I cant comment on the US, I dont live there, but in UK its similar.

In my view Politicians as a genre are always Long on what has happened, and Short on what to do about it (apart from the usual bland and tired generalisations). As a society I guess we have grown Short on responsibility, and Long on Spin; they therefore get away with it, because we let them, its easier to pass the buck.

Kind of harsh I guess, but its not far from the truth. It would be nice to have elections fought on positive issues, not negative slander. The former will never happen until we force them too via the ballot box.

you must not have read gene

In my view Politicians as a genre are always Long on what has happened, and Short on what to do about it (apart from the usual bland and tired generalisations). As a society I guess we have grown Short on responsibility, and Long on Spin; they therefore get away with it, because we let them, its easier to pass the buck.

A few years ago I might have argued with you about this. But age has eitehr made me cynical, or wiser, and it is no different over here. Lots of promises, made and broken.

Unforunately, none of them are running, so you will have to settle for some clown.

I don't think anybody said everything is great.  We obviously have problems, but why should anyone vote for pessimists and defeatists who can't seem to ever say anything positive about anything?




Well that depends on what your definition of "damage" is.  Either way, a strong leader is non-existant in the field right now.




A thrid party wouldn't really be much different than the 2 we have now.  We would just have a 3rd choice of losers who take sides with one the other parties.

I'm all for fixing the problems and making good things better. Unfortunately, while Republicans are not sitting well with me, Democrats are not the party to fix the problems and make good things better in my opinion. I'm not to sure about the idea of throwing more money to problems that already had money assigned to it but politicians were very irresponsible (with the earmarks and stuff) spending it.



This is an interesting concept considering the Dems don't believe the economy is doing good. Leave it to a Dem like John Edwards to say that 37 million Americans considered to be poor need our help financially. As if 2 cars, 3 color TV, cable, internet and houses were not enough, we who work hard for our money must provide these people with more money for that third car, fourth TV, faster internet and premium channels.



You mean "you" didn't hear it. I see it and hear it all the time. Doom and gloom is when there is good news and there is bad news but you only focus on the bad and pretend nothing good happens. That's the Dems way.



That's not entirely accurate. Col has been ignored before but he's still around. The funny thing about Dems is that they create problems where problems either don't exist (such as there not being jobs) or are not the responsibility of the Gov't (such as having to pay for those idiots who bought houses they couldn't afford and the loan companies dumb enough to give them loans). Dem policy is to fix the mistakes of the idiots of this country by giving them someone else's money.



Facing the problems? LOL that's rich. Dems don't face problems, they blame them on others (even between themselves) but never present solutions, only promises they never keep.

I'm sorry but Dems don't work for the poor or the worker anymore, they are all about votes, and they will say anything to get them.

Where did I put those sticker papers for the printer? <--- forgot the smiley