Poll: How do you feel about divided government at this point?

[GTaudiophile]

I am sick of it really. A grid-locked country for 2 years will get us nowhere while the country continues to go down the drain.

I am sick of candidates that lie and pander to the center during the election process only to pander to their base once elected.

Independents are the ones that get people elected but are the first to be ignored it seems.

 

[bamacre]

Imagine this.

Your car has 4 bad tires and the two mechanics are arguing about it. You say "Hey, this is serious. Quit arguing and come and fix it!"

They say "Sure thing Mac." They indeed stop bickering and come to fix your 4-wheeled baby, one with a blowtorch and the other with a sledgehammer.

Do you feel better?

Do I ever feel better? :hmm: Wait, don't answer that.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Do I ever feel better? :hmm: Wait, don't answer that.

Heh, well that's how it is. Health care needs help. Instead of doing that we get these bizarre laws which don't even begin to directly address the level of care a practitioner can give. The other party decided to protect us from terrorism by starting a war they still can't justify in fact.

Those are cases of "government getting things done".

That being the case, keep them at each others throats and let the rest of us figure out what to do.

It's like having a drunken moronic giant with good intentions. It ain't so great.

 

[BoberFett]

While "gridlock" may sound good, it will not do us any good at this point in time. As David Walker would say, "we are suffering from a fiscal cancer." We need some serious changes, especially changes to Medicare and Social Security, and I'd toss our foreign policy in there as well (since Obama likes our little empire, too). While a gridlocked Congress may not create more problems, it won't solve any current ones either.

bamacre, you know as well as I do that the only candidates who stand a chance of winning right now are Republicans and Democrats who have already been handpicked by those who stand to gain. I'll keep voting for the third parties and Ron Paul's but I have no illusions about their electability. Given the reality of the situation, the best we can hope for is gridlock.

 

[BoberFett]

It's like having a drunken moronic giant with good intentions. It ain't so great.

Tell me about the bunnies George...

 

[brencat]

I would love to debate this Ass wipe it would be a slaughter. I would want a true false question period also were we are hooked up to lie detectors . I would eat this ass wipe alive.

I'm sure you could beat him in a debate, especially without a teleprompter...but he would absolutely crush you in a spelling and grammar contest.

 

[Jaskalas]

Given the reality of the situation, the best we can hope for is gridlock.

You're describing a scenario where violence ensues due to mounting failures. That's what I see happening when gridlock is "the best we can hope for".

 

[5150Joker]

In an ideal America, the Republican party would never exist nor would it's constituents. But reaching that Utopia will take a lot of work.

 

[Infohawk]

In an ideal America, the Republican party would never exist nor would it's constituents. But reaching that Utopia will take a lot of work.

And what role would the Democrats play in an utopian America? LOL.

 

[misle]

In an ideal America, the Republican party would never exist nor would it's constituents. But reaching that Utopia will take a lot of work.

Someone's mad that the Republicans got rid of the slave trade...

 

[dawp]

MY ideal government would have more than 2 major parties. There really isn't that much difference between the Dems or Repubs.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

In an ideal America, the Republican party would never exist nor would it's constituents. But reaching that Utopia will take a lot of work.

In your ideal America I'm sure you'd have a Final Solution to achieve the dictatorship you crave.

You aren't going to get it.

 

[Red Dawn]

Clinton was an exceptionally capable politician...who also happened to be a moderate at heart. In fact, Dick Morris point blank told him to "go back to governing from the 'center' like when you were governor of Arkansas..." after the Dems lost Congress in 1994, and he did.

Obama is no such moderate. He is an idealogue who never ran anything. There is a big difference and it is showing itself in how bad his administration is running things at the moment.

Anyway, with regard to the poll, I voted Repub president, Dem Congress. Would rather have a Repub in charge of the military, foreign policy, and Federal bureaucracy.

Except they haven't anybody worth fresh dog shit to run as President.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Except they haven't anybody worth fresh dog shit to run as President.

