。 The United States ushered in a new Daran, and the consensus prediction from the outside world was that it was widely predicted. republican from"; After the election, the Democrats, who have long been gearing up, will once again enter the White House and win a resounding victory in the election of members of Congress held at the same time, but the reality is very different, Landes won by an unguarded advantage, and the Republicans retained a slim majority in the House of Representatives, only becoming a minority party in the Senate. In this election, how strict it is can be described as "drama". Before the election, the Republican Party continued to make a fuss about security issues, advocating deficit spending to expand defense spending to ensure U.S. global interests. Although the United States suffered in the Middle East war. The country's strength is far less than before, but in the context of the Cold War between China and the United States, the Republican Party's "safety card" is very marketable. According to a survey by a number of civil institutions. If the Democrats are still making a fuss about the economy. We cannot take a hard line on foreign policy. Satisfy the appetite of the electorate, then the Democrats have a good chance of losing the election. In fact, the Democrats have put economic issues aside in their campaign preparations, and more Republicans have made national security and national influence the main slogans. Because the correct measures were taken, for example, the presidential candidate was General Petraeus, who served as the supreme commander of the coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, his partner was Brudrin, who served as secretary of state in the Westwood government that year, and the campaign team also included well-known Democratic politicians such as Dugway, Nevide, Copperfield, and Sheffield. No political party in the history of the United States has ever lost an election with Asahi public approval ratings before the election. At the beginning of the year. Almost everyone agrees that it will take only time for the Democrats to win the election.

End of March. CBT's "Nightly News. The program revealed that Brudrin, the Democratic Party's nominee for vice president, evaded military service when he was young, and during Westwood's administration, he cut several military equipment projects for partisan interests, which caused serious hidden dangers to the military strength and national security of the United States, and was the main reason why the United States did nothing in the subsequent wars.

At this time, the election took a dramatic turn.

In the next month or so. Although Brooklyn confirmed that he was not evading military service and that he was born with scoliosis and could not serve in the military like a normal person, when he testified before Congress, Brooklyn could not explain that he was secretary of state. Why overstep the authority of the Department of Defense to manipulate the military equipment exhibition program and cut the program funding without the approval of the president.

The problem is, this has not yet been understood.

At the beginning of next year, CBDR once again broke the news in the "Night News" that Petraeus, while serving as the supreme commander of the coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, was suspected of receiving benefits from the interim governments of Iraq and Afghanistan, and making the US and coalition officers and soldiers bear unnecessary combat risks.

In contrast to the accusations against Brooklyn, if CBDR's Bolu news were true, Petraeus would not only be unlikely to run as a Democratic presidential candidate, but would also be handed over to a court-martialed and imprisoned for the rest of his life.

Of course, CBDR is not a court, and news reporting is not a criminal sentence.

Although at congressional hearings at the end of the month, Petraeus testified that he had not received benefits from the interim governments of Iraq and Afghanistan, but had only accepted personal gifts from the presidents of both countries during his tenure, because the gifts he had received were worth less than $4 per thug, Petraeus did not report this when he returned home to report on his duties. Under U.S. law, Petraeus is also not required to report the situation. That is, he did not violate the law, nor did he violate the regulations of the US military, CBTV is spreading rumors. After the hearing, Petraeus appointed a Democratic lawyer to sue CBC for defamation. But at the hearing, Petraeus was not able to reasonably explain the combat operations mentioned by CBTV, which resulted in hundreds of casualties among coalition soldiers, that is, he could not prove that he did not do anything contrary to the interests of the United States when he was the supreme commander of the coalition forces.

Herein lies the problem.

Although under U.S. law, Petraeus is not required to stalk to anyone but the president for the military decisions he made while he was commander of coalition forces, and Congress is no exception, so even if Petraeus cannot give a satisfactory answer to congressional hearings. There will be no punishment either. But the congressional hearing itself is not a legal trial, but more of a way for Petraeus to explain his past behavior. That is, Petraeus cannot get the support of the voters if he cannot give an answer at the hearing.

From this incident, we can see how chaotic the political situation in the United States is.

You must know that it was Republican President George W. Bush who started the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and it was also President George W. Bush who appointed Petraeus as the supreme commander of the coalition forces in Iraq. Although Petraeus is not a Republican, the Republican Party has made a fuss about these things, which can be described as "shameless". The new address of this site has been changed to: Talk about the fetus o waki, please read in vain!

The problem is, American voters don't care about that.

Anyway. It was the Democratic president who moved into the White House after the thug Bush, and it was the Democratic president who sent Petraeus to Afghanistan to help him.

