Election Issues 2006

As we run into the stretch for the Mid-terms both parties have studies, the media has studies, and the pundits have studies all saying that x, y, or z will or should be uppermost on voter’s minds as they head to polls in November. However all of these organizations have the intent of making their the issues uppermost in voter’s minds. In other words it’s galactic-scale spin that speeds up as we draw closer to the election.

This is my attempt to clarify — most things in life nowadays are never simplex. There isn’t a silver bullet issue that will win for either party, no matter how many pundits will try to convince you that one simplex problem cost so-and-so their seat, or got so-and-so their seat.

The world is more than complex today, it’s multiplex. Issues influence each other, and when you come to an election cycle there are so many spinning constellations of political philosophies migrating together that it’s like Galaxies Colliding.  What comes out the other side and why is nearly impossible to predict or to backtrack on after the fact. Unless of course you are Karl Rove.

Using this multiplex theory, it’s easy to see why disentangling the war in Iraq from the war on Terror is an impossible task, just as trying to pry gas prices lose from Future Energy Policy and past Environmental Policy is a loser as well. There are too many stars, planets, and gas clouds spinning into each other to sort those out for the average voter.

So when it comes to this election here are some key nuclei of the multiplex universe:

1. Local Issues: if there are large ones this will influence outcomes.

2. GWOT

3. Future Energy and Environmental Policy

4. Immigration / protecting the borders

These appear to be the nuclei of the galaxies colliding in November, notice how they all cross over and influence each other. Also take note that if the stars are larger and brighter in your LOCAL galaxy, the gravity of the situation in the other three are not going to influence you as much as the sooth-sayers with their galacto-scan pundit hats and telescopes might have you believe. If you look behind the curtain of the pundits who profess to influence somewhere between one eigth to one sixth of the electorate, you will see they have their scopes focused on a warped mirror reflecting some alternate, mythic universe.

Switzerland Opposes Unlimited Immigration

UPDATE: Dave Schuler corrects me below in comments: Switzerland is NOT a member of the EU. My mistake, and thanks for the correction. This is a real head-slapper for me since Switzerland’s neutrality in all things is well-known, so EU membership was a poor assumption. The blogmind corrects all in the end.

In another sign that EU members are waking up to the fact that In another sign that some of the people in Europe are waking up to the fact that full-blown multiculturalism might not be the best thing for the member countries, their countries, Switzerland has voted to raise the barriers higher to immigrants and asylum-seekers. Now if only France, Italy, and Spain would follow. ABC story. The government had already narrowly passed the new legislation, but multiculturalist opposition forced it to a national popular referendum vote in which two thirds or more of the Swiss voted for the legislation.

According to early poll projections, Switzerland has voted heavily in favour of making it harder for asylum-seekers to gain entry to the rich Alpine state.

Despite warnings of damage to Switzerland’s humanitarian reputation, some two-thirds of voters appeared to have said ‘yes’ in referendums on laws limiting access for non-European job-seekers and making the country’s asylum rules amongst the West’s toughest.

They seemed also to have rejected a call by centre-left parties to redirect part of the central bank’s profit to the public pension system – a move opposed fiercely by the powerful Swiss National Bank.

“The revision of the asylum law looks to reserve Switzerland’s humanitarian tradition while at the same time stopping abuse,” right-wing Justice Minister Christoph Blocher, a strong backer of the new laws, had said during campaigning.

Bin Laden Death Reports Unsubstantiated per Saudi Government

Since the genesis of this sensational story was purported Saudi intel memos I have to chalk this up as another false report. Here’s the ABC story.

The Saudi Government has pulled the rug from under a French newspaper report about the alleged death of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

In a statement the Government says it “has no evidence to support” the contention that the world’s most wanted man is dead.

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has no evidence to support recent media reports that Osama bin Laden is dead,” the Saudi Embassy in the US said.

“Information that has been reported otherwise is purely speculative and cannot be independently verified.”

The question remaining is who put this report out there, and why? The possibilities might be  that this was a ploy to get UBL to prove he’s still there, it could be election fodder: something put out to decrease the urgency terror, or it could be UBL trying to distract.

India is accusing Pakistan as noted in my previous report.

Reuters speculates that this is a ploy to cause UBL to surface, one which might be needed if the Waziristan pact has actually caused him to relocate.

It was fun while it lasted, but I’m not playing here anymore, Bin Laden lives, we still need to find him and figuratively put his head on a pike at ground zero.