Is it too soon for a presidential election thread?

Ted Cruz is a good stalking horse though, lots of people like him for some reason. Scares me a little.

He seems confused about what powers the US president has, ..... like most other candidates from both parties in the recent presidential elections. As the last two presidents have discovered, without the support of congress not much gets done, and what does get done, is flawed.

In that respect, both Reagan and Clinton were much more effective presidents than presidents Bush II and Obama.

Seems to be lost on a lot of people these days that congress and the president need to work together, if they don't we get the dysfunction we see all too often.

A lot of those people seemed to be in the White House or Congress.

The same fuss won't be made over Cruz's alleged birthplace as it was over Obama's.

None of the less extreme Republicans have officially entered the race yet. This will be very different race to the last one, which they never stood a chance of winning.

Yes, it often seems to come across as "well we lost the presidential election but we control congress so good luck". Leaves me wondering who actually won the presidency, Obama or Boehner or McConnell?

It is funny to see the mental contortions they go through to say how obviously Cruz is clearly USC because of his mother while simultaneously trying to continue to dismiss Obama's claim of actually being born in the US.

I agree to an extent. In the past there has always been divisions even within a party so even if party controlled the presidency and both chambers of congress, moderate laws were passed to get support from all factions in the party (example: Obamacare).

However that trend seems to have changed in the republican party. On the state level where republicans have taken over the governorship and both chambers, the first laws to be passed are anti abortion, anti gay, voter suppression laws, and other laws that are desired by the far right base. It seems that the more moderate republicans fear the wrath, money and power of the far right and therefore vote for those laws.

We see the same thing in the house of representatives with the minority far right driving the agenda. If someone like Cruz gets into office, I wouldn't be surprised if republicans fell in line and passed radical far right changes.

Politics in any democracy suffer the same key flaw: voters too oft willingly dismiss reality in favour of appealing rhetoric: manufacturing beliefs on premises that don't actually exist (or are in reality, insignificant, or merely a side-effect instead of a root cause or issue).

In the UK at the moment, it's "tax avoidance" that's caused the UK's "economic disaster" (neither of which are statistically true, yet are widely held views amongst voters).

In film production (and marketing/advertising), one key (and widely employed) method of inducing mass "belief" is referred to as "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspension_of_disbelief".

Tee Hee

Ha Ha

Ho Ho:

Someone's Trolling the Hell Out of Ted Cruz With TedCruz.com

... best buckle up
The bumpy ride has just begun......

Will she...won't she...?

I thought Cruz was Cuban and that was why we are now being friendly with Cuba so it becomes the 51st State and Cruz can run as he was born on US soil.

When I saw the thread title, I assumed it was the UK election, especially after the Ask The Chancellors event this morning. As I'm unable to vote yet, and it'll probably be between a Clinton and a Bush, can't say I care right at this time.

I don't even think he can win the nomination, but who knows.....

Maybe someone better will throw in their hat.

If its down to Cruz or Clinton, won't even bother voting, I don't want either of them.

Maybe he wants VP?

Looks at other names that have been suggested. How do you define "better"?

If you do that I will personally blame you for the result.