applaud him for it. You're not on a date, dear candidates! Who wants a smiling president?!
Honestly, I'm not sure a Chinese debate would have been more of culture shock, but half-way-through something interesting happened: Ron Paul.
Against the entire hall he argues against war. Unfortunately, Ron Paul is not good at this and also a bit too old. A brilliant politician had left this silly desk very slowly and shouted into the hall as loud, but controlled, as he could “DO YOU WANT ANOTHER WAR ??”. And he had repeated that until the audience had reacted. Well, Ron Paul is not brilliant. But he is genuine. He's the only guy on that stage who sounded like he believed what he said.
Of course I disagree with his economic policies. They would lead to massive starvation and dead people in the streets. But on the other hand, he would be unable to actually do anything of what he wants to do anyway. The president of the US is only strong when it comes to war. Otherwise he is captivated in a net of checks and balances so much that action is simply impossible if the other party is on a 100% blockade. (This is assuming the other party is not suspicious of terrorism, in which case the president is now allmighty).
In a way that is the strength of the US system - and of the German system which was massively influenced by the US after world war two. The basic idea is that it's much easier to make things worse than to make things better. And this is very true. Look at England and the constant jumping from one extreme to the next.
But the basic problem of the US system is an accelerating world. Checks and balances require time - and today there often is no time.
Anyway, US Presidents can only give direction to politics by threatening to veto all other directions. And that's why I'd seriously consider to support Ron Paul. He's the only candidate who is trustworthy; something Obama is simply not with his civil liberties record.
At this point I would love to say a few words about the guy who gave “advice” in return for $1.6 million to an institution which was later bailed out by tax payer money. But that's just beyond my mental horizon. Did you know that the German head of state (not the chancellor) is under heavy pressure right now because he accepted a 500,000 € credit from a friend about ten years ago to buy his house (410,000 €). The media argue that the interest rate he payed (4%) was too low and saved him up to 20,000€. They thus suspect him of corruption. I actually agree that this was not a good decision by my head of state.
Ron Paul may be an economic idealist, but you can be certain that he mostly thinks what he says. You can be certain that he actually would fight to his last breath against corruption and hidden lobbyists. Of course I have no vote, but I have relatives, friends and even a blog. Yes - outsiders influence your elections!! Sorry ;)
"She doesn't like Muslims. She hates Muslims. She wants to go get 'em"
Look at his face, at his eyes.