Printable View
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevint
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.
An electorate gets the politicians it deserves.
We complain about politicians being self interested and greedy but in reality they only mirror the rest of us.
Percentage-wise the number of altruistic politicians is most likely the same as the number of altruists found in society as a whole.
The downside is that in my 61 years it seems that "vote 'em all out" has been the motto of every election I can remember. Shakespeare said,"the problem is not in our stars Brutus, but in ourselves." Must be something to that. :)
You can't accuse the President of that at least. He has yet to finish one full term in any federal officeQuote:
Originally Posted by nun2sharp
I have no ideaQuote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL
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.
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 -_-
Some perceived down-side, mostly loss of an individual legislators clout and ability to bring the bacon home to the local district, which is part of the problem. Lack of experience, perhaps well illistrated by the current administration in DC.
But, I agree with Bruno. Two terms and goodbye. I personally have no use for career legislators as they tend to feather their own nest at our expense, true at the state and federal level.
If two terms is good enough for the president, it most certainly is good enough for legislators.
I'm with Bruno with this. Two terms and out.
Yet the question is not all that simple. People get exactly those politicians they vote. I'm really surprised how some politicians (at least) here get voted again and again although everyone with even a limited brain capacity can see that they are empty cans. I can easily live with the fact if someone that was not my candidate gets voted, if he/she keeps trying to do his job honestly, but i do not respect those who serve their office for their personal or party's profit.
I think we have to accept that politicians have to make painful decisions as well, and not only decisions we like. If the politicians would just give the people everything what they ask then the country would soon end up in bankrupt just like Greece is doing now. Politicians are not here to make friends but to serve the country and all it's people.
I was a union ironworker for 20 years. I always felt that the local was like a microcosm of society when it came to electing the business agents. If work was plentiful no matter how good or bad the B.A. and his cronies were they were re-elected. If work was scarce the best guy we ever had was outa there.
IME as an ironworker in the gang who progressed to being a foreman on a number of jobs a person's perspective changes when given a modicum of power and responsibility. The same with elected office I think. A friend of mine became B.A. of my home local. After he was in there awhile he changed. Working out in the field and knowing our perspective he had a different point of view in his new post.
He later told me that I couldn't imagine the temptations that the contractors offered in terms of money and other perks. The strength of character to resist the tendency to the arrogance and abuse of power along with the money must be formidable. That is why you can count the really great politicians on one hand. Even then my great pol may be your pick for the biggest bum. For me FDR, Harry Truman and LBJ were my kind of presidents.
Be careful what you wish for.
So who are you going to go vote for to replace them. They guy who wants to dismantle most of govt, the wrestling gal, Ron Paul? You'll wind up with a group of people so polarized if you think nothing gets done in congress now you haven't seen anything.
besides even if you have fresh meat the system is still the same and once these people come up against the lobbyists,graft and corruption you know what the result will be.
Yes everyone wants to reduce Govt until of course they need the services and then they want to know why Govt isn't there for them.
It's all the same political garbage just a new angle on how to get yourself elected.
There sure is, but we'd rather not look the problem square in the face.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
I would gladly vote for Ron Paul if he were running. At least we would start to get some fiscal responsibility. The jokers in there now are spending our great grandchildren's money and their is no end in sight. I say flush em all.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
Read this column here by Gail Collins in the NY Times and you'll understand .... maybe ... why I don't take a lot of this seriously and I'm glad I probably don't have that many years left. Her depiction of what the electorate ...... or the party that is trying to capture the electorate ..... wants would be funny if it wasn't tragic.
Just another media attempt to discredit anyone who is not an insider or handpicked by the party to maintain the status quo.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
You'll see this constantly now until the election.
Now? Political dynasties in USA are as old as the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Miner123
I looked up NYT and they have an equally discrediting piece on the democratic handpicked candidate. And the first thing that I learned about politics in US few years ago is that the money is almost always the deciding factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Miner123
"Money talks and B/S walks." Old USA saying first heard by me 50 years ago and no doubt a lot older than that. True then and even more so now. :boohoo:Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi