Page 21 of 27 FirstFirst ... 111617181920212223242526 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 420 of 536
  1. solarus's Avatar
    Posts
    554 Posts
    Global Posts
    575 Global Posts
    #401  
    Quote Originally Posted by dianehelen View Post
    Yep Super STUPID Majority.. even WITH that, they could NOT get REAL Health Care Reform thru.. I hold my original claim Dems are STUPID and Reps LIE!
    Sometimes, I prefer Lewis Blacks quote "A republican stands up in congress and says 'I GOT A REALLY BAD IDEA!!' and the democrat stands up after him and says 'AND I CAN MAKE IT SHI**IER!!"

    Albeit you could switch who stands up first depending on who is in control of Congress
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #402  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Hey, here's an interesting idea. Let's take the last 3 decades, list off positive changes for the country and see who was President and which party was controlling Congress? Who wants to start?
    Lol. Like we could EVER settle on that list!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #403  
    So if we came out with a 3 party system, would that work? Effectively, do we already have a "third" party? They "moderates"? These are the swing voters. Would carving out that group and making them a 3rd party change anything?

    I'm thinking that not much would be different. The game would still be to see who could successfully court the moderates to get laws passed.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. #404  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Lol. Like we could EVER settle on that list!
    OK, I have my list. Unfortunately it's a blank piece of paper.
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #405  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    OK, I have my list. Unfortunately it's a blank piece of paper.
    I disagree!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. #406  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I disagree!
    ok, let's see your list...

    I submit that for anything "good" they did, the law of unintended consequences produced more than one "bad" to cancel it out.
  7. #407  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    So if we came out with a 3 party system, would that work? Effectively, do we already have a "third" party? They "moderates"? These are the swing voters. Would carving out that group and making them a 3rd party change anything?

    I'm thinking that not much would be different. The game would still be to see who could successfully court the moderates to get laws passed.
    Making a third party isn't going to solve the issue. The REAL problem is the campaign system, that the candidates need to raise so much money to be able to run for offices. They raise money, make promises in exchange for that money and eventually even if they had the best of intentions when they started, those intentions are lost with all the deals they had to make to raise the money needed for their campaign.
  8. #408  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Hey, here's an interesting idea. Let's take the last 3 decades, list off positive changes for the country and see who was President and which party was controlling Congress? Who wants to start?
    The repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" would have been a huge plus if it was not shot down by the "personal freedom and liberty" party.... /irony
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  9. #409  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Making a third party isn't going to solve the issue. The REAL problem is the campaign system, that the candidates need to raise so much money to be able to run for offices. They raise money, make promises in exchange for that money and eventually even if they had the best of intentions when they started, those intentions are lost with all the deals they had to make to raise the money needed for their campaign.
    another reason to choose legislators the way we choose jury members.

    just sayin'
  10. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #410  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Making a third party isn't going to solve the issue. The REAL problem is the campaign system, that the candidates need to raise so much money to be able to run for offices. They raise money, make promises in exchange for that money and eventually even if they had the best of intentions when they started, those intentions are lost with all the deals they had to make to raise the money needed for their campaign.
    Getting elected means getting the word out via media, advertising, signage, slogans, campaign staff, etc. etc. It comes down to he/she who raises the most money wins. So how do you eliminate the special interests groups without losing funding, and therefore losing the election?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  11. JDAustin's Avatar
    Posts
    17 Posts
    Global Posts
    34 Global Posts
    #411  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Making a third party isn't going to solve the issue. The REAL problem is the campaign system, that the candidates need to raise so much money to be able to run for offices. They raise money, make promises in exchange for that money and eventually even if they had the best of intentions when they started, those intentions are lost with all the deals they had to make to raise the money needed for their campaign.
    And how is this different from 100 years ago? 200 years ago? 2000 years ago?

    This is democracy. The alternative is one of the many authoritarian governments that have existed in the past (absolute monarch, ****/Fascismo facism, USSR stalinism, Chinese maoism) and continue to exist today (China, Cuba are there, Venezuela and Russia are on the road there). You cannot have the good that comes with free democratic elections without having the downside people selling their souls to win.
  12. #412  
    Most if not ALL countries that actually elect their leaders do it with a few weeks of campaigning, NOT this endess, money sucking, promise w*h*o*r*e*ing , tv hogging months and months, and months of overkill.

