Right now, politics is hacker news | Hacker News Reader

Right now, politics is hacker news

5 pointsmhartl19 comments

As I write, the #1 story on Hacker News is The Economist endorsement of Barack Obama for president; it is currently dead. Another fast-rising story is a Financial Times endorsement to the same effect; it is alive, but its days (or minutes) are certainly numbered.

Ordinarily, I am a strong supporter of a clear separation between Hacker News and state; politics, if allowed to infiltrate, would soon dominate. But these are not ordinary times. There is an election on Tuesday, with historic implications.

Until the election and its aftermath are over, politics is hacker news. Stories relevant to the upcoming election should, for now, be allowed to live.

View on HN

I wasn't sure what to do about the Economist endorsement story. Some editors wanted to kill it. I resisted for a while, but then I tried asking myself what I'd have done if the story was "Economist endorses McCain." I wouldn't have been so happy to see that on HN. So I decided I was being a hypocrite and killed it.

I agree with you that this election feels historic, though. So let's try a poll about what to do:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=349421

I read the print edition of The Economist and only check my snail mail once a week. I would likely have missed this endorsement were it not for Hacker News. But it looks like my side is losing the poll; pity.

I read about endorsement on twitter & friendfeed.

> There is an election on Tuesday, with historic implications.

What US Presidential election doesn't have "historic implications"? For that matter, what US national election doesn't have "historic implications"?

This is just another US presidential election.

This is just another US presidential election.

I agree that "historic" is a terribly over-used adjective in this context, but I find it hard to believe you could live in (and love) this country without feeling that this election is more "historic" than most.

You find it hard to believe he loves this country because of an opinion on a subjective matter of semantics? Please...

I'll give you a one liner why this election might not be 'historic': neither likely victor has any intention of making the federal enterprise smaller than $3T.

But don't mind us libertarians in the corner :)

(a) It's not clear that he's an American. In fact I rather suspect he's not. In any case, and with my melodramatic invocation of "love" notwithstanding, it's perverse not to recognize that this is no ordinary election, regardless of which candidate you favor.

(b) I didn't say anything about my views on the election, just that I think it's historic. That goes even for libertarians; though I agree spending will be out of control no matter who wins, the president affects much more than the Federal budget. And an election in the midst of two wars and a global financial crisis with the country's first black presidential candidate is historic no matter how you slice it.

(c) I'm an anarcho-capitalist (terrible term) in the David Friedman tradition. Put that in your libertarian pipe and smoke it. ;-)

> (a) It's not clear that he's an American. In fact I rather suspect he's not.

Me? Based on what?

> In any case, and with my melodramatic invocation of "love" notwithstanding, it's perverse not to recognize that this is no ordinary election, regardless of which candidate you favor.

Perverse? Every presidential election involves some "leg tingling", so what makes this one so different?

> And an election in the midst of two wars and a global financial crisis

World wars were bigger - were all those elections "historic"?. The Civil War was in the US - was 1864 "historic"?

> with the country's first black presidential candidate is historic no matter how you slice it.

Racist :-) (Didn't you get the memo? Any mention of race is an attack on "The One".)

Me? Based on what?

I think it was the repetition of "US ... election" that gave me that impression, and in particular the inclusion of "US" in the construction. As a US native, it probably wouldn't have occurred to me to include that modifier, so I guessed that you might not be American.

what makes this one so different?

Well, "an election in the midst of two wars and a global financial crisis with the country's first black presidential candidate", for starters. Not to mention arguably America's lowest standing in the world since WWII. I remember seven elections and have voted in four, and (despite the "historic" claims four years ago) this one feels bigger than any of them.

> As a US native, it probably wouldn't have occurred to me to include that modifier, so I guessed that you might not be American.

Never considered the possibility that an American might internationalize?

> I remember seven elections and have voted in four

Newbie :-) (The Who's "Won't Get Fooled Again" comes to mind during this election.) How about the possibility that you're trying to relive when elections were new (to you)?

> Not to mention arguably America's lowest standing in the world since WWII.

Still irrelevant. When other countries need something, other countries forget "standing". When America needs something, they happily sell or don't have the capability. (Yes, Australia and some of the Euro contries have some amazing troops. However, they don't have many of them and they can't transport them.)

As someone once said in a slightly different context, if you want a friend, get a dog. Countries act out of perceived self-interest not friendship, standing, etc. (Disagree? Provide examples where "friendship" trumped perceived self-interest.)

If you insist on listening to Monday morning quarterbacks, shouldn't you at least pick ones whose predictions are reasonably accurate?

  "I find it hard to believe you could live in (and love) this country without feeling..."

I do think this election is important. I also think it's reasonable to think it doesn't matter. My comment was about your reaction, not the premise :)

It happens once every four years...makes sense to allow coverage. It's highly relevant and a high volume of political stories suggests a high level of interest.

Maybe if you're American this is the most important political story of the decade.

If you're European, Asian, or Africen it probably isn't. Yes it will impact us, but not more than the global economic meltdown, Pakistans near default, the Iraq war, etc.

Were not all from the US.

No, but some of us are, and we would show your country the same respect of providing coverage and discussion of your historic events that affect hackers in your country.

I don't mean to be demeaning in any way, but no you wouldn't.

I've never seen a post about European political issues here, and I don't think I ever will.

Excuse me, but if a story appeared here that had significant impact upon foreign hackers, then I would upvote it, personally.

Is there anything worse that's happened to the world as a whole in the last decade than George Bush being the American president? I don't mean that as a controversial statement; I'm serious. What else had as bad effects globally? Maybe global warming.

I see what you're saying, and I don't entirely disagree. That being said I could certainly name a few things that affected me as a European more than Bush being president.

Think of how you would respond if stories about an important election in China popped up all the time, not only here but everywhere. It would certainly affect you since China is a large global player, but the election of your local governor would probably be more important to you.

I think this is how many of us feel - it's important, but not that important.

It would be interesting if Obama were elected President, and Tory Leader David Cameron beat the current PM Gordon Brown. Both Cameron and Obama are young, charismatic, in touch with the "zeitgiest" of the day, etc., and I think share some similarities in policy points of view. Both, for instance, put the environment high on the priority list. I think an Obama - Cameron dynamic would be fascinating to watch, perhaps one which would rank with the Thatcher - Reagan dynamic that ended the Cold War. I think the principle underlying both individuals or their rise in prominence is "change". Both their nations have economic struggles and both promise "change". I think Cameron and McCain could work together fine, don't get me wrong, it's just from a generational kind of perspective that makes me think Cameron and Obama are on the same "wave length". Obama met Cameron during his European tour and I think the meeting went well. Certainly would be interesting to see them win their respective elections.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com