Debt Ceiling Crisis Deal Poll

[Ivytalk]

Pick the exact date and hour of when (not if) a deal will be cut that "ends" the debt ceiling "crisis."

I'll say Saturday, July 30, at 3 p.m. -- in time for preparation of self-aggrandizing press releases on both sides before the evening news cycle.

Not looking good for ol' IT!

[SDHornet]

With all the recent votes, isn’t Congress back to square one? I'd be shocked to see a deal before the so called August 2nd deadline. It seems as this issue has become more polarized as the deadline approaches.

[BlueHen86]

With all the recent votes, isn’t Congress back to square one? I'd be shocked to see a deal before the so called August 2nd deadline. It seems as this issue has become more polarized as the deadline approaches.

We are being governed by idiots. All they care about is re-election, even if it hurts the country.

[TheDancinMonarch]

With all the recent votes, isn’t Congress back to square one? I'd be shocked to see a deal before the so called August 2nd deadline. It seems as this issue has become more polarized as the deadline approaches.

If they spent as much time trying to solve the problem as they do trying to make each other look bad . . .

[SDHornet]

With all the recent votes, isn’t Congress back to square one? I'd be shocked to see a deal before the so called August 2nd deadline. It seems as this issue has become more polarized as the deadline approaches.

We are being governed by idiots. All they care about is re-election, even if it hurts the country.

Agreed. What is also bothersome is the co called “cuts” is nothing more than reduced spending. Both “solutions” are increased spending, one just at a higher rate than the other. This does nothing so solve the long term problem. I am starting to fall into the “let the “default” occur and see what will happen” camp.

[BlueHen86]

With all the recent votes, isn’t Congress back to square one? I'd be shocked to see a deal before the so called August 2nd deadline. It seems as this issue has become more polarized as the deadline approaches.

If they spent as much time trying to solve the problem as they do trying to make each other look bad . . .

Exactly. Their priorities seems to be:

1. Make sure that we can blame the other guy, even if the country gets screwed.

2. Do what is best for the country.

There does not appear to be any good people running the country right now, I don't care what party they are part of.

[BlueHen86]

We are being governed by idiots. All they care about is re-election, even if it hurts the country.

Agreed. What is also bothersome is the co called “cuts” is nothing more than reduced spending. Both “solutions” are increased spending, one just at a higher rate than the other. This does nothing so solve the long term problem. I am starting to fall into the “let the “default” occur and see what will happen” camp.

Yours and my idea of long term differs from theirs.

We look out for our future, which usually means retirement, kids etc.

They look out for re-election. They are a bunch of small minded, selfish bastards.

[Rob Iola]

Agreed. What is also bothersome is the co called “cuts” is nothing more than reduced spending. Both “solutions” are increased spending, one just at a higher rate than the other. This does nothing so solve the long term problem. I am starting to fall into the “let the “default” occur and see what will happen” camp.

Yours and my idea of long term differs from theirs.

We look out for our future, which usually means retirement, kids etc.

They look out for re-election. They are a bunch of small minded, selfish bastards.

So if the House conks really wanted to enact change, instead of demanding a balanced budget amendment they should demand a term limits amendment...

[Ivytalk]

Yours and my idea of long term differs from theirs.

We look out for our future, which usually means retirement, kids etc.

They look out for re-election. They are a bunch of small minded, selfish bastards.

So if the House conks really wanted to enact change, instead of demanding a balanced budget amendment they should demand a term limits amendment...

I'm now re-thinking my long-held opposition to term limits. I used to think that term limits were fundamentally undemocratic. Limiting Presidents to two terms hasn't made much difference in terms of the quality of executive leadership and performance. Can we reasonably expect better results by limiting Senators to two terms and Congressmen to four or five? Don't know that we'd get better quality people in there, but we may get more public-spirited candidates with a longer-term view.

[Ibanez]

I have been telling you all for years. we do not elect Statesman anymore. nothing more than a group of jaded misgueded egos running the country, pumping the media full of crap so that when they are up for re-election, the voters just want it to end. And it's easier to vote in an incumbent b/c most Americans don't care enough. I'm all for voting each and every single person out of office. Will it happen? No. But i think the chances of these Baby Boomers being voted out is greater.