Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of New York City, has told his aides to draw up plans for an independent campaign for the U.S. presidency, The New York Times reported on Saturday. Read full article
That's simply not true.
Nobody has ever bought a Presidential election and couldn't no matter how much they spent on it.
Ross Perot is the perfect example.
Trump is on the top of the polls and has spent under U$6M.
While Hillary has spent about U$100MM and is losing to a Socialist.
Impressions are meaningless, especially those of outsiders, I give you Odumbo's campaigning in Berlin as the perfect example. Odumbo has a higher favorability outside fo the USA than inside where it matters.
If rich people want to run and spend their own money trying there's nothing to stop them and most of the USA is fine with that.
Hillary, least worst option. However, we are all enjoying Trump. Mitt the Mutt was pretty good but Trump is better. Looking forward to his next Gaffe. He should ring Prince Phillip for a few tips.
Every gaffe Trump has puts him higher in the polls.
Silly foreigners don't have any idea how the USA works.
WILL HILLARY BE INDICTED?
Andy McCarthy joins former Attorney General Michael Mukasey in sensing that there’s a good chance Hillary Clinton will be indicted. He writes:
Jim [Comey, the director of the FBI] is tough, he is smart, and if there is a case to be made here, he will make it. And if he makes it, it will be bulletproof.
Of course, making the case would not mean the FBI could force attorney general Loretta Lynch — and the president to whom she answers — to pursue the case. The FBI cannot convene a grand jury and present an indictment.
But you’d best believe the FBI can make the Obama administration look very bad if it shrinks from doing so. Then it will be a matter of how far Barack Obama is willing to stick his neck out for Hillary Clinton.
I’m betting: not that far.
McCarthy is a former federal prosecutor. Moreover, he worked with James Comey. His opinion should be taken seriously.
:)
So, let me answer my own (rhetorical) question. In the UK presidential candidates do not exist. Instead the administration of the country is formed buy appointees of either God or their monarch. And the same applies to their equivalent of the Senate, the 'House of Lords', which is packed with 'lords' and bishops of the official state religion, both of whom are appointed by their monarch. They do have a rough equivalent of the HoR, the 'House of Commons', but this is dominated by the administration and functions largely as a rubber stamp.
So, the British avoid the costs of elections by avoiding having elections. This is not a solution that Americans find attractive.
I knew you would not understand the British Parliamentary system because you are a complete idiot.
The Lords you refer to have only a few hereditary ones left in place which in my experience is a shame because they have in the past stopped idiotic decisions being enacted by Parliament or at least until the override act has ben enabled.
They are chosen by the current government as a way of stuffing their own supporters into help get their own legislation through, very similar to the US 'Committees'.
It's no wonder you get things arse about face you are a complete moron.
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesAnd some people on here think the Dems are doing fine.
Jan 25th, 2016 - 01:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Psst, if they were you wouldn't see articles like this....
You too can have a shot at being the Yankee President....
Jan 25th, 2016 - 02:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...but it'll only cost you a Billion bucks...
There is something seriously wrong with US politics....
Sanders isn't rich.
Jan 25th, 2016 - 02:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Rubio isn't rich
Cruz isn't rich
There's nothing wrong with our system.
It is working perfectly fine.
@ 3 yankeeboy
Jan 25th, 2016 - 06:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well it's certainly creating enough world-wide amusement, this perfect system you have.
You only need a billion bucks and be a yank and you can BUY the US Presidency!
THAT is the impression your perfect system is giving to the world.
You can't be happy about that surely?
That's simply not true.
Jan 25th, 2016 - 07:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nobody has ever bought a Presidential election and couldn't no matter how much they spent on it.
Ross Perot is the perfect example.
Trump is on the top of the polls and has spent under U$6M.
While Hillary has spent about U$100MM and is losing to a Socialist.
Impressions are meaningless, especially those of outsiders, I give you Odumbo's campaigning in Berlin as the perfect example. Odumbo has a higher favorability outside fo the USA than inside where it matters.
If rich people want to run and spend their own money trying there's nothing to stop them and most of the USA is fine with that.
Hillary, least worst option. However, we are all enjoying Trump. Mitt the Mutt was pretty good but Trump is better. Looking forward to his next Gaffe. He should ring Prince Phillip for a few tips.
Jan 25th, 2016 - 08:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-philip/9883276/Duke-of-Edinburghs-best-gaffes.html
Every gaffe Trump has puts him higher in the polls.
Jan 25th, 2016 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Silly foreigners don't have any idea how the USA works.
WILL HILLARY BE INDICTED?
Andy McCarthy joins former Attorney General Michael Mukasey in sensing that there’s a good chance Hillary Clinton will be indicted. He writes:
Jim [Comey, the director of the FBI] is tough, he is smart, and if there is a case to be made here, he will make it. And if he makes it, it will be bulletproof.
Of course, making the case would not mean the FBI could force attorney general Loretta Lynch — and the president to whom she answers — to pursue the case. The FBI cannot convene a grand jury and present an indictment.
But you’d best believe the FBI can make the Obama administration look very bad if it shrinks from doing so. Then it will be a matter of how far Barack Obama is willing to stick his neck out for Hillary Clinton.
I’m betting: not that far.
McCarthy is a former federal prosecutor. Moreover, he worked with James Comey. His opinion should be taken seriously.
:)
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/01/25/former-ny-city-mayor-bloomberg-willing-to-run-for-president#comment428252: For our instruction maybe you can tell us what a typical campaign budget might be for a UK presidential election. Also what are the figures that a candidate for the UK Senate or HoR might spend?
Jan 26th, 2016 - 11:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 8 Hep, Hep, all the way down the sewer!
Jan 27th, 2016 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Idiot!
Just shows how utterly stupid you are.
The UK has one of the first (Isle Of Man was THE first) PARLIAMENTARY systems.
Go read if you can.
PS The Falklands will be absorbing the rump of Argentina in 25 years.
HA, HA, HA. Idiot.
Lots of people talking about Hillary's campaign running out of cash.
Jan 28th, 2016 - 02:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is the most interesting election cycle I've ever seen.
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/01/25/former-ny-city-mayor-bloomberg-willing-to-run-for-president#comment428412: I see that this got no response. I'm not surprised. Non of the Brits I know is prepared to defend their corrupt system of government.
Feb 01st, 2016 - 02:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0So, let me answer my own (rhetorical) question. In the UK presidential candidates do not exist. Instead the administration of the country is formed buy appointees of either God or their monarch. And the same applies to their equivalent of the Senate, the 'House of Lords', which is packed with 'lords' and bishops of the official state religion, both of whom are appointed by their monarch. They do have a rough equivalent of the HoR, the 'House of Commons', but this is dominated by the administration and functions largely as a rubber stamp.
So, the British avoid the costs of elections by avoiding having elections. This is not a solution that Americans find attractive.
@ 11 Hepatia
Feb 01st, 2016 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I knew you would not understand the British Parliamentary system because you are a complete idiot.
The Lords you refer to have only a few hereditary ones left in place which in my experience is a shame because they have in the past stopped idiotic decisions being enacted by Parliament or at least until the override act has ben enabled.
They are chosen by the current government as a way of stuffing their own supporters into help get their own legislation through, very similar to the US 'Committees'.
It's no wonder you get things arse about face you are a complete moron.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!