Thread: Would there be a down side to voting all incumbents out?

Sure, it's only a theoretical, but I've been trying to think today if there would be any negatives to all incumbents being voted out of office at the state and federal level, all the way up to the president. A national wave of unified, rash, reactionary fervor where voters quite simply voted for anyone other than an incumbent.

Irrational and irresponsible, maybe, but what would the downside be if such voter behavior was the norm? How would our country be different?

Chris L

I cant see a downside other than the loss of Ron Paul. The upside would be comparable to a clogged toilet finally flushing. Out goes the bad and in comes the clean.There are too many making a "career" out of their supposed "public service".

Yes there would be! Those voted in.

Originally Posted by kevint

Yes there would be! Those voted in.

That would be the good part, a great many unaccustomed to the pomp, privilege and payoffs! And as soon as they got dirty we could flush the political toilet again.

TBH, I think thats what we need over here as well. All three of the main parties are just as bad as each other, all have been milking the expenses gravy train as much as possible, and all will lie through their teeth to get hold of some power.

I know Camerons only been in power a few weeks, and I do want to give the guy a chance to prove himself, but I'm pretty disenfranchised with the whole thing.

Its getting kinda old now..!

really? The things that should be done -not saying I know exactly what they are- but I do believe those things which must be done to make things in the world better will require extreme sacrifice from each and every one us. Such will never happen until it is forced upon us / become unavoidable.

Just like the drug addict, alcoholic who must hit rock bottom before (s)he realizes the harm they do. This is more like switching from whiskey to vodka or maybe beer if things went really well.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

There are too many making a "career" out of their supposed "public service".

You can't accuse the President of that at least. He has yet to finish one full term in any federal office

Originally Posted by ChrisL

but what would the downside be if such voter behavior was the norm? How would our country be different?

I have no idea

Personally I think no politician should serve more than 2 terms in any office. There are far too many politicians who have turned their elected position into their personal fiefdom through political maneuvering.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Personally I think no politician should serve more than 2 terms in any office. There are far too many politicians who have turned their elected position into their personal fiefdom through political maneuvering.

And now in some instances their children or other family members are starting to take their place or run for other offices. It's like royalty all over again.

It really would not matter. There would be a period of time during which the country would suffer because all these freshman politicians would need to first figure out how the machine works, set up all-new "Old Boys" networks, etc., before they could even begin to govern. Then it would just be business as usual. Same old, same old with new faces.

There was a joke that made the rounds about 45 years ago that seems more sad than funny:

The local paper printed an article that stated "Half the politicians in this city are dishonest and corrupt." Thoroughly incensed, every single politician called the newspaper's editor, threatening to sue for libel if the paper did not print a retraction. The very next morning, the paper published "The article we printed yesterday was in error. Half the politicians in this city are not dishonest and corrupt."

And so it goes.
Namaste,
Morty -_-