Do you think a democrat needs to be in office for things to be set "back to normal"?

Answer 1

If by normal, you mean more of the same lobbying and corporate corruption with less media scrutiny, then yes.

Answer 2

Unfortuntely, I don't think that there is a way to answer your question directly. While I would certainly agree with your assertion that, looking solely in terms of foreign policy and compliance with international law, this country is headed in the wrong direction, I don't know that it's a simple solution, nor even one that could be solve in the next 4-8 years.

That said, any candidate willing to honestly work towards reestablishing multilateral action when dealing with international problems would help. I would personally add that any candidate willing to work towards restoring the judiciary as a more indepenent branch of the government would certainly be on the right track as well, along with attempting to enact legislation to help scale back the USA PATRIOT Act and it's murky Constitutional standing. The moves towards enacting a better, more independent judicial branch would be easier - although, throughout time, the judicial branch has certainly been in tune with the presidential party's ideals - and the changes in the PATRIOT Act, would be very difficult.

There are candidates on both sides of the aisle who have noted their devotion towards restoring multilateralism. It could be claimed that the democrat's general tendencies of a less "hawkish" nature would be a benefit, and I certainly agree, the situation in Iraq is a very difficult one - but one at this point that would certainly benefit from a multilateral position where, additionally, the US did not take its general position of 'World Leader', but instead acted as more of a mediator of a dialogue amongst allies.

All this said, it has been noted in at least one Time article I read, and I'm sure elsewhere, that Hillary Clinton would indeed be the candidate best suited to deal with foreign policy, as she has seen the workings of this from inside the executive branch, and in the legislative branch. That isn't to say that she's the only one worth considering as a foreign policy expert, but that she has certainly been noted as such.

Answer 3

Neither party has the answer to getting back to normal. Of course the question is what is normal. 7 years ago with Clinton in the White House, things were not that great, so I hope that is not normal. But they certainly have gotten worse.

Answer 4

There is no normal. Anyone who believes this is so far from reality that they should be under a doctors care.

Politics is always in flux just like the weather or the climate what you call normal is only a season not a norm.

Answer 5

No.
I think for things to get back to *normal*...we will have to revamp our system
Maybe put a 3rd party in? Maybe make it less about money so it isnt the one who can ho his/her self out the best that wins

Answer 6

Hell no!!

Didn't you watch the debates?

The only way that things will get back to normal is to elect Ron Paul as President.

Hillary is a war-monger.

Obama doesn't want English as the offical language.

Edwards will welcome the illegals into the USA.

WAKE UP PEOPLE!!

START WATCHING THE DEBATES FOR CRYING OUT LOUD AND QUIT LETTING THE CORPORATE-OWNED MEDIA DECIDE FOR YOU!!!!

Answer 7

I don't know, I just look at that pack of democratic liars in congress everyday.

Answer 8

back to normal? as in back to pre-colonial America? Yeah, Hillary's economic policies could make this country look like that again i guess.

Answer 9

It doesn't matter from which party the new president belong-we need someone to be committed to the American citizens and our national security.

Answer 10

Hell no, democrats should never be on office!