What a repeat of 2007/2008 will tell us...

Flash back to 2008 when the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (what authorized TARP and the bailouts) was proposed and passed. Now consider two of the signatories and proponents of passing the bill...
Senator Barack Obama
Senator John McCain
I have always believed the fact that both supported it was a bit questionable. It reeked of a scenario in which the two were spoken to and instructed "You must both support this so there can be no "told ya so" moment AND so the voters cannot hold support against one of you, swaying the election over this issue."

Now we look at what I believe is the opening salvo of a repeat of 2007/2008 all over again. If, as more and more are starting to believe, we are headed for a repeat, we may very well be able to take some cues from who comes out of the primaries. If I am correct in my assumptions on these trends and indicators, the next election will have to be between either two non-reps or two reps, it cannot be a combination of the two because that breaks the chain of shared responsibility and any corporate bailouts or corporate welfare actions will be held against (one way or the other) the lone rep running against "the outsider."

What this means in a nutshell is that, if Hillary continues to slide down the steep slope of rubble she's headed down and Sanders steps to the forefront, the GOP nominee will be either:
Senator Ted Cruz
Senator Rand Paul
Senator Lindsey Graham
Senator Marco Rubio
or Senator Rick Santorum
The only individual on this list who is almost certain to vote "NO" to another corporate bailout is Rand Paul. It is also pretty much a given that Sanders will be a "NO" vote as he was in 2008. That means the only way to even the sides out and ensure that it isn't a politically suicidal scenario, while still giving corporate America whatever handout they're demanding, would be to distill the election down to Paul vs Sanders. This is purely because, to date, the Democrats have nobody running outside of Sanders who could vote for this bill. (All bets are off if Elizabeth Warren really does run, because she'd be pretty likely to vote for the bailouts, IMO.)

If we see cracks forming in the economy and the feds play the same hand they played in 2007 "Everything is OK, the economy is fundamentally strong, fear not, etc." and no wild card has entered the scene on the DNC side, I would expect us to see the choices being presented more clearly as this being Sanders vs Paul for all the marbles, OR Warren jumps in and becomes the media darling while Marco Rubio builds steam and we can predict, from that, that another bailout is expected and the want a repeat of 2008 with whoever is in the White House having supported the handout.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Interesting take on it, I am wary of Cruz in this instance considering his associations but, if the ticket were to be Cruz v Sanders, couldn't a Gary North ticket suddenly become viable?

a reply to: greencmp

I *hope* the GOP voter base is smart enough to recognize the fact that Ted Cruz can't win the general election. Marco Rubio, however could. I also believe, under this scenario, that TPTB would view Cruz as a potential fly in the ointment... in other words, he's the kind of guy who absolutely would check out what his opponent was doing and then do exactly the opposite just to gain the potential ability to say "I told you so."

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think sometimes I am the only one that wants Trump on all of ATS.

All I see (OP Excluded) is a bunch of delusional people.

We are in big trouble. It's time to get strong as a Nation, before it's too late.

Which POLITICIAN who is begging for money in exchange for influence,

Is going to stand up to the bastards stealing our Nation ?

I am proud to say it "Trump 2016 " It's officially kick ass time.

a reply to: whyamIhere

I want to agree with you, really I do. I just haven't figured out if I like Trump because I believe in him or because I just want to watch the world burn. It's probably a bit of both... I just have a hard time separating "Republican" Trump 2016 from East Coast Democrat Trump that was so obvious prior to his GOP campaign announcement.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: whyamIhere

I want to agree with you, really I do. I just haven't figured out if I like Trump because I believe in him or because I just want to watch the world burn. It's probably a bit of both... I just have a hard time separating "Republican" Trump 2016 from East Coast Democrat Trump that was so obvious prior to his GOP campaign announcement.

It's the fact he's not bootlicking the normal billionaires.

Cause he is one. They can't stand the fact they can't own the Candidate.

Trump is not stupid. I swear to God I see Reagan in him.

Besides, not a single "Professional Politician" on either side will change.

They can't, they are bought and paid for.

I am not willing to give America to the PC Crybabies without a fight.

It's pretty damn bad when a friggin Socialist doesn't sound too bad.

i've been curious about what trumps numbers are in the states with the highest electoral votes and swing states.
just to lazy to look them up.

i see trump as a distraction, plain and simple. he has yet to give any real deteils as to how he's gonna get the things he talks about done other than saying he will delegate the the work. hell isn't that what obama has been doing and it seems we're sliding down the sh@@er just as bad now as we did in 2008, only now the big money movers and shakers have lined their pockets with a few billion more dollars.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
i've been curious about what trumps numbers are in the states with the highest electoral votes and swing states.
just to lazy to look them up.

i see trump as a distraction, plain and simple. he has yet to give any real deteils as to how he's gonna get the things he talks about done other than saying he will delegate the the work. hell isn't that what obama has been doing and it seems we're sliding down the sh@@er just as bad now as we did in 2008, only now the big money movers and shakers have lined their pockets with a few billion more dollars.

Just like they tried to sink him with the first debate question.

It's going to take a little time to become Presidential.

Trump is not a stupid man. I believe he loves his Country. I've been wrong before.

But, I would rather go down with someone who actually points his finger.

Than somebody who does that ridiculous fist/thumb stupid thing trained liars do.

NO ELECTION WILL OCCUR IN 2016 IN THE USA.

America, you've had your last ever election.

By November 2016, your entire country will be in chaos. Obama will go on air to tell the US that the elections will be postponed for a few weeks until things have "quietened down" This will trigger even worse civil disorder. Weeks, months, years will pass. No election. Obama still in the Whitehouse. Still your leader.

America, you had your chance and both times you voted Obama, so enjoy, you've got him for life - Captain of the Titanic as she goes down.

a reply to: whyamIhere

All I see (OP Excluded) is a bunch of delusional people.

After 4 years of Trump people might be saying that about you.

I long ago gave up having any belief or faith in a politician. The thing they are best at doing is acting and as far as acting goes give Trump an Oscar.

An interesting quote comes to mind,

"Never let a politician grant you a favour, they will want to control you forever" (Bob Marley).

Sorry to say that in my life time all I have seen is evidence to suggest Bob Marley is correct.

You are being played by Trump. He is sweet talking you with what you want to hear. What he says and what he would do are as deep and wide a chasm as the Grand Canyon.

Right now he will try to be as much all things to all people as he can and whisper sweet nothings into your ear as he seeks to get that all important VOTE.