Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it's not the "republicans" or the "democrats", it's the party establishments that have completely lost touch with the people they "represent" and instead have become entities unto themselves, self perpetuating behemoths who fund themselves and have no interest in the voters. Unfortuantely the parties are hard to get rid of, but for the good of the country it may be time to unelect eveybody, chase the moneychangers from the temple and start over, with new parties. More than just the 2.
I find it odd that someone who claims to want the Republican Party to go down in flames would dislike Trump so much. Trump is in the process of trying to dramatically change the Republican Party. There's a reason why the Establishment Republicans hate the idea of him as President.
Most of the current Republican candidates would just be more of the same nonsense.
A question just as fair is why the Democrats - the part of diversity - is stuck with a field of candidates that consists of 4 White guys and 1 White woman, the 2 frontrunners are both old. Meanwhile the Republican field included 1 woman, 1 Indian America, 1 Black American, and 2 Cuban Americans. D's gets a vast majority of minority votes but seem to be lacking in future exciting minority candidates.
Even the minority Republican presidential candidates are failing to generate any real excitement. Let's be honest, we all know that a woman and a black man isn't going to capture the GOP nomination. With the Democrats, at least a diversity candidate did. And won the presidency...twice.
Huntsmen was too close to a centrist candidate, and could not survive the primaries, I suspect he would have won the presidency. I was impressed by him. ron paul was too...different for many. I respected him a great deal. his son is similar, but is missing the commitment to beliefs that his father had.
McCain wasn't bad either, until he doomed himself with Palin.
This election is not about Democrats vs Republicans---anyone who thinks that way has fallen into the establishment's trap. It's about We The People vs the Establishment. There's no difference between "electable" candidates like Jeb!, Rubio, or even Fiorina and Cruz (outsiders who are bought and paid for). And Hillary is a bit better than any of the GOPe, mostly because she cares more about the rights of women and the LGBT people than they do.
The "electable" candidates this time are people like Sanders, Carson and of course, The Donald. People love them. The People's Billionaire is saying what everyone knows to be true (about illegals, Muslims, etc), but doesn't want to admit because of their special interests, or wanting more votes. THAT is what scares the establishment, RINOs, and liberals. We FINALLY have a candidate who is speaking the truth and is openly proud of America and wants to bring it back from the brink.
There is no way in hell Hillary or Bernie will be the next President. .
I'm not so sure if it ends up coming down to Trump and Hillary.
Trump is a loose canon and a pathological narcissist with no self-control.
And although Hillary is a pathological liar, a total political opportunist, deeply corrupt and incompetent, she will have the majority of the media and entertainment industry on her side. Most voters will be low on information and end up swayed by vast media coverage of Hillary's best moments and Donald's worst moments over and over and over again.
1948 Truman, D 4 years
1952 Eisenhower, R 8 years
1960 Kennedy/Johnson, D 8 years
1968 Nixon/Ford, R 8 years
1976 Carter, D 4 years
1980 Reagan, R 8 years
1988 Bush, R 4 years
1992 Clinton, D 8 years
2000 Bush, R 8 years
2008 Obama, D 8 years
Notice a pattern?
Here's the math since 1948
Democratic Presidents 32 years, 8 terms
Republican Presidents 36 years 9 terms
The Democrats had two 1 term Presidents (Truman, Carter) while the Republicans had 1 (GHW Bush).
1948 Truman, D 4 years
1952 Eisenhower, R 8 years
1960 Kennedy/Johnson, D 8 years
1968 Nixon/Ford, R 8 years
1976 Carter, D 4 years
1980 Reagan, R 8 years
1988 Bush, R 4 years
1992 Clinton, D 8 years
2000 Bush, R 8 years
2008 Obama, D 8 years
Notice a pattern?
Here's the math since 1948
Democratic Presidents 32 years, 8 terms
Republican Presidents 36 years 9 terms
The Democrats had two 1 term Presidents (Truman, Carter) while the Republicans had 1 (GHW Bush).
I don't think you can pick an arbitrary starting date and then conclude that Democrats must win in order to create equilibrium (or whatever). What I notice is that people have short memories, and each time they make the foolish choice of electing a Democrat to occupy the White House for eight years, they eventually become so fed up that a Republican will win by default. Obama is the most leftist and divisive president in the history of this country, so the pendulum is going to swing hard to the right this time.
I don't think you can pick an arbitrary starting date and then conclude that Democrats must win in order to create equilibrium (or whatever). What I notice is that people have short memories, and each time they make the foolish choice of electing a Democrat to occupy the White House for eight years, they eventually become so fed up that a Republican will win by default. Obama is the most leftist and divisive president in the history of this country, so the pendulum is going to swing hard to the right this time.
The equilibrium is what I showed, or what you called the pendulum swing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.