Jump to content

The Next President of the USA will be?


TULedHead

Who will win the Presidency in 2008?  

282 members have voted

  1. 1. Who Wins in 2008?

    • Hillary Clinton
      47
    • Rudy Giuliani
      9
    • John Edwards
      7
    • Mike Huckabee
      7
    • John McCain
      42
    • Barack Obama
      136
    • Ron Paul
      21
    • Mitt Romney
      9
    • Bill Richardson
      1
    • Fred Thompson
      3


Recommended Posts

Well if she doesnt make it the rumour already is that she will be the next governor of NY State. But dont count her out yet. Every day iis a new day. She will win Penn. and I dont thiink NC is impossible if any more trash comes out on Obama. And lets not forget Florida. Something can still happen there with the count. Hillary is the only logical choice. Ill stand by that.

Exactly what i mean, not saying she would be given the keys for the governorship, but the guy in there now is a joke. I think Obama would eventually give Hillary all those delegates from Florida and Michigan, once he has 2050 or 2175 delegates. I think both of them will make great vice-presidents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 12, 1999, President Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. One of the effects of the repeal is it allowed commercial & investment banks to consolidate. Several economists and analysts have criticized the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act as contributing to the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis.

The first Glass-Steagall Act allowed the government obligations as well as commercial paper to be used as reserve in banks.

The Glass-Steagall Act, passed on 16 June 1933, and officially named the Banking Act of 1935, introduced the separation of bank types according to their business (commercial and investment banking), and it founded the Federal Deposit Insurance Company for insuring bank deposits.

Literature in economics usually refers to this simply as the Glass-Steagall Act, since it had a stronger impact on US banking regulation

Losses at financial firms from the mortgage collapse may eventually triple to $600 billion as defaults on home loans grow, says Zurich-based UBS AG. One reason banks are losing money is the repeal nine years ago of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial and investment banking after excessive risk- taking contributed to the Great Depression, Eveillard said.

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities.

Citigroup, which has fallen 36 percent since reporting in January the biggest quarterly loss in its 196-year history, may have writedowns of $15 billion this quarter, according to New York-based Merrill Lynch & Co. That would add to the $22 billion that Citigroup already lost because of the housing slump.

``Glass-Steagall protected bankers against themselves, Eveillard said. ``Bankers are sheep. They don't mind going over the cliff if everyone else goes over the cliff.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act"

The Glass-Steagall Act has had influence on the financial systems of other areas such as mainland China which maintains a separation between commercial banking and the securities industries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 12, 1999, President Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. One of the effects of the repeal is it allowed commercial & investment banks to consolidate. Several economists and analysts have criticized the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act as contributing to the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis.

The first Glass-Steagall Act allowed the government obligations as well as commercial paper to be used as reserve in banks.

The Glass-Steagall Act, passed on 16 June 1933, and officially named the Banking Act of 1935, introduced the separation of bank types according to their business (commercial and investment banking), and it founded the Federal Deposit Insurance Company for insuring bank deposits.

Literature in economics usually refers to this simply as the Glass-Steagall Act, since it had a stronger impact on US banking regulation

Losses at financial firms from the mortgage collapse may eventually triple to $600 billion as defaults on home loans grow, says Zurich-based UBS AG. One reason banks are losing money is the repeal nine years ago of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial and investment banking after excessive risk- taking contributed to the Great Depression, Eveillard said.

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities.

Citigroup, which has fallen 36 percent since reporting in January the biggest quarterly loss in its 196-year history, may have writedowns of $15 billion this quarter, according to New York-based Merrill Lynch & Co. That would add to the $22 billion that Citigroup already lost because of the housing slump.

``Glass-Steagall protected bankers against themselves, Eveillard said. ``Bankers are sheep. They don't mind going over the cliff if everyone else goes over the cliff.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act"

The Glass-Steagall Act has had influence on the financial systems of other areas such as mainland China which maintains a separation between commercial banking and the securities industries.

Ok. So please. Translation? Your take? I now have a migraine from reading this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. So please. Translation? Your take? I now have a migraine from reading this.

Just pointing out that a "Clinton"... someone from the Clinton "Family" signed this Congressional Act in to existence, and all of the fallout from it is beginning to be felt.....

How you "use" the info... and what you see, or don't see going on around you, and the Nation, financially.... is up to you..... You connect the dots, or you don't....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said 4 years ago that the G.O.P. would nominate Condlezza Rice for president, because i thought that obama and Hillary was going to hook up somehow. It would be the perfect play. A black women against a Black man and a women. The problem is Ms. Rice is horrible at politics. So this latest news of her being VP is really a made up news story. Even she knows she be more useful being the Sec. State. I don't think it would work if she campaigned while there is a war going on. But i do wish who ever wins would keep her a Sec. State. (doubtful if not McCain)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my guess, McCain will go for a young, hardcore conservative... Mitt has been mentioned and Condi is a possibility... but thats all I've heard so far

Yeah i heard that too. The most logical is a governor from a state that the G.O.P. can steal. To bad Arnold isn't a natural born citizen, but i not sure if that disqualifies him. I would assume they would skip over him if the president died. I think it's the speaker of the house? or senate pro temper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah i heard that too. The most logical is a governor from a state that the G.O.P. can steal. To bad Arnold isn't a natural born citizen, but i not sure if that disqualifies him. I would assume they would skip over him if the president died. I think it's the speaker of the house? or senate pro temper.

