DrDawkinstein Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Fixed. Eliminate these clowns from ever having a re-election campaign to influence their agenda. You show up, serve, and then go back to having a life. No f---ing pensions either. I like any idea for term limits, but yours especially for the reasons you listed.
The Dean Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Eliminate these clowns from ever having a re-election campaign to influence their agenda. You show up, serve, and then go back to having a life. No f---ing pensions either. Of course that eliminates any incentive for representing the will of the people. While re-election is FAR from perfect, it does give the voters a means of voicing their displeasure. With a one-term limit, best-funded biggest-liar should win every time. No?
DrDawkinstein Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Of course that eliminates any incentive for representing the will of the people. While re-election is FAR from perfect, it does give the voters a means of voicing their displeasure. With a one-term limit, best-funded biggest-liar should win every time. No? I agree with the sentiment, but this is what we have already happening under the current system anyways. So what is there to lose?
Just Jack Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Term limits... Senators...2 six year terms House of Reps.. 6 two year terms. end of career politicians. Robert Byrd of my state was classic example of this. as is our congressman, Nick Rahal. 34 years in house of Rep. Change the reps to 3 four year terms. With a two year term, you almost have to start planning your re-election campaign as soon as you take office.
KD in CA Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Of course that eliminates any incentive for representing the will of the people. While re-election is FAR from perfect, it does give the voters a means of voicing their displeasure. With a one-term limit, best-funded biggest-liar should win every time. No? Doesn't that already happen 98% of the time anyway? If you keep cycling new people through while eliminating the career politician, it makes it a lot harder for special interest money to control the group. If those who are elected know they have only a fixed period of time, they might do the right thing instead of whatever will get them re-elected. Ending the gravy train would also result in fewer sleezeballs and attract more good people willing to step out of their careers for a few years to serve. Not to mention getting people who actually have careers other than 'politician' as representatives.
HopsGuy Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 I certainly got the sense that the National Republican Party was not behind O'Donnell. The local party was definitely not in her corner. A lot of that bubbled over from the primary where she launched a very negative campaign (not normal for Delaware) against a very iconic and well-liked candidate in Mike Castle. That can happen when you don't keep an eye on your cauldron. I voted Saturday morning. You know who doesn't vote? Hot chicks. Not a single one in line. It got me thinking, "they don't need political representation, they get everything they want anyway. No wonder they're not here."
bartshan-83 Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 That can happen when you don't keep an eye on your cauldron. What's funny is, when I first typed that out, I wrote "brewed over" and I my first thought was Witch's Brew. Totally missed it the second time. I voted Saturday morning. You know who doesn't vote? Hot chicks. Not a single one in line. It got me thinking, "they don't need political representation, they get everything they want anyway. No wonder they're not here." No doubt. The one truly insulated demographic. I think if I were a hot girl, I'd spend a lot of time not really giving a ****.
Andy Rooney Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 What's funny is, when I first typed that out, I wrote "brewed over" and I my first thought was Witch's Brew. Totally missed it the second time. No doubt. The one truly insulated demographic. I think if I were a hot girl, I'd spend a lot of time on my back.
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 This is exactly how I feel as well. ANYONE who wants to get into politics nowadays MUST be a soulless scumbag. Doesnt matter which "side" they say they are on. Once they get elected, it's all the same side. Them against the people. The problem isn't "Democrats" or "Republicans". The problem is all of the Career Politicians. Then you have the Scott Lee Cohen guy who ran IND. for IL Gov... His whole campaign revolved around the phrase: "Not a Career Politician." He actrually won the DEM nomination for LT. Gov. on Quinn's ticket... Yet, was forced off because of his roid rage, domestic abuse past... So then he decides to stick it to the "career politicians and run IND for the kit and kaboodle: Gov. The IL Gov. race won't be settled for weeks.. Quinn (Dem) leads by about 8,500 votes over the Rep. Brady. Cohen got about 150,000 votes... No doubt he siphoned off votes on both sides. I actually voted for him... Then again, his credentials were him being a millionaire pawnbroker with a GED. So... In conclusion what is worse!
tennesseeboy Posted November 8, 2010 Posted November 8, 2010 Didn't vote for the first time since 1968. Couldn't find anyone running for office I could vote for on the national, state or local ticket.
Just Jack Posted November 8, 2010 Posted November 8, 2010 Didn't vote for the first time since 1968. Couldn't find anyone running for office I could vote for on the national, state or local ticket. Then I'll tell you the same thing we told BF years ago. You can not complain about any policies and laws enacted the next two years.
tennesseeboy Posted November 8, 2010 Posted November 8, 2010 sure I can. There wasn't one person on any of the tickets I have any confidence in handling the economy, the health care system, the stupid wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I certainly wasn't going to have a part in putting any of these morons in. When there is someone to vote for who has the interests of the people in mind, I'll vote for him or her.
Nanker Posted November 8, 2010 Posted November 8, 2010 I voted. Interesting to see who hasn't claimed to have voted. Conner
Booster4324 Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Not until they add a "None of the Above" option. Link
KD in CA Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Link I'm a little disappointed there wasn't a Montgomery Brewster reference in that link.
Recommended Posts