No one does. It's all about doing what's possible to achieve and maintain power.

It seems to me that the attitude inside the Beltway is "America? What's that?"

 

[dullard]

Political gridlock is good for our country. The worst situations that we have gotten ourselves into often got their momentum when one party ruled all. The best situations often occured when we had near gridlock (Clinton's term for example).

Gridlock lets people and businesses plan for the future with certainty. That leads to more investments (economically and socially).

Heck, what would happen if we had gridlock right now? The Bush tax cuts would expire, and the budget would balance itself in a few years. That is true even without any spending changes to Obama's "massive" spending.

 

[dullard]

The best government is the one that does the least. Our country has been most prosperous when our government is gridlocked.

Beat me to it, I should have read the thread first.

The sad truth is that what Americans need the most (stability and gridlock) is what they want the least (they want change every election).

 

[Nemesis 1]

This is the most intelligent post, and mostly readable post I have ever seen you do. What is the world coming to when I have finally read and agreed with something Nemesis 1 has posted?

I have my momemts

 

[Infohawk]

I think that after a runner has explained what he wants to do . Than on national TV have reports question them on their stance in true false formate with lie detector so americans could see for themselves the lieing bastards. To have tech in this day and age and not use it to the advantage of its people shows we have tech but are afraid to use it for the benefit of the People.

Next presidential election you should start a campaign to have the candidates volunteer for just this. They would never do it but it would be fun to see their reaction to the idea.

 

[Wardawg1001]

Next presidential election you should start a campaign to have the candidates volunteer for just this. They would never do it but it would be fun to see their reaction to the idea.

We all know the parties would adjust to only running people who can beat a lie detector. Do we really want that?

 

[Infohawk]

We all know the parties would adjust to only running people who can beat a lie detector. Do we really want that?

Good point. Actually it already takes a psychopath to run for President. Most of them can probably already do it.

 

[woolfe9999]

Political gridlock is good for our country. The worst situations that we have gotten ourselves into often got their momentum when one party ruled all. The best situations often occured when we had near gridlock (Clinton's term for example).

Gridlock lets people and businesses plan for the future with certainty. That leads to more investments (economically and socially).

Heck, what would happen if we had gridlock right now? The Bush tax cuts would expire, and the budget would balance itself in a few years. That is true even without any spending changes to Obama's "massive" spending.

The expiration of the Bush tax cuts alone will not end the deficit in a few years, or even in 20 years. There has to be spending cuts on top of that, and not insignificant ones. With gridlock, you won't see spending cuts.

- wolf

 

[Infohawk]

The expiration of the Bush tax cuts alone will not end the deficit in a few years, or even in 20 years. There has to be spending cuts on top of that, and not insignificant ones. With gridlock, you won't see spending cuts.

- wolf

Why is that? Clinton and the Republicans cut spending. It actually makes more sense that a bipartisan budget will have less expenditures. Each side will refuse to pass the spending the other side wants to push.

In fact, it seems like both sides are only fiscally conservative when there is a split government. When that happens, they each want to look more fiscally prudent than the other. The Democrats sure don't seem to watch their spending when they alone hold power and the Republicans were also awful from 2000 to 2006.

 

[Genx87]

In an ideal America, the Republican party would never exist nor would it's constituents. But reaching that Utopia will take a lot of work.

Like an true communist I am sure you would work tirelessly if given the chance. Until the crazy leader deems you a threat and wonder why you also ended up in the ditch next to the very people you were eliminating.

 

[dmcowen674]

I do wonder now about something I didn't consider.

Did Dems and Republicans ever work together for the greater good of the country?

 

[Double Trouble]

I do wonder now about something I didn't consider.

Did Dems and Republicans ever work together for the greater good of the country?

Yes, occasionally they do, but only when they both agree on a goal. They might pursue the goal for different reasons, but they will work together to achieve it