1 Vice President President of the Senate Dick Cheney

2 Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi

3 President Pro Tempore of the Senate Robert Byrd

4 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice

5 Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson

6 Secretary of Defense Robert Gates

7 Attorney General Michael Mukasey

8 Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne

9 Secretary of Agriculture Ed Schafer

— Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez (non-natural)

— Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao (non-natural)

10 Secretary of Health and Human Services Michael Leavitt

11 Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson

12 Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters

13 Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman

14 Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings

15 Secretary of Veterans Affairs James Peake

16 Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff

the dashs are un-natural citizens, and they are just skipped over, so I guess Arnold could be VP...

I'm not sure he'll be conservative enough to balance McCain... Huckabee could fit the bill, but I heard hes waiting for a run in 2012/2016 and VP would not be in his best interests

we'll wait and see, I think we'll know McCain's VP by the end of Spring

-----------------------------------------------------------------

What I'm interested in is if the 2008 DNC will be like the 1968 DNC ... alot of parallels between them... should be interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill. Law Would Bypass Electoral College

By NGUYEN HUY VU – 5 hours ago

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — Illinois will award its presidential electoral votes to the winner of the nationwide popular vote — but only if several other states follow suit.

A bill signed into law Monday by Gov. Rod Blagojevich made Illinois the third state, after Maryland and New Jersey, ready to bypass the Electoral College in November. The three states, with a combined 46 electoral votes, won't act unless states totaling 270 electoral votes — enough to elect a president — sign on.

"By signing this law, we in Illinois are making it clear that we believe every voter has an equal voice in electing our nation's leaders," Blagojevich said in a statement. As a congressman in 2000, the governor co-sponsored a proposed constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College.

The new law is part of a national push by the California-based advocacy group National Popular Vote Inc. It's aimed at preventing a repeat of the 2000 election, when Al Gore got the most votes nationwide but George W. Bush put together enough victories in key states to win a majority in the Electoral College and capture the White House.

The Electoral College is set up by the Constitution to make the final decision on who becomes president. States get one electoral vote for each member of their congressional delegation. Maine and Nebraska award electoral votes by congressional district, but other states award them on a winner-take-all basis.

Under the National Popular Vote plan, states agree to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. If most of the electoral votes were awarded that way, the popular vote winner would be guaranteed to win the election.

In the case of a tie in the popular vote, the current system would be used.

Critics of the proposal say it could reduce the influence of smaller states, and that a close presidential election would require a nationwide recount.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So should we go to a popular vote or should we keep the current system.

It wouldn't matter any way for me, I'm glad how 2000 worked out for my sake. The only think i can say is that Bush was beaten by Gore by more votes in New York than he beat him in the general election. Just by that you could say New York was the reason Gore won, but then some people could say Bush won because of Florida, and i say that he won because 29 other states voted for him, better than 1 state deciding the election. I think it would be okay if we go to wards a popular vote, but i don't want states have the power to decide, i think congress should do something. If they did get rid of it, it may add seats to the House of Representatives, since i think there is a cap because of the electoral college, but more Reps. for bigger states may have a adverse affect that the Electoral college prevents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Latest poll out of Pennsylvania has Clinton's lead over Obama slipping yet again. She now only favors him by 6 points (4+/-) being the margain of error..and as many, including myself have said, if she doesn't blow him out by more than 12-15 points, the win is really a failure for her campaign. But with primaries a week away, her slight lead may end with a dead even tie or possibly a slip and an Obama lead going into next Tuesday's primary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any sort of win would stll allow her to keep going. If she loses, she will be giving her consesion speech that night. But right now, Ive heard, that shes only still alive so she can pay off her debt and the chance that obama will be called on his bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if the dems were... they never would have used the super delegates this year

both of them kinda run on the same principle

Yeah i just kinda hoping that Hillary does take the popular vote, which i believe she has an excellent shot at. That would be fun to see.

Regular delegates are like the electoral college, super delegates is something completely different. But they can run their party any way they want. it's their nomination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah i just kinda hoping that Hillary does take the popular vote, which i believe she has an excellent shot at. That would be fun to see.

Regular delegates are like the electoral college, super delegates is something completely different. But they can run their party any way they want. it's their nomination.

shes behind in popualr vote by 700,000 votes... she'll need to slaughter Barack in every remaining state to possibly catch up...

i'm gonna still predict the 2008 DNC will be very similar to the 1968 DNC... with the issues regarding war, and delegate selection... i expect riots if the super delegates do not go with the popular vote and primary results

Link to comment
Share on other sites

shes behind in popular vote by 700,000 votes... she'll need to slaughter Barack in every remaining state to possibly catch up...

No, she doesn't. If she can keep this going, there is well over 10 million more votes to be cast and she only needs to win by 7%.. Plus if Mich. and FLA. are seated, most likely she will get the votes, probably split the delegates.

Tog et the delgates she needs close to 70% of the vote, in the popular, she only needs 55% of the remaining votes when compared to Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, she doesn't. If she can keep this going, there is well over 10 million more votes to be cast and she only needs to win by 7%.. Plus if Mich. and FLA. are seated, most likely she will get the votes, probably split the delegates.

Tog et the delgates she needs close to 70% of the vote, in the popular, she only needs 55% of the remaining votes when compared to Obama

She has to win Pennsylvania by more than 6 points if she hopes to keep her campaign alive. At this point, she only has the elder vote while Obama's 'youth' vote is catching more steam with every passing day. The 'youth' vote is largely independent, something Clinton will never have a shot at capturing now or in November.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clinton Lovers..... Past ... and Present...

FotoRedazionali_729.jpg

strangepair.jpg

You know that if Elton john had met Hillary 15 years ago, the intern in the first pic wouldn't be famous because you would assume that Elton would give Hillary a few pointers on certain things. so that Bill wouldn't have to run off to the intern for some Little Bill time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...