You mean just left of center with righty thrown in for good measure and balance. :haha:

The problem is our two party system has our government by the nuts. Were forced into voting for R or D, with little in between.

Next election I plan to vote first and foremost for any Libertarian candidates. Failing that, ill be forced to vote republican though. After the events of the last few years, if I vote republican, it will be out of spite for the democrats, because I do not want to see them maintain their current level of power in the government. That said, in my heart of hearts, I don't want the Republicans having as much power as they did in the past, nor as much as the Democrats currently enjoy either.

EDIT:
MUCH could be accomplished with congressional term limits, but good luck getting congress to pass a bill to limit their own tenure in office.

Vote None of the above.
They are all liars and thieves. That's why they run in the first place.

Why? - "It's sufficient to systemize nonsense to make it the belief of many." (Nicolás Gómez Dávila). - That's why.

(translated from this German quote: Es reicht aus, daß man einen Unsinn systematisiert, damit er zur Meinung von vielen wird.

But is he talking of his belief in the rejection of democratic political powers or his belief in the traditionalist political powers of the Vatican?

He's not the messiah, and I think that only his die-hard fans thought that. He's also not the anti-christ, he's just another president who will be gone in three years so another president can take charge and either the same group of people or a different group of people can start complaining about him depending on what political party he is affiliated to.

There is nothing new under the sun.

Here's a thought:
There are congressman who have seen presidents come and go. They must have themselves quite the "good ole boys" club going.

I strongly believe not much is ever going to change in our government, until we have congressional term limits. Limit them to the same as the president, a maximum of two terms. I see this as having innumerable positive effects, but it's a pipe dream. It's asking those in power, to give up that power. A naive altruistic dream at its finest. It won't ever happen.

Exactly, the President is just a figurehead, a mouth-piece, a surprisingly limited position of power. The real power is the people behind the president, those who pull the strings, prepare the dossiers, fund the campaigns. That's where the problem lies. It's like when you weed, if you just cut off the bit that's above the ground, then the weed grows back, it's the bits you can't see that linger.

Here's a thought.
Lame duck presidents bring problems over accountability.
Making a couple of hundred lame duck congressmen will obviously bring a couple of hundred more of the same problems.
Nice idea though, but it has its downside as well as it up.

I can only remember Republicans calling Obama the Messiah when they are trying to deride him. I have not heard any Democrats refer to him as that.

That is much of the problem, a two party system that has control due to mass funding. It's rare a 3rd party can run and even when one does it usually splits the vote. In the end, most will vote for the GOP or Dems because they know they're throwing their vote away on a 3rd party.

I do think the future is a socially liberal, fiscally conservative platform.
That is where I now stand even at my age. Others are right, the religious right has the GOP by the nuts and will be hard for them to win national office spouting right wing religious ideals.

It will take a big person that can get major backing to start a 3rd party or run as an Ind. with a chance of winning....a Bill Gates type....

He already runs a fair proportion of the country now. Why would he want to subject himself to an electoral process as tortuous as yours?

I dont particularly like him. I think he is a mediocre leader and just another inefficient talking-head politician. But that doesn't mean he hasn't accomplished anything. Even though it is flawed and in dire need of mending, the ACA was a bold and necessary bill. To claim that this country's healthcare system was "fine" before is absolutely ridiculous. We desperately needed to reform our healthcare system, and the ACA was the first step. It still has alot of flaws, and it still has a LONG way to go. But with alot of amending and additions to the bill, it may, in the future, become the best thing Obama did in his 2 terms, aside from maybe bailing out the automotive industry/wall street to save them from collapse (along with all the jobs and financing handled by those companies). He also beat around the bush so as to avoid getting involved in Syria, which would've been disastrous.

That's about as far as my praise goes, though. Everything else hes done has either been mediocre or a disaster. Some issues were to be expected though. Its highly doubtful scandals like the NSA wouldn't have happened under another president, seeing as how those kinds of operations have been going on for 65 years now under all kinds of presidents, wiretapping and such. Every president has had a fair share of scandals, or coverups, or something that angers the people for a few weeks before it slips onto the backburner.

He did not reform healthcare. He reformed insurance. The ACA is the last step. Lowering cost makes thing affordable. Throwing more money at the healthcare high cost is not reform.

No, with hardcore democrat types, the way they speak, and look towards obama, it's not a stretch to say that Obama is thought of as "The chosen one". Messiah has a religous connotation, and that doesn't fit in the Democrat political lexicon.