John Boehner calling it quits at end of October

[Lenonis]

Why is it always the republicans that are supposed to reach across the aisle and compromise?. When have the democrats ever reached across?

Contrary to what you would like to believe the ACA was a compromise. The GOP wrote part of the bill and had heavy input.

Also, many of the military bills as well as the security related bills were full of compromise.

[zenkai]

Let GOP and NDC just collapse already, please.

There, I fixed it for you
ABCDEF30

[Reeve]

Why is it always the republicans that are supposed to reach across the aisle and compromise?. When have the democrats ever reached across?

I seem to recall months and months of Democrats trying to negotiate Obamacare with the Republicans, compromising it to death instead of just going with the Single Payer option they really wanted. Despite tons of overtures of various compromises, the Republicans just outright refused all offers, so the Democrats ended up passing the law without them.

[Wilian]

...and democrats are sane?

You know, color me a skeptic (as I tend to play) but I'm pretty sure both parties push a lot of the same agendas at the end of the day.

If there is anything we need is more parties, more factions, and less of this 2-way sway.

I don't remember saying Democrats are sane.

However, if I have to choose between wet, messy explosive diarrhea (GOP) and solid shit (DEM), I'll pick the solid shit.

[Felya]

Why is it always the republicans that are supposed to reach across the aisle and compromise?. When have the democrats ever reached across?

Do you think Obama wanted Bush tax cuts to be extended indefinitely? Instead of reinstating Glass-Steagal, leaving a percentage to lawfully undermine it? A healthcare system that is not single payer? If Obama is the liberal icon republicans claim he is, his entire 2 terms have been a compromise... Otherwise, you'd be searching for a needle in a haystack if you want his liberal policy...

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

I don't remember saying Democrats are sane.

However, if I have to choose between wet, messy explosive diarrhea (GOP) and solid shit (DEM), I'll pick the solid shit.

Honestly, I find that hard to agree with. Pretty sure both are just messy and explosive for differing reasons with fleeting nuggets of solidity and meaning.

Like right now, on the Republican side, I can at least find a lot I agree with through Rand Paul; though he might as well be another party unto himself.

Democrat wise? Basically you're choosing who's going to run this country into the ground faster. Both financially and socially. Your two main candidates are major warhawks and even worse seem to think that domestic spending can be pulled out of a black hole indefinitely with no consequences.

[Draeth]

Wow. Maybe there is a God (who's sick of being misrepresented by these nutbags).

[Kujako]

Honestly, I find that hard to agree with. Pretty sure both are just messy and explosive for differing reasons with fleeting nuggets of solidity and meaning.

Like right now, on the Republican side, I can at least find a lot I agree with through Rand Paul; though he might as well be another party unto himself.

Democrat wise? Basically you're choosing who's going to run this country into the ground faster. Both financially and socially. Your two main candidates are major warhawks and even worse seem to think that domestic spending can be pulled out of a black hole indefinitely with no consequences.

Right now it boils down to the Republicans listing all the horrible things they'll do if elected, and then the Democrats just saying "yea... we wont do any of that" and winning.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Right now it boils down to the Republicans listing all the horrible things they'll do if elected, and then the Democrats just saying "yea... we wont do any of that" and winning.

But Democrats are saying they're going to do a bunch of sorry stuff.

Why is it that financial ramifications and trying to stop the war-mill that this country has become is not a priority for democratic voters until republicans are firmly in power?

[Rukh]

Honestly, I find that hard to agree with. Pretty sure both are just messy and explosive for differing reasons with fleeting nuggets of solidity and meaning.

Like right now, on the Republican side, I can at least find a lot I agree with through Rand Paul; though he might as well be another party unto himself.

Democrat wise? Basically you're choosing who's going to run this country into the ground faster. Both financially and socially. Your two main candidates are major warhawks and even worse seem to think that domestic spending can be pulled out of a black hole indefinitely with no consequences.

And yet we keep having to go back to democratic leadership every time the republicans belly up the economy. Please stop with your revisionism.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

And yet we keep having to go back to democratic leadership every time the republicans belly up the economy. Please stop with your revisionism.

...The economy still isn't even recovered and in constant threat of relapse. What revision are YOU pushing?

Also, no, this isn't about which party is better. I don't get how one side can vehemently support one over the other when they're both wrecking this country by and large.

[DeadmanWalking]

If you are a democrat and this makes you happy because you hate him so much, well better the creature you know than the one you don't, because they will just replace him with someone even crazier than him. When it came down to it the Republicans hated that he kept standing in their way of suicide bombing the funding of the government because he knew it would turn out bad for republicans in the end, but they responded, "So?". Boehner didn't exactly do everything Conservatives wanted but the next guy will and the next guy will be in line (4th?) for President of the United states.

[Ivanstone]

...The economy still isn't even recovered and in constant threat of relapse. What revision are YOU pushing?

One party took a healthy economy and threw it off the cliff.

One party took a crappy economy and made it somewhat better.

I'll let you assign which party where.

[vaeevictiss]

I actually think someone that is more of a conservative will help move things along better, not the alternative. I think Boner had bad leadership, was a RINO, and tried to pander to both sides too much. This is why the republicans never took his side. So while a stronger conservative may divide things more, i think it will also produce more.

Quite frankly we need it to be more divided. Government is just a huge mass of the same thing. I get a kick out of forums and facebook arguments when people bitch about Republicans and democrats and you can literally swap the words republican with democrat and vice versa and the context and point trying to be made is still true.

[Flabberly]

Ah! That guy's name sounds like a porn star.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

One party took a healthy economy and threw it off the cliff.

One party took a crappy economy and made it somewhat better.

I'll let you assign which party where.

Both aided in the former, the market just barely managed the latter. Believe it or not it's somewhat autonomous and can rebound or break without government intervention necessarily.

I don't agree with how they helped to inflate the housing market. I don't agree with how they propped up failing companies when the fall occurred. Essentially, what they did and have been doing is artificially manipulating the market into bubbles and then when those bubbles burst, saving weak or incompetent companies from going under. Which of course, leads to stagnation, poor competition, and picks winners out of a pile that should've been losers.

I try my best not to play this little game you guys have invented, where you believe that each side is truly different from the other. They're both problematic and crippling for this country currently. There might be individual candidates worth investing in but hitching your ride with one organization or the other isn't at all productive nor creative. You're falling for a false narrative.

[Tychus]

This news just made my day!!!!! Now we can get a real conservative Speaker instead of a RINO. Now if only Mcconnel would resign too

the majority of republican saints of yesteryear are very much "RINO" in today's neocon atmosphere.

[Beazy]

Awwww, looks like BonerMan is scared to lose, so hes "leaving on his own".

What a shit stain.

[Thetruth1400]

or are you suggesting a "1 party" system?

Honestly, with one party, people might actually have to sit and look at the issues not just go "I voted for so and so front runner of Party A because I'm a staunch supporter of Party A!"

When everyone is one party, there are essentially no parties. Maybe that's the shakeup the American system needs because a two party system sucks.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Honestly, with one party, people might actually have to sit and look at the issues not just go "I voted for so and so front runner of Party A because I'm a staunch supporter of Party A!"

When everyone is one party, there are essentially no parties. Maybe that's the shakeup the American system needs because a two party system sucks.

...or they do what the two parties currently do and work hand-in-hand in most cases while stifling the voice of dissent.