BF2S Forums Where's the motivation? [Debt Ceiling]

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

We have as many choices as we want, including the choice to not legitimize the government by voting. I happen to be registered as a Libertarian Party member.

No vote for a libertarian candidate will ever have any effect - well done.

Don't you think having only two real parties, and huge numbers of people refusing to legitimise the govt is bad for democracy and the country as a whole?

Govts need to be legitimised to get things done, look at your situation, the elected govt can't basically do anything for at least 3 out of 4 years of their term, the opposition can't either - how is that democratic or good govt?

When was the last time anyone other than a member of one of the two major parties in the UK sat at 10 Downing?

Dunno, right now?

Otherwise they usually form a significant minor group, as opposed to having no other group at all under your system.

So who's going to be the next president?  Obama seems fucked atm.

13urnzz wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

So who's going to be the next president?  Obama seems fucked atm.

i'd vote for Huntsman, but he won't win the primary.

the problem, is during the primaries candidates pander to the base, and move to the middle during the general. the bigger problem is people like lowing vote in the primaries.

I'm considering becoming a Republican for this election just in case it comes down to Huntsman vs. Obama.  Huntsman needs all the help he can get during the primary.

no, it comes down to fund raising and pandering.

i'm a Westerner and from what i see -

if Pawlenty doesn't finish strong in the Iowa straw poll, bye.
if Rick James get's in the race, it's five fingers across the face Bachman.
if Palin jumps in, Obama get's reelected.
if Ron Paul, well, if there were internet voting RP would win.
if anyone google's Santorum, they will see where he stands.
Romney will carry both Michigan and Massachusetts, because both of those populations can't help themselves.
Herman Cain - America isn't ready for a black president (Obama proved this). Republicans haven't made the tent big enough  for the cheap seats.

Huntsman gets a bad rap because he served as Ambassador to China. i don't care who the fuck you think you are, the ambassador will learn where the policy of our biggest trade partner/economic competitor is focused a whole hell of a lot sooner than the also rans that spout talking points back home.

Spearhead wrote:

13urnzz wrote:

America isn't ready for a black president (Obama proved this)..

wat

did you gloss over the rest of the post?

senator McConnel said his aim was to unseat the president. i believe him because Kentucky is a stalwart equality state. he hates Obama because he's a Dino.

Herman Cain is a fiscal, social, and committed Republican. the party has no need of those right now because of the tea-bagger influence is so rampant.
the majority of Americans look to Obama's heritage and Democrats dismiss it as another person with daddy issues wanting to be in the White House, and Republicans dismiss it because his mother was white and he is a Democrat after all. the most conservative Democrat since the Whig Party folded, but a Democrat nonetheless.

Shocking wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

edit: WOW HOLY SHIT NORWAYS DEBT

Not sure where those numbers come from because the official Norwegian statistical source says 666 billion dollars in total debt and not 2,2 trillion dollars, as of 1 quarter this year that is ... and then again we have our fortune in the pension fund that amounts to 587 billion dollars.

The numbers are correct. External debt is not only gov. debt but that of every company/citizen in Norway owed to foreign creditors, it's the real collective debt.

Right ... well it's exspensive to buy a house and a car in Norway and many Norwegians have adapted the credit based consumerism   it's more common now than ever before to buy stuff you normally would save up for on credit ...

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

No vote for a libertarian candidate will ever have any effect - well done.

Don't you think having only two real parties, and huge numbers of people refusing to legitimise the govt is bad for democracy and the country as a whole?

Govts need to be legitimised to get things done, look at your situation, the elected govt can't basically do anything for at least 3 out of 4 years of their term, the opposition can't either - how is that democratic or good govt?

When was the last time anyone other than a member of one of the two major parties in the UK sat at 10 Downing?

Dunno, right now?

Otherwise they usually form a significant minor group, as opposed to having no other group at all under your system.

Gee. I thought the Conservatives were one of the two major parties in the UK...the other being Labor.

Now the moonbats are calling for changing our very system of government:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezr … ingtonpost

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dunno, right now?

Otherwise they usually form a significant minor group, as opposed to having no other group at all under your system.

Gee. I thought the Conservatives were one of the two major parties in the UK...the other being Labor.

DERP

PM's from the Conservative Party.

Derp your damn self. Read the question.

Aaaand we just lost our AAA rating.

http://news.yahoo.com/p-reconsidering-u … 07261.html

Markets should be fun on monday.

it was s&p and they cited republican resistance to enact legislation in congress

Poseidon wrote:

Aaaand we just lost our AAA rating.

http://news.yahoo.com/p-reconsidering-u … 07261.html

Markets should be fun on monday.

Cleary this was the reason:

Obama's Hip-Hop BBQ Didn't Create Jobs

eleven bravo wrote:

it was s&p and they cited republican resistance to enact legislation in congress

No. They didn't. They cited inaction on the part of both Congress (that would be both houses, and thus both parties) and the Administration (only one party there) to address our debt issues adequately.