pBills Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 The problem with that is that the incoming politicians will become the incumbents and will do the same things their predecessors did for the same reason. Such is the way in America....... Exactly.
John Adams Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 The problem with that is that the incoming politicians will become the incumbents and will do the same things their predecessors did for the same reason. Such is the way in America....... If they do, we have the power to deal with them too. 90+% relection rates in the House. The other guy's Rep is always the problem.
Adam Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 If they do, we have the power to deal with them too. 90+% relection rates in the House. The other guy's Rep is always the problem. Problem is that most people are dumb enough to continue to elect democrats and republicans, then complain when things don't change. The democrats and republicans have power now- they don't want things to change and are working together to ensure status quo remains
John Adams Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 Problem is that most people are dumb enough to continue to elect democrats and republicans, then complain when things don't change. The democrats and republicans have power now- they don't want things to change and are working together to ensure status quo remains The problem is less with the parties (though it resides there too) and more with the people. People love to say there's a problem but then go out and reelect their Congressman again and again and again. I remain skeptical about this mythic bloodletting coming in November. Big deal: a few incumbents lost their primaries. Most of the incumbents are running nearly unopposed in November and will win in landslides. Sure, 10% in the House may lose but that's not different than most even years.
Adam Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 The problem is less with the parties (though it resides there too) and more with the people. People love to say there's a problem but then go out and reelect their Congressman again and again and again. I remain skeptical about this mythic bloodletting coming in November. Big deal: a few incumbents lost their primaries. Most of the incumbents are running nearly unopposed in November and will win in landslides. Sure, 10% in the House may lose but that's not different than most even years. I think we are wording the same idea differently.
John Adams Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 I think we are wording the same idea differently. I'm not arguing with you--we're riffing on the same idea: The current system is broken because we allow it to be. Dumping even 20% of House incumbents in November would be earth-shattering. I doubt we get as high as 15% though. When push comes to shove, people will pull the lever for the name they know.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 Can't see youtube here, but I'll bet it's the "re-elected" ad. That may be the most powerful campaign ad I've ever seen.
PastaJoe Posted May 19, 2010 Posted May 19, 2010 In fact, there's a big sign in front of the Naval Acadamey that says "NO RAT-BASTARDS ALLOWED!" It's a court-martial offense. You're an idiot. Well numb-nuts, please list the specific things that Sestak has done that qualifies him to be labeled a 'rat-bastard'. Not just a politician you disagree with, but a 'rat-bastard'.
Keukasmallies Posted May 20, 2010 Posted May 20, 2010 So, Joe, how much different is Specter changing parties to keep his job from the Kennedy and Clinton Search-for-a-seat efforts that brought them to NYS?
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 20, 2010 Posted May 20, 2010 So, Joe, how much different is Specter changing parties to keep his job from the Kennedy and Clinton Search-for-a-seat efforts that brought them to NYS? it isn't. it was blatant in its reason: he knew he'd lost to Toomey, and couldn't stomach it. the dude was a sleazy lifetime politician who needed to go.
Recommended Posts