Guess who might be the next US President?!?

[Mr Oz]

Wahoo I have my own forum.
I promise to play nicely and not distrurb anyone else in my new sandpit.
Been very busy haven't had time for crazy theories only the credible ones which of course is why I've been quiet.

Ok I'm going to predict this guy will be shortly running for president.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Schwarzenegger

...now your going to say no he can't cause under the US Constitution...Yeah...Yeah..

Well after 230+ years the FEC quietly without any fuss has decided this month to about face and reinterpret the constitution.
http://www.abdulhassanforpresident.com/ ... sident.pdf

What was that? Constitution???? What!!! You've been listening to that person who does not exist who is vacuuming air time at the presidential debates. Look the Constitution is for you natural peoplet, We the statutory people (corporations) run the runners who run the government. - US MSM

[Morrolan]

erm... the FEC only opines on whether he can be a candidate (yes) and whether he is eligible for presidential primary matching funds (no). they don't say anything about him being able to actualy get elected as president (which is the Constitutional issue), which obviously he can't.

[Lili Von Shtupp]

Can we pleeeeeeease give all the Republican presidential campaigners huge Nerf battering rams and protective head gear?

[Fat Bob]

I'm guessing:

Kermit the Frog?
Queen Elizabeth II?
Donald Trump?
Homer Simpson?

How close am I?

[Morrolan]

Can we pleeeeeeease give all the Republican presidential campaigners huge Nerf battering rams and protective head gear?

protective headgear? why? what's there to protect?

[Lili Von Shtupp]

The protective headgear is to level the playing field with Trump, who obviously brings his own.

[FurBaby]

Lili: snort!

[Fat Bob]

Can we please not hear about the US presidential election until 6 weeks before people go to the polls. Honestly, they are all a bunch of politicians, none of them has ever done anything different than any of the others.

Well, I'll happily hear about Homer running for president. Or Ralph Wiggum!

[Mr Oz]

erm... the FEC only opines on whether he can be a candidate (yes) and whether he is eligible for presidential primary matching funds (no). they don't say anything about him being able to actualy get elected as president (which is the Constitutional issue), which obviously he can't.

Absolutely correct. It does not mean he can't be a candidate, win the nomination and win the election. Then the supreme court may decide who the president will really be, the one that won or the one that didn't. Oh hang on weren't they already there in 2000? and we all know how that decision turned out! WAR WAR GFC... Remember the courts only rule on things put before them, if nothing or the court case takes years to presented then they will not make a ruling and he may be "deemed" president for years or they may just have a quick show trial and be disqualified and Obama just gets re-elected by default. Heck you have Arnie or Obama, WIN WIN the people have their show election and feel good and they didn't get to choose that republican tea party candidate <name redacted> and the crooks on Wall Street and FED can be content in knowing they can get back to what they do best.

[baloo]

If T2K ran I'd vote for him.

[T2K]

Thanks Baloo...but if they don't like Newt Gingrich (who's the smartest guy interested in the office bar none, including Obama) because he doesn't offer a socially conservative example, I've got no frigging chance. The photos from Rugby Sevens in HK 2006 alone would sink me, not to mention shots from Tokyo or Bali or Seoul or wherever and my moderate admiration of the ability of Singapore and China to get things done without so much damn bureacracy. "He's an Asianized atheist degenerate hedonist fascist Manchurian Candidate!"

FB, agreed. This shit starts way too early. One correction though - one candidate, Herman Cain, is not a career politician, he's never held an elected office.

[Morrolan]

FB, agreed. This shit starts way too early.

absolutely, at a time when everyone should be focusing on 'fixing' the economic mess half the world is in, they are pre-occupied with candidate pre-elections and political posturing.

[T2K]

Election reform, tax reform, entitlement spending reform, redeployment of US military...all are badly needed. And I don't mean a few tweaks here and a few percent different there and a few hundred more lines of obscure Federal laws. Radical changes are needed all around, but no one who proposes such changes can get elected. So, the US rumbles along to...where?

[slinky]

....So, the US rumbles along to...where?

That's the question of the, what, year, decade, century?? We'll get more of the same from either side because it's all become too political and divisive. Radical change - yep, that's what's needed, but who can actually bring it?

[Lili Von Shtupp]

T2K, don't forget about political contribution and gift reform!

[T2K]

T2K, don't forget about political contribution and gift reform!

That's under my "election reform" category for sure, Lili.

Slinky - No one can bring radical change without first getting elected. No one who proposes radical change can get elected because we have a firmly entrenched two-party system and the R's and D's want status quo, or near to it, so they won't anoint anyone who is not mainstream. Thus, judging the future by the past (which is the best method, though not a certain one) we're going to get a more of the same.

The check point will be when the interest payments on our national debt become overwhelming, perhaps when they reach 25% of US gov't income. It's around 8% now, I think, but growing every year.

[cromasaig]

T2K, don't forget about political contribution and gift reform!

Now Lili, remember, corporations are people too.
You'll be hurting their feelings.

[skank-la]

A lesson in reality from the master