Who do u think will b next ruler of USA

[Deathproof]

I'm afraid it is going to be Clinton. I'd rather Trump, but I'm resigned to the inevitability of Hillary.

Your prob right with Obama+ Bernie endorsing the bitch.All bullshit aside I'm not thrilled with ether.This has been the most ducked up hit below the belt election ever.

 

[lindier]

I think we run you pretty close with our foul up over Europe. Cameron only called the referendum to enable him to keep control of his party and because he was certain he could win it. Talk about hubris and the law of unintended consequences. And now the 48% of us who wanted to remain have been disenfranchised.
Personally I think that for such a big change affecting the status quo there should have been a larger majority needed than 50%. Perhaps 60%. I know it might not have seemed fair, and if ever we get a chance to vote again on remain I would object strongly to raising the bar were it to affect us, but there was too much at stake.
Guess who is a very bad loser. And arguably no democrat����.

 

[lindier]

And another thing. I guess I'm going to have to get used to thinking of my county as England and Wales rather than the United Kingdom since it is pretty certain that Scotland will win its next referendum on independence and that ultimately Ireland will be unified by an all Ireland referendum. That last might not be q bad idea though. After all the initial division was designed merely to appease the conservative Carson in the twenties and had no real logic since Ireland had always been treated as a unified province.

 

[lindier]

Incidentally to go back to the original subject of this thread, and I apologise that it seems to have been hijacked by bebating Brits, though to b fair that is part of the charm of the site, the fact that threads develop a life of their own, but to go back to the original title, do you guys have a ruler. If Hilary is elected not she be subject to the control of the congress which will probably be republican and the Supreme Court judges. Don't you have checks and balances designed to stop any single person ruling you. Or have I misunderstood your system. And I understand that the chances of the democrats taking control of congress are less than Cameron's chances of losing th European referendum. Whoops!

 

[alexonedeath]

If Hilary is elected not she be subject to the control of the congress which will probably be republican and the Supreme Court judges. Don't you have checks and balances designed to stop any single person ruling you. Or have I misunderstood your system. And I understand that the chances of the democrats taking control of congress are less than Cameron's chances of losing th European referendum. Whoops!

I not only don't understand the political system in my own country, I have little interest in learning more about it. I have become convinced that everything concerning the three branches of government is bogus and all elections are rigged, so voting at the polls is meaningless.

 

[Deathproof]

Has a current president ever endorsed a candidate in USA b 4? I'm not very political

 

[deaddirty]

I think we run you pretty close with our foul up over Europe. Cameron only called the referendum to enable him to keep control of his party and because he was certain he could win it. Talk about hubris and the law of unintended consequences. And now the 48% of us who wanted to remain have been disenfranchised.
Personally I think that for such a big change affecting the status quo there should have been a larger majority needed than 50%. Perhaps 60%. I know it might not have seemed fair, and if ever we get a chance to vote again on remain I would object strongly to raising the bar were it to affect us, but there was too much at stake.

Yes, we do need a second referendum
- the first had none of the checks and balances needed against a fundamental change without a clear majority (if we the British People said anything clearly it was that we were split right down the middle)
- some of the Leave information was seriously inaccurate (and was withdrawn the moment they knew they had won)
- since there was no clear proposal covering the financial implications, the implications for the Union (and therefore for our nuclear deterrent and Security Council seat, as well as the serious risk of renewed conflict in Northern Ireland), or whether it involved keeping free trade with Europe or being able to reduce immigration (we can't have both!), none of us knew cearly what we were voting for or against.

 

[Deathproof]

Incidentally to go back to the original subject of this thread, and I apologise that it seems to have been hijacked by bebating Brits, though to b fair that is part of the charm of the site, the fact that threads develop a life of their own, but to go back to the original title, do you guys have a ruler. If Hilary is elected not she be subject to the control of the congress which will probably be republican and the Supreme Court judges. Don't you have checks and balances designed to stop any single person ruling you. Or have I misunderstood your system. And I understand that the chances of the democrats taking control of congress are less than Cameron's chances of losing th European referendum. Whoops!

No we don't have a ruler just a figure of speech I guess I was being a little sarcastic no there's no ruler

 

[lindier]

Yes, we do need a second referendum
- the first had none of the checks and balances needed against a fundamental change without a clear majority (if we the British People said anything clearly it was that we were split right down the middle)
- some of the Leave information was seriously inaccurate (and was withdrawn the moment they knew they had won)
- since there was no clear proposal covering the financial implications, the implications for the Union (and therefore for our nuclear deterrent and Security Council seat, as well as the serious risk of renewed conflict in Northern Ireland), or whether it involved keeping free trade with Europe or being able to reduce immigration (we can't have both!), none of us knew cearly what we were voting for or against.[/QUOTE]

Mate.
On this as on much else I think we are in total agreement.
Your posts on political and ethical matters seem to speak much sense from a clearly intelligent and thoughtful guy and whilst we may disagree on some matters, iI think you are to my left in politics, it's always a pleasure to read them. Long may our debates continue
Keep up the good work

 

[deaddirty]

Thanks Lindier. Yes I'm definitely to the left of you, but our hearts are in the same liberal place.

 

[lindier]

Thanks Lindier. Yes I'm definitely to the left of you, but our hearts are in the same liberal place.

We are. And it's a good place to be.

 

[Deathproof]

 

[deaddirty]

Thanks DP!

 

[alexonedeath]

What tale is being told by that animation of the two boys on the bench? Are they young homosexuals? Is that dive-bombing butterfly supposed to represent the Westboro Baptist Church? I suspect the GIF was created for our edification, but I can't determine the moral of the story.

 

[Deathproof]

No these 2 boys r just good friends enjoying the day.

 

[rtndguts]

Trump is a man who's failed every business he's started, has no political experience, makes obviously empty, unbelievable promises, changes his mind nearly on a daily basis and tries to deny his mistakes. Does this SOUND like a guy you'd entrust with the nuclear football?

 

[Deathproof]

 

[Deathproof]

Failed???So is he only presidential candidate in history to ever fund his own campaign completely himself. Where did all that money come from did it fall from the sky did he find it. Hillary is a career politician with no experience whatsoever in business. When Trump said he would stop the illegals from coming over here and even send the ones that have snuck over back that was a bold move. Nobody else would ever say that because they know it would cost them the Hispanic vote it's refreshing to have somebody say what they think instead of what they know people want to hear.

 

[Deathproof]

 

[lindier]

Failed???So is he only presidential candidate in history to ever fund his own campaign completely himself. Where did all that money come from did it fall from the sky did he find it. Hillary is a career politician with no experience whatsoever in business. When Trump said he would stop the illegals from coming over here and even send the ones that have snuck over back that was a bold move. Nobody else would ever say that because they know it would cost them the Hispanic vote it's refreshing to have somebody say what they think instead of what they know people want to hear.

Mate.
It's not often I agree with you but I hope that the Hispanic vote, faced with the danger of Trump, turns out for Hillary in great numbers.
They have experience of Trump in Scotland and it's difficult to find anyone with a good word about him. They can't all be wrong.
If America claims to lead the world perhaps we should all have a vote since we may all b affected . And isn't it nice of him to imply that the Baltic states don't matter. I assume he has no money invested in them.
And isn't his bimbo of a wife thick. Not only is she incapable of drafting her own thoughts she has to let her team plagiarise the First Lady a post I hope she never fills unless you want to become the laughing stock of the world.