Although after the congressional hearing, the Democratic Shan knife fought back. Began to uncover the scars of the Republican Party. For example, the reason for Bush Jr.'s fight over the Bush family was not valid at all, and the oil companies controlled by the Bush family and the energy companies related to the Bush family reaped immeasurable benefits from them, but few American voters will look forward to history, and as long as Reus cannot prove that he did not send coalition officers and soldiers to death because of personal problems, it will be difficult for the Democratic Party to convince voters that this former commander-in-chief of the coalition forces can lead the United States to defeat more enemies.

Exactly, 2 months before the start of the general election. The Democrats' support has plummeted.

Although the Democratic Party won some support in the desperate counterattack before the general election, there were still many "wall-riding" voters who voted for Landers when it came time to vote. As a result, Landes's election to the U.S. election with only 2 electoral votes was an indirect election, with a total of electoral votes for the states and Washington, D.C. You only need to obtain more than half of the electoral votes to be elected, and among the two valid ballot papers in the recent quotation. Landers received only about the House of Goose votes, as was the case with George W. Bush in the four-round election. Be elected without the support of a majority of voters

Command.

This election is definitely a pivotal place in the history of the United States.

For the Republican Party, winning the election does not mean winning everything, because in the Senate election, the Republican Party lost several extremely key seats in several northeastern states, so in the Senate, the Republican Party has become a minority. As we all know, the U.S. Senate has a lot of influence, so many of Randes's policies will be blocked in the Senate, and even forced to make major adjustments to major policies.

The real change comes from the Democratic Party.

Although at the time, no Democrat would have thought that after just four years, there would be a chance to make a comeback, after all, no one expected that a war that lasted for more than a month would shatter voters' illusions about the Republican Party and make the Republican Party have to deal with the election with all its might. But after losing the election, which should not have been won, two very different voices emerged within the Democratic Party. Traditional Democratic politicians like Brooklyn advocate keeping the lights on and starting to prepare for the next election. Hard-line Democratic politicians represented by Petraeus have a different view, believing that the defeat of the election is not because the Republican Party is too strong, but because the Democratic Party itself has gone wrong, and should use this lesson to carry out drastic reforms of the Democratic Party. In fact, it is an analysis of conservatism and reform.

If it's just an argument, it's not a big deal.

The problem is that in the end the argument becomes a disagreement, and in the end the disagreement is a rift.

A rupture is inevitable.

At the beginning of the year, the day Landers was sworn in as president of the United States for the second time in Congress, Petraeus announced his separation from the Democratic Party and the formation of the "Democratic New Party." That is, the later "Democratic New Party" was also called the "New People's Party". Petraeus was joined by several influential politicians, including an incumbent member of the House of Representatives and seven incumbent members of the Senate. And so it goes. In the year, the Republicans not only extended their lead in the House of Representatives, but also became the largest party in the Senate.

It can be said that when Petraeus announced the establishment of the "Democratic New Party" in the new year, the whole world trembled.

You must know that the United States is a typical representative of "two-party politics," and it is also the country where "two-party politics" has been carried out most perfectly and perfectly. Although the history of the United States has not always been governed by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, for example, in the early days of the United States, only the Federalist Democratic Party and the Republican Party were derived from the Federalist Party, and then there were the predecessors of the Democratic Republican Democratic Party, and then there were the predecessors of the Whig Republican Party. Even after World War II, there was a third political party in the United States, the Greens, which had very little influence. However, except for the early days of the founding of the People's Republic of China, there are only two catties of people who are really capable of winning the presidential throne in any period. Party.

With the founding of the Democratic New Party, the political situation in the United States has entered the era of three-legged hegemony from the two powers.

Although in the eyes of many people, the DPP is unlikely to become the ruling party in the short term, it will take at least a year or even longer to gain the same influence as the Democratic Party and the Republican Party and win the general election. What's more. The Democratic Party has been hit hard and will not be able to recover for a long time to come, and will not be able to challenge the Republican Party. Therefore, almost all political commentators agree that the Republican Party will definitely win the election in the big year. Some political commentators have even asserted that Mrs. Loebling will run for the Republican Party in the year of the Knife and become the first female president of the United States. However, there are still some people who believe that the Republican Party cannot occupy the White House for a long time, and that the newly formed Democratic New Party is not a political force to be underestimated. You must know that in this newly formed party, it not only has the task of a hard-line leader like Petereus, but also has excellent politicians and administrators like Nevide and Copperfield, and it is worth noting that Dugway, whose influence is not under Petraeus in the slightest, also announced in March of the year that he would leave the Democratic Party and join the Democratic New Party. In other words, the multifaceted nature of the main members of the Democratic New Party has enabled this nascent party to win over not only a large number of diehards of the Democratic Party, but also some diehards of the Republican Party. In terms of ABC's comments on Dudgway's switch to the DPP, as a political party with the ultimate goal of entering the White House, the DPP lacks only one key factor, that is, a politician with the ability to govern the country and strong charisma. There are not many such politicians in the United States.

