That's just a general definition of what a State of Emergency is.

In the United States the only way to change the date of elections is through either an act of Congress or by governors on a state by state basis and even then only under very specific circumstances. 

Even if the elections were postponed by Congress until after January 20th Obama will still stop being President. At that point the Speaker of the house would become President at which time special elections would likely be announced and scheduled within 90 days.

There is no legal mechanism in the United States that would allow Obama to be President for more than 8 years.

We are going to know very shortly 

I mean...we will. But you say that like there's a reasonable chance you'll be right. Unless there's a military coup or Obama has secretly convinced Congress and every State legislature in the country to repeal the 22nd amendment. These elections will go just like all the others.

Well, it's obvious that people don't know what i am talking about and it's not my fault.

If People fail to pay attention to what is going on within their own country, it's their fault.

If People fail to do a simply research on those they vote on, they are doomed to be fucked over and they deserves to be fucked over.

You guys have forgotten the responsibility you guys have to protect your country from goverment corruption but instead of doing something about it, you rather stick your head down into the sand and talk about the next braindead entertainment.

If People need to "Ask or adress confusion" whenever someone say: Trump and Hillary are both playing you like the sheeps they think you are, it's time to do some research and end the confusion, i can't do that for you because i don't have that type of power, all i can do is to point you in the right direction.

Neither Trump or Hillary are interestet in saving you, Trump is a Socialdemocrat who runs as a republican nominee, don't that come off as strange to you? As Trump himself said: If i was to run for presidency, i would do it as a republican because Republicans are dumb enough to vote for him.

We all should know the Clinton family and their crime-cartell, if i have to go into details here, it only proves how dense someone can be.

I am on a smart-phone and i don't deem a conversation like this important enough to correct all the auto-correct errors, because "Stupid" don't listen, cause i am no Pokemon GO, So I am not distractive enough or "Hip" enough.. Yes i am a sacrastic bastard but for a very good reason.

Face it. Hillary is best girl.

It can/might happen, like i said we'll see shortly 

Yes, banks CAN just create money. If someone gets an credit from the bank this credit isn't based on money the bank has accumulated from other sources. It is written to the account as book money. True is, that these credits must be backed by some money the banks have from other sources. How much is not that easy to answer. For europe and the US the current rules are based in the Basel III agreement:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basel_III

It's hard to understand, the rules are complicated. But basically the credits are money which is created out of thin air and backed by around 3%-5% money the bank has in reserve. this reserve money can come from a credit the bank took from another bank.

That the central bank isn't creating money alone (they do too based on the same principles) is clear, if you see that the central banks don't know how much money is in existance but make estimations instead.

Look here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply#United_States

The central bank controls the actually printed money (M0) and some deposits (MB). Other than that it is out of direct control for the central bank. M2 includes the money you have in your banking account. In the graphic you see how much more M2 (green) is in comparison to MB (blue). So M2 is mostly money that is NOT created by the central bank.

The situation in europe is similar.

The reserve can be money they have lent from other banks. So multiple banks can create indefinite money without a central bank. You're right though that at some point the confidence in credits goes away. But that point is far far beyond the money created and controlled directly by the central bank.

Well, Clinton is opting every time she has the chance for war. That alone makes her instantly a bad candidate in my book. I don't say Trump is good, but basically it boils down to Cholera vs. pestilence. Yes, we could argue for hours about who of the two is the lesser evil, but basically they're both bad. Fortunately the americans have other options: Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, Gloria la Riva...

I do not know Donald Trump. I can only form an opinion of the man based on what I have actually heard him say and what I have actually read of his writings. Based on these criteria alone I conclude that he is despicable. If he believes what he says and writes then, to me, he is in appalling individual. If he says and writes these things purely to attract a demographic that , in his estimation, gives him a chance of winning the election and he doesn't believe most of these utterances then he is even more despicable.

It will be a bad day for the U.S. and a worse one for the world were he to succeed.

Just my opinion of course!