Results 41 to 50 of 50
Thread: Vote or stfu
-
10-30-12, 04:36 PM #41
Re: Vote or stfu
I could get behind something along the lines of requiring 66% or more of the popular vote. That would ensure that someone wasn't just being re-elected because of their party, because it would take people from the "other side" to keep them in office. That would ensure that the only ones able to stay after the first few terms would be the ones that were actually effective for their constituents.
~Morningfrost
-
10-30-12, 04:44 PM #42
Re: Vote or stfu
Other than tarp, the regulation to regulate investing which hasn't helped do anything and the affordable health care act. Name another groundbreaking piece of legislation that got passed in the last 10 years that affects virtually the majority in the United States. Because honestly you won't be able to find one. Other than some miscellaneous and routine bullshit miniscule legislation. Our tax regulation needs overall, our military budget needs serious review, our national infrastructure needs hauling to say the least and quite a few other pressing matters. However because you have people worried about keeping power, income and status. The majority of the time shit doesn't get done.
Sent from my Motorola Photon Cannon!"And the hits just keep on coming." - Tom Cruise, A Few Good Men
-
10-30-12, 04:50 PM #43
Re: Vote or stfu
Being a leader is a duty not a career. I am all for extreme term limits in most offices of the government with some providing re-eligibility after X terms or years. This way a politician knows they have basically one shot at it, and with that I believe most would make the most of it.
I personally like the way George Carlin sees it, surely this is been posted a thousand times already. Though I'll be voting for a libertarian candidate in hopes that we'll see enough voter turn out to take 3rd parties more seriously next election. (Yeah I know this has been a pipe dream for many decades now)
-
10-30-12, 06:29 PM #44
Re: Vote or stfu
I still haven't heard a compelling argument for term limits. Not one. Basically it seems to boil down to "give new people a chance." Well you know what, we already have a procedure for that. It's called voting and primaries. Congresspeople and Congress itself are viewed in a unique manner. For the most part, people like their congresspeople, which is why they got elected and get reelected, but they hate the Congress as a whole. Term limits don't fix any problems that aren't already able to be fixed, what they are there for is to get rid of other people's representatives that you don't like. Term limits will only create more gridlock and make our Congress even slower and more inefficient by tossing out all the people who know what to do and putting in greenhorns, who have to figure out the system and everything.
-
-
-
- Join Date
- 02-13-07
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX
- Posts
- 42,785
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
10-30-12, 06:53 PM #47Re: Vote or stfu
Just cap bribes, I mean campaign contributions, and corporate handouts and then you will have politicians doing it for the job instead of the paycheck. Problem solved.
deathgodusmc liked this post
-
10-30-12, 06:54 PM #48
Re: Vote or stfu
-
10-30-12, 06:59 PM #49
Re: Vote or stfu
I wholeheartedly agree. I'd prefer publicly-financed, but I'd take this, too.
Uh, Civil is on my side of the fence on this one. And it doesn't change the fact that the only argument so far has been "we need new people and we don't want to have to vote them out!"
-
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks