What I see as more dangerous overall, is the "Madrid Effect". In the days before the spanish election, simultaneous bombs detonated, killing scores, wounding lots more etc... etc...
Next thing we know, days later the govt is changed by the vote.
I see an extremely dangerous precedent here. Effecting govt elections through the use of terror, and/or economic terror.
I suspect there is a very high chance that the domestic US election is a target of terrorists. They may try to impose their election choice on us this way.
Also, if you've noticed that Wed/Thurs, OPEC reduced the flow of oil by about 8%. There is no glut right now, as a matter fact there is a shortage. Motive? Election pressure. By squeezing the US economy, they are trying to push swing voters into the "non-bush" camp by affecting pocket books.
That, I see is very dangerous. The US economy might be being used as an external election steering tool. And more violently, terrorists may try to take advantage of a vote situation to alter the peoples opinion.
The sad thing is that with current GDP growth in various countries (some of us do look globally, not just locally), there is 11 years left of US dominance economically.
Note: I am not American, but I care more for the US than many locals, and I feel that the US is a global model for governance. Yes, there is a bit of Ayn Rand in the healthcare area, but when you tally up the chips, I think it is #1. Sadly, so many foriegn influences and donor situations have weakened that strength from an economic standpoint.
