The final year of a lame duck administration is when most garbage occurs, and most dangerous legislation is rammed through. Will 2008 be the worst year ever, due to the many lessons learned, over time, by the looters?
2007-12-01 06:19:09 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yeah, a lot worse than the year Pearl Harbor was attacked or the early years of the war when it looked like there was no way we could win. A lot worse than those years during the Depression when people were starving in the streets. You people need to get a grip!
2007-12-01 06:23:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
By General Elections, I review the key player's positions, words, and actions since one of them will be voted into office. Like GratefulDead06, I feel most times like I've had to pick the 'lesser of two evils' because the person I felt would do a better job was knocked out in the primaries. So as much as an Independent Party Candidate may have a good message and the actions to back it up, pole numbers that low will not get them into office - just be a spoiler to one parties' candidate. I will not waste my vote on that end - it will be toward which of the 'evils' at that point in time I feel may be able to best carry out the duties of the President. And that will be whichever party candidate meets those qualifications I am looking for.
2016-05-27 03:12:17 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not even close. We had a civil war, Robber barons, 25% unempolyment in 1933, two world wars, the threat of nuclear war, and Vietnam. It be might be the worst out of the last 20 but most people probably think the 2001 would top that list.
2007-12-01 06:43:48 · answer #3 · answered by meg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We had a war with england and a civil war, ww1 ,ww2 I think they far out weight the current situation .
This is like the Indian or banana republic wars .
No real big deal except the looting by corporations today makes it seem much worse by the cost alone of this current occupation .
2007-12-01 06:24:13 · answer #4 · answered by TroubleMaker 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I certainly hope not... I hope we have enough Democrats in congress to actually push some changes through...
As it stands right now, even though dems are a slight majority, there are not enough to prevent a filibuster or a veto.
If a democrat is elected, we won't have to worry about the veto as much (assuming congress has enough Dems) but we would still have to contend with the stalling filibusters.
2007-12-01 06:24:00 · answer #5 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I would call the period between Bush's election and when he leaves office the "Dark Ages" for America.
2007-12-01 06:23:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Not for me and most hardworking Americans.
2007-12-01 06:22:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I think it very well could be
" a man with nothing, has nothing to lose"
2007-12-01 06:22:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