Which is better?

[Big Black Dog]

Which is better for America:

(1) More "big government" badly managed and controlled by the Democrats?
(2) Less "big government" badly managed and controlled by the Republicans?

Please answer the simple poll.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Smaller government managed competently is not an option.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Smaller government managed competently is not an option.

That statement makes more sense than anything I've read on this board lately.

 

[topspin]

republican if you talking economy
democrat if your talking freedom

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Damn...this might be the single most accurate polling question in history.
And to think I voted in it...awesome.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Does anyone actually believe that Republicans are going to "shrink" government? Not even His Holiness Saint Reagan did that...

 

[Annie]

I'm hoping that 2012 elections will actually be more about Congress than the Presidency. I'm hoping that this is the last election, at least for awhile, where the electorate just swings between the two parties.

I'm hoping that the tea parties keep at the issues and don't get assumed by GOP or as likely down the road, by the DNC. We need an electorate that knows what they expect and pay enough attention to retain or vote out their representatives.

 

[The T]

I'm hoping that 2012 elections will actually be more about Congress than the Presidency. I'm hoping that this is the last election, at least for awhile, where the electorate just swings between the two parties.

I'm hoping that the tea parties keep at the issues and don't get assumed by GOP or as likely down the road, by the DNC. We need an electorate that knows what they expect and pay enough attention to retain or vote out their representatives.

As it should be since the Cingress was supposed to be the direct link/voice of the people.

 

[mattskramer]

Which is better for America:

(1) More "big government" badly managed and controlled by the Democrats?
(2) Less "big government" badly managed and controlled by the Republicans?

Please answer the simple poll.

Assumed premise invalidates the poll. One might want a big government run by Republicans. It would have been better had you simply asked if we prefer bigger government or smaller government or if you had asked if we would prefer to have our government run by Democrats or Republicans.

 

[The T]

Which is better for America:

(1) More "big government" badly managed and controlled by the Democrats?
(2) Less "big government" badly managed and controlled by the Republicans?

Please answer the simple poll.

(3) Big Government Booted out by the people.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

republican if you talking economy
democrat if your talking freedom

If you're talking freedom, the answer is none of the above. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are champions of personal freedom and liberty.

 

[Sallow]

Yes, Clinton "badly" managed the government by reducing it's size and leaving Bush with a surplus.

And Bush managed the government "well", by starting two wars, growning government with medicare part D, Department of Homeland Security and leaving Obama with a huge deficit and teetering economy.

 

[The T]

To the OP: Sorry. Cannot answer your poll...albiet I understand the premise? I cannot rightly answer in good conscience. Therefore I opt for #3 as written.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Complex and modern government controlled by the tea baggers, would be my choice. But that's just for the entertainment effect. It wasn't on the list though.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes, Clinton "badly" managed the government by reducing it's size and leaving Bush with a surplus.

And Bush managed the government "well", by starting two wars, growning government with medicare part D, Department of Homeland Security and leaving Obama with a huge deficit and teetering economy.

There was no surplus. Projections don't really exist. Especially when they don't take into count the economic downturn.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Yes, Clinton "badly" managed the government by reducing it's size and leaving Bush with a surplus.

And Bush managed the government "well", by starting two wars, growning government with medicare part D, Department of Homeland Security and leaving Obama with a huge deficit and teetering economy.

There was no surplus. Projections don't really exist. Especially when they don't take into count the economic downturn.

From 1999 to 2001, the government took in more revenue than it spent. That's a surplus. But go ahead and redefine accounting to make it appear that Bush didn't spend us into the crapper, and then dump his economic failure on the next guy.