{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
11/13/2016 11:05:57 PM
43
Let me see if I got this straight...
In 2008, the US elected Obama based on a message of change.
Then (I think I heard that it was 2010, which would make sense in the mid-terms), Republicans try to stop a lot of stuff Obama tries to change.
Then, the population gets disgruntled with the Democrats in power who are unable to enact much change because of Republican obstructionism.
And now, the Electoral College is poised to elect a Republican to power with a Republican House and Senate. Presumably many of the same Republicans who tried to stop Obama's changes.
This man and his party are conservative, the very definition of which is someone who wishes to conserve the status quo.
And they were promoted to this position on a message of... change?
Is that about right or have I grossly oversimplified this?
-
For starters Democrats had enough control of congress when obama started to get things done. But really Democrats are WAY TOO radical now a days. If you allowed Democrats full control the borders would be open to anyone, guns would be confiscated, free speech would be gone(Shit they basically did that anyway), Military would be weak, welfare would be increased, Taxpayer funded college, Obamacare, etc etc etc You simply cant let Democrats enact THEIR change. Republicans are a lot more...........Conservative when it comes to change.
