The Second American Revolution - 2076?

[GoldenRivet]

Damned iPhone auto-word selection thingy

fixed it

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

WRONG

I truly believe that most voters don't do their own thinking. That's why so many get re-elected... "straight party ballots"

Too many morons just select "straight rep" or "straight dem"

so do you think that people should pass some sort of test before being eligible for a vote?

[Enigma]

WRONG

I truly believe that most voters don't do their own thinking. That's why so many get re-elected... "straight party ballots"

Too many morons just select "straight rep" or "straight dem"

so do you think that people should pass some sort of test before being eligible for a vote?

Seriously....

What am I saying that's wrong? how can you call me WRONG in big old capital letters when my statement is accurate? People get re-elected because the people elect them. I'm wrong about this!?? If people want to vote a straight democratic, or republican ticket, they have every right to do so. It doesn't make them stupid.
Just because you don't happen to like the candidate, or his stance on the issues, does not make the people who voted for him idiots. It makes you the minority. That's all.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

WRONG

I truly believe that most voters don't do their own thinking. That's why so many get re-elected... "straight party ballots"

Too many morons just select "straight rep" or "straight dem"

So why do you think it is in the best interests of democratic governance to have the government override the will of the people? That's what term limits are. It is the government telling the citizens:

"It is not important who you want.

Your electoral decisions are irrelevant.

The government, can not allow you, the citizen, to have the freedom to elect who you want to;

Therefore, the government will take that freedom away from you. You will still be able to vote, but the government will tell you who you can't vote for."

That is what term limits are.

Is that really the optimal solution?

I agree that the average voter is ignorant and lazy. That is the problem. So why don't we try to fix that problem instead of trying to band-aid the problem by restricting civil rights.

Even if we do have term-limits for Congress, we will still have the same ignorant and lazy voters. Your solution does nothing to address the problem. These same ignorant and lazy voters will just elect some other equally unqualified person for the job instead of voting for the incumbent.

Term limits sound, on the surface, like a good solution. But a moment's reflection should show that the solution may be worse then the problem.

[fatty]

Originally Posted by Platapus

So why do you think it is in the best interests of democratic governance to have the government override the will of the people? That's what term limits are. It is the government telling the citizens:

"It is not important who you want.

Your electoral decisions are irrelevant.

The government, can not allow you, the citizen, to have the freedom to elect who you want to;

Therefore, the government will take that freedom away from you. You will still be able to vote, but the government will tell you who you can't vote for."

That is what term limits are.

Is that really the optimal solution?

I agree that the average voter is ignorant and lazy. That is the problem. So why don't we try to fix that problem instead of trying to band-aid the problem by restricting civil rights.

Even if we do have term-limits for Congress, we will still have the same ignorant and lazy voters. Your solution does nothing to address the problem. These same ignorant and lazy voters will just elect some other equally unqualified person for the job instead of voting for the incumbent.

Term limits sound, on the surface, like a good solution. But a moment's reflection should show that the solution may be worse then the problem.

Excellent post.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by fatty

I'll only be 90, not so bad. Probably too old to shoulder a musket though.

That's true, since by then, you'll be lucky if they allow you to even have a musket let alone a real gun.

-S

[fatty]

Maybe, but at least by 2076 it will be a laser musket.

[August]

Originally Posted by fatty

Maybe, but at least by 2076 it will be a laser musket.

And the amount of parts they'd have to install to get a 90 year old ready for combat you might as well call him "Robo-Minuteman"...

[CaptainHaplo]

Actually - some here might remember I proposed a fix to this problem. To fix the "party pick" ballot - and the same person getting re-elected because of the letter beside their nane, does NOT require term limits.

Term limits are the government telling the people that they can't have an effective representative if they want to re-elect them.

So how to fix the problem? Super simple really. And environmentally friendly too.

Stop putting letters beside the names. Get rid of the little (R), (D), (L), etc. Saves ink, and makes people actually have to go out and figure out which person is where on things that matter - ISSUES!

Unfortunately, neither major party wants this, because "party" has become more important to most politicians than the nation. Only when the people stand up and pull a RENO will there be meaningful progress.

And no - RENO has nothing to do with the former attorney general Janet Reno - RENO means: Re-Elect No One

Ultimately - the party system has ruined our republic. Once politicians have to speak to issues, not to party hacks, then the government would end up like it is supposed to be - working FOR us. Not the other way around.

[Monica Lewinsky]

Originally Posted by Enigma

You want term limits, to what? Override the vote of the majority of your state? If the man keeps getting elected, clearly he's wanted....

I think you have your head up the butt - since you do NOT reside here - and have NO CLUE of local conditions.

The answer is $MONEY$ not a "majority vote".
money, Money, Money.

The "majority" of the STATE hates him and wants him GONE - like our ex-Governor [Blahgo] recent event, like Rolland Burris in 2010 [another EGO dirt bag] - gone, soon.

But these king pins mass HUGE re-election funds 1-day after the election like Dick Durban - Senoir Senator, Illinois.

He had a $20 million dollar slush fund for his last election while the oppenent raised 750 thousand $bucks$ at best.

It is "stuff" like this that MUST END.

Got $Money$ ... no problems ... we [YOU] keep re-electing these TRASH bags for LIFE.

Term limits would flush these dirt bags down the drain and make them go AWAY.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

so do you think that people should pass some sort of test before being eligible for a vote?

No, not at all

But I do think "straight party ballots" should be outlawed.

lets face it... congress holds most of the power, but the president catches all the heat when times are tough.

it has always been that way - and it is a nice distraction from the fact that congress is usually to blame for little problems our nation seems to face.

i think the voting process should be reformed so that if people are unhappy about their representative or their congressman etc - it should be easy and clear to vote them out of office.

for the time being, im fairly happy with my congressman, but thats for now... a year or two from now i might hate his withering guts.

if so... i want it to be easy and pain free to fire his ass.

Im with Lewinsky on his issue... term limits all the way. if we cant change the process by which members of congress come in and out - we need to have severe term limits.

Congress should be a revolving door.

we ditch the president every 4 years - those douche bags on capital hill should get 4 years too and then they get flicked like a bugger!

[joegrundman]

So if someone had, say, a 10 year term cap on being a congressman, they should then apply for a new job as a senator or a governor for the next 10 years, and so on?

edit: is "flicked like a bugger" a common american term? It sounds funny to a British ear!

[August]

One rule i'd like to see implented is a politician can't run for one office while he holds another. Want to run for President? Fine. Resign from that Senate seat first.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Imo, what we need is a budget Amendment that restricts the Federal budget to about 15% of the annual GDP and requires that the Government attain and sustain profitability by about 2050.
Our Federal government has demonstrated its' nearly limitless capacity to implement ineffective legislation and policy whilst simultaneously wasting a lot of money on many occassions. At least with such an Amendment they would be bound by Constitutional law to waste less money.

[CaptainHaplo]

Well - true campaign finance reform is also something I discussed. Limit what an individual can give - and no money from anyone or any thing that doesn't get a vote. Thus - if your ideas resonate with the voters, you get support. If not - you don't.

Common sense fixes to the problems for some reason are the very things the parties don't want to see.