    I am most grateful these days for my TV MUTE button!!
    I have always been a "Phone" person. My love of "Phones" started at an early age. Avatar to the left, is circa 1952, see the sparkle in my lil toddler eyes
    Cell History: Bag Phone, Brick Phone, Various Micro Tacs, Treo's, Centro, the PRE!


    I Pre

  13. #413  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Getting elected means getting the word out via media, advertising, signage, slogans, campaign staff, etc. etc. It comes down to he/she who raises the most money wins. So how do you eliminate the special interests groups without losing funding, and therefore losing the election?
    Perhaps it's time to enforce some equalizers. Limited campaign periods rather than year-long every year campaigns, donation limitations, equal screen time, and how about we see just how well some of these people can acquit themselves in viral campaigns.

    Not sure on how to really fix campaign issues for a Presidential run since the expenses are so high but for the Legislators those things could help out a lot.
  14. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #414  
    Quote Originally Posted by JDAustin View Post
    And how is this different from 100 years ago? 200 years ago? 2000 years ago?

    This is democracy. The alternative is one of the many authoritarian governments that have existed in the past (absolute monarch, ****/Fascismo facism, USSR stalinism, Chinese maoism) and continue to exist today (China, Cuba are there, Venezuela and Russia are on the road there). You cannot have the good that comes with free democratic elections without having the downside people selling their souls to win.
    Thus the problem still remains; when, if ever, are the requests of the people set as the priority, and not the requests of the primary funders (corporate lobbyists, unions, wealthy special interests)?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  15. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #415  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Perhaps it's time to enforce some equalizers. Limited campaign periods rather than year-long every year campaigns, donation limitations, equal screen time, and how about we see just how well some of these people can acquit themselves in viral campaigns.

    Not sure on how to really fix campaign issues for a Presidential run since the expenses are so high but for the Legislators those things could help out a lot.
    I'd add to that list total end-end transparency on who is making donations.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  16. #416  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I'd add to that list total end-end transparency on who is making donations.
    I'll add in some term limits and barring them from becoming lobbyists after they have served their terms...
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #417  
    hoe wee crap. have we just agreed on something?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. #418  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I'd add to that list total end-end transparency on who is making donations.
    That would probably be a part of monitoring donation limits. Part of that could also be enforcing donation limits for candidates based on registered voting residence as well.

    Though just adding it outright for Presidential elections would be useful as well.

    Really with media and technology in this day and age the only huge expense left is travel (once TV broadcast time is regulated) and maybe office space depending on the district. But the Legislative candidates should be able to handle travel inside the state or district they are running for with the exception of Alaska (the place is big and the major population centers spread out). Also forcing a limited campaign period before election means that candidates can take time to setup their campaigns to start during that window instead of needing to spend so much money to try to run them pretty much all year long and in a reactionary form.
  19. #419  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    hoe wee crap. have we just agreed on something?
    Not too hard to believe. I am not the hardcore socialist you like to think I am...
    Last edited by Kenanator; 09/28/2010 at 02:10 PM.
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  20. #420  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    hoe wee crap. have we just agreed on something?
    well we up here in the great white north dont call em repubs and dems,, we call em conservatives, and liberals, with the odd ndper and a few hangers on.
    its much the same here, when we elect a prime minister, we elect his party. Right now, we have a minority government. Which means at any time that the opposition feels strongly enough, they can vote against the govt, creating a Non-Confidence issue. Which essentially brings down the govt.

    Right now the liberals and the ndp are more than a little afraid of doing that, people here are tired of the whole political mess, and it may end up in a majority govt for the conservatives.

    now my own personal feelings on our prime minister is not fit to print. however he is the leader of my country, and as long as he is in charge, i will do as he asks, grudgingly but do it i will.
    to be frank,,, ok ok I’m not frank, lol, to be honest i think a minority govt works pretty well.. stuff gets done for everyone, not just special interest (s) .. but that is just me..
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.

Posting Permissions