Krellin for pres. Nice. Let's start with king Mod first.

The president IS responsible for creating treaties with other nations where after the senate approves of the treaties, The president also reserves the right to create executive agreements with other nations that need not be validated by congress. The PROBLEM is that both congressional republicans AND the democratic president have tried to skirt around each other instead of working together. So the republicans overstepped the president by contacting a foreign nation while the president overstepped congress with his multiple executive orders. Simply put two wrongs don't make a right. Both sides need to grow the fuck up and sit down like men and compromise; executive orders are in place for the president to make immediate decisions that cant be waited on for days to be passed through congress; and executive agreements are for the same purpose. What needs not happen is a precedent be set forward that the president can ignore congress and congress ignore the executive; it is embarrassing as an American; and as an American I think Obama's executive orders should be brought to court and made null and void by the SCOTUS, and the senators who signed the letter to Iran should be punished as well.

I have little siblings, when they act up while I am babysitting I don't punish one or the other. I sit them both down, I tell them both they are wrong, and I ground them both until my parents get home. If our government wants to act like children they should be treated as such. enough of the bullshit, enough of the stagnation, enough of making our country look like an ass on the international stage. We need a 3rd party, to stop this from happening.

precedent *not* be set forward.

Yeah, Obama hasn't used an unusually high number of Exec Orders.

Anybody think that would ever happen here? A credible 3rd party? I would love it but I don't see it happening.

@mendex, but the point is what he used them for. He used them for actions otherwise reserved for congressional laws, simply because he couldn't get republicans to compromise. Either way it's bullshit.

@MarquisMark- I think the third party could be as simple as people electing independent candidates more often in congressional districts. Of course that would require more americans to actually give two fucks about politics and research their candidates...

I say we give Cruz smallpox.

+1 abgemacht

Giving someone smallpox that you don't agree with? Extreme.

I think a bigger hurdle to 3rd party candidates is the lack of fundraising/campaign machinery. There's lots of independent candidates on the ballots but they get virtually no publicity before the elections. If we do see a credible 3rd party, it would be a splintering off of a current one, like centrist/moderate republicans going off on their own. But that kind of thing is easier to do in a parliamentary system, rather than ours I think.

Oh, and Ted Cruz is a buffoon and will NEVER be in the Oval Office. Donating to his campaign is the same as setting your money on fire.

You can't make this stuff up! The audience for Ted Cruz's announcement did not volunteer to be there:

http://reason.com/blog/2015/03/23/liberty-u-students-forced-to-attend-ted

More and more, Amerika resembles the olde Soviet Union.

@MarquisMark- True, but if people took a more active role in their politics then they would research smaller candidates on their own. Over time the funding would materialize. It's a matter of getting people to look.

@Chaqa- its an inside joke based on a different forum discussion.

"More and more, Amerika resembles the olde Soviet Union."

Except when it doesn't.

FTA: "While Liberty University, a private organization, is free to compel its students to suffer through whatever soul-crushing campaign announcements it deems perversely essential to their education or moral development, there's still something vexing (to me, anyway) about an institution with "liberty" in its name requiring attendance at a political event."

Politicians frequently do events at Liberty University. I knever new why. Know I now.

The only thing as depressing as US politics is British politics. They say that people get the politicians they deserve! What the hell have we all been doing to deserve this bunch of fuckwits?

Labour is experiencing something of a dry spell lately, but that's largely due to their habit of stabbing the back of anyone who looks vaguely competent. The Tories have a decent breadth and depth of talent, the SNP have a truly excellent populist politician, and UKIP's leader is almost as impressive. Only the Green Party have a dire set of complete no hopers. UK politics is in pretty decent shape.

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/236640-cruz-website-shared-certificate-with-nigerian-princecom

Ted Cruz is off to a bad start with hours of unsecured donations at his web site. With staff like his, he doesn't need competing candidates.

Octavious! Either you are out of your mind or you have a very interesting idea of what constitutes a "decent shape". Your comment about the Tories suggests you also have a very strange concept of talent! A more depressing bunch of self serving pigs with their noses in the troughs it is hard to imagine. If your really believe that Farrage is impressive then you are simply stupid. The man is a vile populist who simply appeals to the lowest/basest instincts.

You are quite right, MD. I have very interesting ideas. I thank you for noticing :)

On November 8, 2016, a Thunderdome will be erected on the National Mall, and Hillary Clinton will battle Condoleezza Rice to the death for the right to be called the Leader of the Free World.

If I had views like yours Octavious, I would be doing my utmost to avoid being noticed.

And yet you seem to think a politician who has taken the non-entity single issue party of UKIP from nothing to a serious contender for seats isn't impressive. Your judgement is hard to fathom.

People are talking about this like it's a real thing, but Ted Cruz has about as much chance of being elected president as I do, and I'm an obscure undistinguished academic at a community college with radical fringe politics.

Even if you ignore that he has no clear path to the Republican nomination, much less the White House, Cruz won't be elected because he is goofy looking. America has never elected a president as goofy-looking as Cruz, and we haven't even come close since the modern media era.

The question is: has a candidate that relies on extremist hardliners in his own party ever won? No. Even Williams Jennings Bryan would have had to admit that.

I voted in the Republican primary in Texas just so I could vote against Ted Cruz. That's the only thing that could cause me to vote for the scum David Dewhurst.

However I don't vote anymore, as it is an endorsement of a failed system.

Send Krellin To Iran

i second that motion!

Thucydides should take him.

THE TED CRUZ LOGO IS AN UPSIDE DOWN AMERICAN FLAG ON FIRE WHAT DOES THIS TELL YOU ALL

http://tinyurl.com/n44avgu