I'm just wondering here; in a general sense nobody here outside a few idiots who haven't posted anything worth reading since 2005 (unless it was funny in its inanity) has much to do with either party - sure some of us bust on the the Republicans more than the Democrats - and vice versa - when their more favorite group is in power, but I honestly believe that, for the most part that this is mainly because its "fun" and not because people really believe that their pet party would actually do much better. (I could be wrong, sure, but I think most of us accept that politicians are exactly the wrong type of people that should be in charge of the country). Anyway a few obvious points: Last election - Obama, Palin I mean wtf really? Previous Round - undeclared war yet again? from the "conservatives" yet again? really? Sure there's plenty more on both sides, but in all honesty can any "Liberal" or "Conservative" do anything more than pot, kettle, black here? So yeah, I don't think that either party has the ability to change itself barring some massive social-economic upheaval rivaling the 20s+30s or another major war (and regardless of how "stretched" our military is, we're not in a major conflict). Personally I think we're just going to slowly continue to degrade until one of these things happens since I don't think either party believes in reform, this saddens me, because it is pretty obvious that heads are up collective asses when there's so much we could be doing (and I base this on every political thread we've done over the last six years). So, what say you political fundies? Or did I just call you on your bullshit and you really don't got nuthin no-how?
Not unless there were more people that would take an active interest in the politics and their senators and congressmen and see if they are, in fact, representing their interests and not bowing down to special interests and voting along party lines. And if they don't give a damn, the people have the right to kick 'em out of office. We have congressional elections every other year for this reason. People get the party they deserve, IMO.
Unfortunately, it'll be quite some time before the duopoly of the Demoblicans & Republicrats is neutralized Like Jesse Jackson said, the Republicans & Democrats aren't gridlocked, they're hiplocked It's 1 party with 2 names.
I wouldn't say it was so much a question of "brains"--both parties have lots of people who are plenty smart--but of political will. The problem is that no party today can govern on the basis of what is actually good policy, because they have to convince 51% of the voters to go along with them. And significantly less than 51% of the people have the time, inclination, or understanding to really understand what makes for good policy. So politicians looking for power settle for being good speechmakers, talking about "patriotism," promising free lunches for everyone, and making vague references to God and family to show that they are good "Americans." And we end up with the current situation.
..Oh, God. John Kerry AKA Lurch. The Dems really thought they had that election won if that was the best they could do.
From their point of view, there is nothing to fix. Their constituency is that of corporate elites and as such they wish to marginalise the public by turning elections into petty personality contests. That's the problem. So yeah, the public need to make them change.
I've banged on about a political class before, and that's the core problem - we have a group that exists in a rarified air, well away from the people they're supposed to represent, and in a world of different mores to the people. When a bill comes along, they look to change it - not for the benefit of the people as a whole, but to find pieces of silver to toss at their constituents in order to buy their vote. We have it in the UK too, when Labour go out of power, the Tories will be a slightly less toxic poison going through the system, but a poison nonetheless. Both sides are quite happy with the status quo, both sides have core voters who'll kneejerkingly vote (increased partisan feeling entrenches this) regardless, and both sides know people will sell out the nation for the benefit of their own little neck of the woods. All of that means Bad Shit for the people as a whole, and nothing short of a revolution will alter that. All systems trend to a point of lowest energy, politics is no different.
1 - Term limits for congresscritters. 2 - Public funding for elections. NO private contributions allowed. 3 - Congressional districts drawn by impartial mathematical process, not gerrymandered to make "safe" seats. 4 - NO organized lobbying allowed. No "soft" money. No "gifts". No "perks".
Agree with all except 4-lobbying, which is constitutionally protected fee speech. But I'd agree that no soft money/gift/perks, as you said.
A great idea, until you break it down. Think about it: you're gonna have the government fund it's elections, and not allow private "funding." You could take that to the extreme and in the end, you'd be allowing the gub'mint to pick it's own replacement. Even with term limits, you'd be shooting your head off.
None of that is viable: 1) Term limits- good idea in theory. a horrendous mess in practice. Every two years both houses of Congress would spend months just figuring out who the leadership is. Believe it or not, but deciding who gets which congressional offices already is a considerable hassle. It would actually move massive amounts of power from ELECTED Congressman to UNELECTED govt. staffers. 2) Public funding okay, but the Supreme Court IIRC has pretty much established that a person who wants to run for office can use all of their own money they want. Because the ability to spend your money as you see fit is a protected part of free speech. So Congressional races would largely go to only the wealthy. Even more so than now. 3) Impartial redistricting. Not going to happen. Black Americans would be up in arms because there would be far fewer "black supermajority" districts and thus to some peoples way of thinking fewer black and other minorities elected to Congress. 4) As mentioned above, lobbying is protected free speech. And in all honesty, if the above "reforms" were implemented, it would be damn near impossible to get anyone worthwhile to bother running for Congress. What kind of successfull person wants to go to the trouble to seek an important office knowing they have but a few years there before they are automatically gone (the presidency is different because the office is a man killer at best). Congress would become the domain of A) Bored rich guys B) Some clowns the party drafts to run who they know his staff (all party loyalists) will tell what to do once he is in office.
Hello, first post here. Really, there are only two types of government: dictatorship and oligarchy. America is the latter, and have been for some time now. Don't like that method? Try the other one for awhile. It's only when the voting section of the population gets up in arms (figuratively or literally) that the politicians pay attention to anything other than their own private agendas. But that's mob rule, and not productive either. In the end, we have something roughly similar to Voltaire's "best of all possible worlds" and only through voter manipulation can we persuade the elite to work in our best interests.
