This election scares me

[narci]

Originally Posted by ClaireVoyant

Silly iPad doesn't like the term "flip flopper" much


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com App

Maybe Steve Jobs was a Democrat?

[ClaireVoyant]

Originally Posted by narci

Maybe Steve Jobs was a Democrat?

LOL, no maybes about it . Oh well, so are some of my bestest pals


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com App

[irnfit]

Mitt Romney stated in his platform that he was going to create 12 million jobs when he was elected. So, he didn't get elected, therefore he is keeping those 12 million jobs a secret. Shame on him.

[ClaireVoyant]

A secret? Romney lost . . .his policies won't be enlisted. It will be the policies of the Obama Administration . . .you know, the one who promised if he could have a trillion dollars in stimulus to stimulate the pockets of his cronies and their green companies that have since gone belly up, we would have 5% unemployment. Why there's 21 million fewer people working today IS the secret


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com App

[Thumper]

sigh, politics!

I have 7 kids, mostly now teens and college age/ early 20's, and I have noticed they are quite disgruntled and pessimistic against BOTH parties, and I do feel that their generation (or one shortly thereafter) will likely push for the creation of a 3rd party, or somehow, the Green party, or Libertarian, or whatever it will be called is just ripe for the taking right now, I wouldn't be surprised at all if we all see a 3 party government system in our lifetimes, I even know a few people who voted for Gary Johnson (Libertarian), and I was over hearing this conversation of this younger generation and their thoughts on how any 3rd parties never get much of a chance, via debates, press, etc. and I think its just a matter of time before one of the other parties gains some power,people are just sick of the deadlock, and something needs to happen.

Kara

[ClaireVoyant]

I would truly love to see the Libertarian Party become a bigger player . . .but in today's climate of two party system and the way they're funded, I just don't see that happening.

As for gridlock, that's not always a bad thing. When one party had control of both the House and Senate and controlled the White House, the leaders in the Senate ended filibustering by striking a deal with former Senator Arlen Specter. He switched parties, giving Democrats the super majority in the Senate and prevented filibustering so that Democrats didn't have to negotiate with Republicans on health care. Instead, they were able to ramrod it through both the House and Senate without so much as a single Republican vote and then signed into law by the President.

Of course, that maneuver cost Democrats control of the House and a return to filibustering when they lost their super majority in the following midterm 2010 election.

Which is why Democrats . . .unable to have a super majority in the Senate the "old fashioned way" . . .are working on ending filibuster privileges of the minority party by way of rules change.

Gridlock was purposefully and artfully placed in the Constitution by its framers for the express purpose of preventing one party from running roughshod over the country. That's why there's three independent branches of government . . .it was designed to be a stopgap measure to prevent dictatorship. Until now, it's worked admirably.


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com App

[Missy]

Originally Posted by mellowbo

Missy, Kara, my ulcer is getting stirred up just reading these posts, LOLOLOLOL! Thank God the election is over so I don't have to comment. ROFLMAO, eyes twitching and all..........xxoox

LOLOLOLOL Carole...so many fond memories! nope not gonna engage this time!

[ClaireVoyant]

LOL, the thread title makes the content pretty clear . . .and clicking is still a choice . . .enter at your own peril


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com App

[narci]

Now that the election is over, what needs to happen is that both parties have set aside their personal differences to work together and plan out what's best for America and it's people.

No 1 party is 100% correct but if you take the good points from both, you can come closer to solving issues.

[ClaireVoyant]

Problem is, compromise is defined as Republicans caving and Democrats get what they asked for. Case in point: in August 2011, Washington hit the debt ceiling and the President needed the debt limit raised to continue to function. Republicans said fine, we'll raise your limit, provided you make budget cuts . . .Dems said we'll agree to cuts beginning in Jan. 2013 if you will give us the debt ceiling raise now. Republicans, believing Democrats were sincere in their promise to make cuts, caved, the limit was raised and S&P lowered our credit score for the first time in US history because Republicans were rolled like weenies.

Now we have the so called "fiscal cliff" looming and the president says give me the tax increases and we'll decide what to cut LATER. but this is a spending problem not a tax problem and not addressing budget cuts IS what's sending us over this cliff.

It's so bad . . .the last two budgets the President has sent to Congress were so outrageous in spending, they were voted down by 100% of Congress (see? Democrats and Republicans CAN agree the President is a tax and spend politician).

We have to do something, here . . .the debt ceiling limit must be raised again next month . . .and the time is ticking on this fiscal cliff. Congress will soon leave Washington for Winter Break . . .while the President shuffles off for his three week Hawaiian vacation. None of these people have earned the break . . .we're sitting on the edge and short of a miracle, we're ALL falling off.


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com App