Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Ron Paul vs Newt Gingrich on Fidelity.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Eternally Optimistic" data-source="post: 59280167" data-attributes="member: 296733"><p>actually, no there's not. Oh sure the undersecretary to the undersecrtary of dog walkers in the department of this or that may be vacant for a time, but but there is someone above them, and above that person is the Secretary of one of the 15 current cabinet departments (or the EPA, UN, etc etc), all of which have some one who is at the helm leading them.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>it could be, but again, if somehow Paul were actually able to win, that would be an indication that his stance had won the day in that election, so I would find it nearly impossible to believe that the Congress elected on his coat tails would be 2/3 against him most of the time....I suppose it is technically possible, but highly unlikely.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>winning an election is a mandate, and if it were Paul v Obama (not likely to be I admit) and Paul won, his ideas, which are in quite stark contrast to President Obama, would have won. Now certainly he would then head one branch of government, kept in check by the other two, but he would have the power of the veto, which like you said could be overturned...but would be very unlikely I think, at least for the first two years...until the midterm.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>not sure that that had to do with anything.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Eternally Optimistic, post: 59280167, member: 296733"] actually, no there's not. Oh sure the undersecretary to the undersecrtary of dog walkers in the department of this or that may be vacant for a time, but but there is someone above them, and above that person is the Secretary of one of the 15 current cabinet departments (or the EPA, UN, etc etc), all of which have some one who is at the helm leading them. it could be, but again, if somehow Paul were actually able to win, that would be an indication that his stance had won the day in that election, so I would find it nearly impossible to believe that the Congress elected on his coat tails would be 2/3 against him most of the time....I suppose it is technically possible, but highly unlikely. winning an election is a mandate, and if it were Paul v Obama (not likely to be I admit) and Paul won, his ideas, which are in quite stark contrast to President Obama, would have won. Now certainly he would then head one branch of government, kept in check by the other two, but he would have the power of the veto, which like you said could be overturned...but would be very unlikely I think, at least for the first two years...until the midterm. not sure that that had to do with anything. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Ron Paul vs Newt Gingrich on Fidelity.
Top
Bottom