Given a choice between a Dem President or a real majority in both houses of Congress.

[Skidmore]

I'd choose the real majority in Congress. I just think that for all the angst swirling around this current election, that it is more important to have a congress that can get something done.

[supernova]

1. This time round,

I don't think we'll have to choose.

But we need to make sure that the GOP minority is as minority as possible. We won't get anything done if they have more than a 1/3 of both houses. They are too good at throwing monkey wrenches in everything.

Ashame we haven't learned that.

[sandnsea]

2. A real Dem President

Who set the agenda the American people really want. Nobody could vote against a common sense Democrat working for the people.

[bighart]

10. wanna bet

[sandnsea]

17. Absolutely

We don't have any who are speaking 100% straight to the working people. I don't think we've had someone like that since Truman.

[LSK]

3. why can't it be both?

[Skidmore]

4. After the last decade, I'm not certain that both is something desirable,

particularly if corporatists have control.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Yeah that whole FDR thing was an nightmare.

And LBJ with his damn EXTENSIONS to the new deal!

It depends on who is in power and what their objectives are. Control of all branches of government is not, in and of itself, a bad thing.

[LSK]

14. so you want the party that is 100% corporatists to have some power?

Versus the party that is 50% corporatist to have more control?

[Beerboy]

5. Why choose? Ever heard of sweeps?

I don't mean to snark, but c'mon, the Repugs are toast.
edited to add: Don't forget the Supremes!

[Warren Stupidity]

6. I don't understand why that is a realistic choice.

Congressional and presidential elections are separate.

[Beerboy]

13. Oh yeah, ground everyone in reality...

It's got everything to do w/ the counting...

[Raine]

7. I'm with you

I would choose a real Democratic majority in congress.

[ShaneGR]

8. No such thing as a "real majority"

Even if you have 60 members in the Senate, which is highly unlikely after 08, you still have to deal with minority rights, filibusters, etc etc etc. I'd take a slim majority in Congress and a Dem President any day. Not to mention all of the other decisions a President makes that have nothing to do with Congress.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

11. Well, I wouldn't because the Republicans assert a "unitary executive" ABOVE Congress and,...

,...the SCOTUS.

[DU9598]

12. Supreme Court

We need a Democrat in the White House from 2008-2016 due to Supreme Court and Appellate Court appointments. Without the nominating power the judiciary will continue to undermine our nation.

I thus choose a Democratic President as more important.

[TAZller]

15. Not really a choice in my mind.

In the next eight years we have 2 opportunities to get the President right but 4 to get the congress majority.

Add to that the power the President has over Judicial nominations, including the Supreme Court, which we have no active voice in...

Add to that all of the other cabinet appointments which we have no active voice in...

Add to that the history of a sitting president being reelected, and then followed by a viable Presidential nomination coming from the VP....

Add to that the impotence of the congress in setting international policy AND practice....

No question in my mind... Democrat President Please!

[damntexdem]

16. Given that choice, I won't accept half a loaf.

I want both.