Hello again, tom:
Uhhhh, WHICH house of congress? It DOES make a difference.
excon
|
Hello again, tom:
Uhhhh, WHICH house of congress? It DOES make a difference.
excon
The new Congress meets in joint session on January 6, 2013, to count the electoral votes (this count happens whether the election is close or not). If neither candidate has reached 270 Electoral Votes, then the House and Senate take over and elect the President and Vice-President, respectively.
It is the new Congress, inaugurated the first week of January, 2013, that will have the responsibility of breaking any ties.
What Happens if there is a Tie in the Electoral College?
Hello WG:
Wow. That sounds like a recipe for disaster. What if the House and the Senate don't agree, as I'm sure they won't?
excon
The House picks the President ,the Senate the VP according to the 12th Amendment .
Maybe there's a tie. There could be a heavily contested congressional fight that would last weeks. There could be a fiscal cliff catastrophe. There could be an astroturf uprising against the electoral college.
But there might not be a President.
Read more: The Possible Electoral College Nightmare Scenario Is Even Worse Than We Thought - Business Insider
Hello again,
Hmmm... That sounds scary.
excon
Scary as opposed to having SCOTUS decide it ? Nah,we've had worse and survived . JQ Adams was selected by the House after a 4 candidate race in 1824 (word of warning to those who think 3rd party politics is a good idea) . Andrew Jackson won a plurality but not the majority .Jackson assumed that he's be President . But it was a 4 way race ,and under the 12th amendment provisions ,only 3 candidates could be considered by the House. Henry Clay was the man left out. But he was Speaker of the House ;so that made him a king maker.
Clay hated Jackson... nuff said... JQ Adams won out even though Jackson had the plurality . Coincidently Adams chose Clay as Sec State (at the time considered to be a key position for anyone who had Presidential ambitions) . Jackson spent the next 4 years calling it a 'corrupt bargain' ,and that helped Jackson win the Presidency 4 years later.
You know what's scary, Tom, is Romney thinks Russia is america's greatest enemy.
You ,like the President ,do not understand the difference between"enemy " and "geopolitical foe " .I don't happen to agree with Romney on that either ; our greatest geopolitical foe is China... our biggest "enemy" is jihadistan .
As I said before Tom there is a lot you don't like why are you going to vote for him?
Geo-political foe, that's board room speak for I'm smarter than you and I don't have a clue
I would say your biggest enemy is your capitalist enterpreneurs who think investment in China makes more sense than investment in america
Yeah blame America or Americans 1st . One thing you won't see from Romney is a bowing apology tour .That makes him heads and tails above POTUS O'BOGUS .
Hello tom:
If by that, you mean that Romney will DENY American complicity in the problems of the Mid East, then peace is a LONG way off..
SOLVING the problems over there is better than LOOKING macho. But, of course, we know from the 47% tape, that Romney has NO plans to FIX anything over there... He believes the problems are BIGGER than he is, and I agree.
excon
We've already seen by performance that the President is in over his head there... unless you think recruiting AQ to fight in Syria while claiming they are on the run is a good plan. Unless you think neglecting to attend national security briefings is something the Commander in Chief should be doing. Unless you think evading meetings with key allies is a good idea.
What we've learned about Obama is that he loves being President ;but he really doesn't love doing the job of President . Even Chris Matthews recognizes this :
Thrill Is Gone? Matthews Turns On Obama; 'I Hear Stories That You Would Not Believe' - YouTube!
Hello again, tom:
If Obama is in over his head, then Romney is too.. He's the presidents biggest foreign policy fan... You couldn't fit a razor blade between the TWO policies... Oh yeah, Romney is going to talk tough, but that AIN'T policy.
excon
His pivot to the center, after being far right was a sloppy move at best.
He probably doesn't like being president because he doesn't like people. That's kind of scary if you ask me.
But he does like golf and the sound of his own voice, that should be enough reason to vote him in again.Quote:
Clinton, being Clinton, had plenty of advice in mind and was desperate to impart it. But for the first two years of Obama’s term, the phone calls Clinton kept expecting rarely came. “People say the reason Obama wouldn’t call Clinton is because he doesn’t like him,” observes Tanden. “The truth is, Obama doesn’t call anyone, and he’s not close to almost anyone. It’s stunning that he’s in politics, because he really doesn’t like people. My analogy is that it’s like becoming Bill Gates without liking computers.”
The President lied through his teeth regarding Iraq. He (specifically Biden and Panetta ) bungled the 'status of forces 'negotiations with the Iraqi gvt and that is the ONLY reason there is a complete US withdrawal underway.
What is amazing is that this critique comes from his side ;not his political opposition. Chris Matthews went from the thrill up his leg to wondering why or if the President even wants the job .Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Hello again, tom:
Bush lost Iraq a few months after we invaded... Since that opportunity for victory vanished, there's been JILLIONS of mistakes, MOST of which were perpetrated by the Bush neo-cons who are NOW running the Romney campaign. Even IF I accept that Obama blew the agreement you're talking about, Iraq was LOST long ago. If I were you, I wouldn't be looking for ANYBODY to blame for Iraq but yourself.