If you look back in history, the one who really meets these two standards is Franklin Roosevelt. Although in the first: after the Second World War. The United States has also produced many outstanding politicians, such as Kennedy and Clinton, but these politicians are either short-lived. Either there are flaws, and they are definitely not perfect. Of course. Nor can it be said that the United States lacks good politicians. The so-called heroes of the times are early, and only in the appropriate historical background can heroic tasks that affect history appear, and great politicians may also appear.

In fact, the United States is in such an era. The new address of this site has been changed to summer: Chat about the fetus o Woki Gongshan, please read in vain!

By any standard, Randers is a very mediocre politician. Being re-elected only extended the time he lived in the White House and did not provide him with more performances.

The problem is that Rand New is not a politician who is willing to be lonely.

During his first term, because he wanted to seek re-election, Landers did not dare to mess around on many issues, and he respected the suggestions and opinions of his aides, especially Mrs. Loeblin, and almost handed over the power of managing the country to the secretary of state and other officials. After being re-elected, because there was no pressure to be re-elected, Landers no longer attached so much importance to Mrs. Loeblin, and began to reuse a group of White House staff, wanting to make a big deal in Hejian.

As you can imagine, Mrs. Loeblin, who is still in the State Department, is in a very awkward position.

Even more ironically, in order to ensure policy coherence, Landers rarely gave orders from the White House, but instead took a detour and let Mrs. Loebling give orders from the State Department. The problem is that Madame Loeblin's political prowess is definitely not comparable to that of Landes. Mrs. Loebling was well aware of Landes's intentions. Because almost everyone believes that the battered Democratic Party and the fledgling Democratic New Party are unlikely to pose a threat to the Republican Party in a yearly election, the Republican Party does not need a talented politician like Mrs. Loebling. Just like the general election of Li Linian, as long as he is a normal person with a clear mind, he can win the election on behalf of the Republican Party. No doubt. Politicians like Randers are increasingly swayed by interest groups, and it is politicians like Mrs. Loebling who are likely to cause trouble for interest groups. In other words, it is not Landes who wants to suppress Mrs. Loeblin, but the White House aides who are around Landes and speak for interest groups want to deal with Mrs. Loeblin.

The president and the secretary of state are not in tune, and the results can be imagined.

Fortunately, the war in the Middle East has just ended, and the authorities of the Republic are also fighting openly and secretly for the general election of the first year, and several other countries that have the ability to cause trouble for the United States have their own problems to solve, so when the United States is engaged in internal strife, it is not threatened from the outside world. On the other hand, it is the sudden disappearance of the external threat that has made those in power in the United States, the interest groups that really control the United States, dare to focus on internal struggles. If it had been before the previous year, let alone the ruling party's infighting, even the opposition parties would not have made a fuss about issues involving the fundamental interests of the state.

It can be said that this is a political struggle that is evenly matched.

Landes has the authority of the president. Mrs. Loeblin, on the other hand, was a man of great political talent.

The problem is that in this political struggle, Mrs. Loeblin will never want to gain the initiative. What's more, it's an infighting that doesn't do the United States any good. Truly conscious politicians know that if a secretary of state fights a president, he will definitely lose badly. For example, during the presidency of George W. Bush, the first secretary of state was Powell, who assisted him in beating Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War. As we all know, George W. Bush is similar to Landes, and he is also a politician who does not have many talents. Although Cannon Will was born in the military, he had extraordinary political talent. In the eyes of many Americans, Cannon is the most politically minded military man since Marshall and Eisenhower, after Bush Jr. was re-elected. He drove out Powell and sent Rice, the former national security adviser, to the State Department. In other words, Cannon Will's failure to win against George W. Bush was defeated. Mrs. Loeblin was in a much better position than Powell. At least at the time, because the Democratic Party has not yet split and may even win the general election, Landers not only does not dare to sweep Mrs. Loeblin out of the house as George W. Bush did with Powell, but also has to let Mrs. Loeblin continue to join the campaign as secretary of state.

This struggle continued until the end of the four, when the general election approached again.

Although Mrs. Loeblin had struggled to deal with Randers' challenge for the previous three years, as secretary of state, she managed the U.S. federal government in an orderly manner and achieved many diplomatic achievements, such as stabilizing the already crumbling Egypt and Jordan. In general, during these three years, Mrs. Loeblin's performance was still excellent, but because the American authorities did not have the fighting spirit, they did not have the world's remarkable achievements.

Just when almost all Americans thought Mrs. Loebling would represent the Republican Party at the next year's congress, the strong woman who had worked in the State Department for eight years suddenly resigned, citing good health. On the outskirts of Henderson, it was announced that he had accepted Petraeus and Dudgway's invitation to join the Democratic New Party and form a campaign with Petraeus.

It was only at this time that the political storm in the United States really arrived.