I've said on these pages MANY, MANY times, you can't win a war that you've already LOST.
excon
Bush left Iraq a won war even though there were mistakes made . Obama lost the post-war .Now the nation is the transportation highway for Iran to funnel supplies to the Assad regime.
By the way ;can't wait to see all the ads in swing State Virginia ;where Norfolk hosts the biggest Naval base,and the state heavily involved in the ship building industry, that the cuts in the Navy budget aren't significant.
Apparently the bayonet industry is none too pleased with his snide, immature remark.Quote:
tw ;can't wait to see all the ads in swing State Virginia ;where Norfolk hosts the biggest Naval base,and the state heavily involved in the ship building industry, that the cuts in the Navy budget aren't significant.
Quote:
TMZ spoke with multiple people in the bayonet industry who tell us they were shocked and even offended when Obama brought up the weapon during last night's debate.
...
According to the official U.S. Marine Corps website, every Marine is STILL required to complete a bayonet training program... because "the weapon becomes just as effective [as a rifle] in close combat situations."
What happened to all those Obama failed policies that Romney now agrees with?
Enough debate, cast my vote today, this is over until the final count as far as I'm concerned. Naw I didn't go with the new version of the Bush neo cons!
Do you get your daily talking points straight from the DNC?
Not to mention the fact that we are about to surrender Afghanistan to the Taliban... and all their horses.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Hello again, tom:
I think we've talked before about the wars George W. Bush lost... Afghanistan was the first. He lost that one when he got all excited about invading Iraq..
So, you can't lose a war that you've already lost.. It's only blame that you can shift around... But, I ain't buying any of it.
excon
The time has come the Walrus said, to speak of many things, somehow I don't remember surrender being one of them.
A few years ago, in another century, the US surrendered Vietnam to the Vietnamese, oddly enough this hasn't necessarily being a bad thing for the Vietnamese. In the same century the US surrendered the Philippines to the Phillipinoes. I don't recall that necessarily being a bad thing. In this century the US surrendered Iraq to the Iraqi, I think the jury is still out on that one and common sense says that the sooner the US retreats from Afghanistan the better. Al Qaeda has now established itself in Mali so we can expect the US to need its resources to attack and subdue Mali, another place where foreign armies have not done well.
Thing is Tom, the US is too sophisticated to fight effectively in some of these places, because there are no set piece battles and they loose the advantage technology gives them, this is why they have resorted to drone strikes, targets of opportunity. Perhaps Obama was right, perhaps the day of the bayonet is over
No Obama isn't right ;his snarky ignorant comments about the military proved he's unqualified for the position he holds.
So should we start the draft back, or keep recycling people to fight a war YOU want? Have you volunteered yet?
Let the Afghans worry about their taliban countrymen.
Yes Tal I agree, it is time for the Afghans to sort it out. The vacuum doesn't exist now that allowed the Taliban to take over. If that benighted country wants to live in the seventh century, let it. What I say is pull the plug on both Afghanistan and Pakistan, why should any of us be supporting them. A little dose of reality goes a long wayQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Your grandkids will be dealing with them.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Actually he proved that he's up-to-date on the US military requirements and he really put Romney in his place. You are one of the very few fervents who view that exchange as a negative for Obama... but then again you view everything as a negative for Obama so it's understandable.Quote:
No Obama isn't right ;his snarky ignorant comments about the military proved he's unqualified for the position he holds.
The only thing Obama knows about the Navy is that they play basketball on the deck of the Carl Vinson . How does the adm plan on doing it's "pivot the Asia-Pacific region" with a depleted fleet ?
What is "pivot the Asia-Pacific region"?
Pivot to the Asia-Pacific region..Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul...pivot-20120702
Bah, not interesting, certainly not to the voters.
Hello again, tom:
Let me see. If I were going to trust one of 'em, I'd pick the guy who got Ben Laden and NOT the guy who thinks Syria is the path to the sea for the Iranians...
Bwa, ha, ha ha ha.
excon
What's the hurry? What's driving events for a "pivot" by so many boats at once? Or is this another neocon hunt for WMD, or the business interest to cash in?
Or contractors trying to stay in business? All of the above?!
Who pays for this after a tax cut for the wealthy?
That's because you haven't thought it through . Iran's path to Mediterranean Sea is now through the Suez Canal. That is a path that presents a number of choke points the US fleet dominates . The Syrian relationship is crucial to Tehran for a number of reasons like supplying their surrogate terrorists like Hezzbolah . But it is also true that Tehran is building a naval base in Syria that will give them direct access to the Mediterranean ,and in doing so;threaten the Israeli coast .
Iran to Build Permanent Naval Base in Syria - YouTube
Ummm the pivot is the Obama policy . It happens to be a policy I don't object to because as I said yesterday ;our greatest geopolitical foe is China.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again, tom:
Thought it through?? I'm not smart enough to think.. But I AM smart enough to look at a map.. THAT casual observation tells me that Iran and Syria don't share a border. There's a country in the way, and those people may NOT want to give 'em a path...
Look. You can try to cover for this dildo, but it doesn't make him look smarter...
excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:43 PM. |