• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

With eye on 2016, Jeb Bush resigns from all boards

Perotista said:
Exactly, this country is in the habit of voting for the lesser of two evils or as I like to say. The least worst candidate. The problem is when voting for the least worst candidate, you still end up with a bad winner. The two major parties push the line when it comes to voting for third party candidates that it is a wasted vote, the third party candidate cannot win. But I think voting for a Republican or Democrat is a wasted vote, you are voting for business as usual regardless of that they say or the rhetoric they spout.

My beliefs have led me to vote third party in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections. Perhaps if more voters would vote for whom they like, for whom they think would make the best president. Maybe, just maybe the two major parties would offer up better candidates. But then again, I doubt it.
Click to expand...

I don't think that we are going to get better candidates until start doing their jobs properly again and stop thinking that they are there to "make a difference".... Most people don't follow politics like we do in here, and as such make their decisions based on what an reader on FNC, or CNN say, couple that with the ads that blatantly lie, and you have horribly misinformed voters...Hell, just look around here. How many posters in here just spout talking point crap, and when pressed, disappear?

Someone said it before, and I agree, we are becoming Idiocracy.
 
j-mac said:
I don't think that we are going to get better candidates until start doing their jobs properly again and stop thinking that they are there to "make a difference".... Most people don't follow politics like we do in here, and as such make their decisions based on what an reader on FNC, or CNN say, couple that with the ads that blatantly lie, and you have horribly misinformed voters...Hell, just look around here. How many posters in here just spout talking point crap, and when pressed, disappear?

Someone said it before, and I agree, we are becoming Idiocracy.
Click to expand...

Yep, campaign slogans are so important. A catchy slogan that can fit on a bumper sticker is worth millions of votes. I agree, elections today are won by the candidate who lies the best and can get the most people to believe his lies. Truth, solutions to problems, visions, ideas, do not have any place in today's political campaigns. Today's campaigns are designed to make the voter hate the other guy a little bit more than they hate you. It is all about divide and conquer.

Then when it comes time to govern, since those who won have divided us so much in order to win, they wonder why they can't govern. Why so many people are dead set against them regardless of what they try to do. Hate boils to the surface. But it is the candidates and those elected own fault.
 
Perotista said:
I would say the odds right now are 9-1 Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. Bush on the other hand is iffy. Probably no better than a 20% chance as of today that he will win the Republican nomination.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - 2016 Democratic Presidential Nomination

So if Jeb and Hillary do wind up at the two major political party's nominees, whom would you vote for? In Georgia we usually have third party choices like the Libertarians, the Constitutional Party and sometimes the Green Party. Would you vote third party or not vote at all?
Click to expand...

I agree that Hilary is far more likely to be the D than Jeb is to be the R

In the event that they both make it to the general, I'd vote third party like last time - voted for Dr Jill Stein because I didn't want more Obama or Romney. my political minded friends considered it a wasted vote but oh well
 
Bethlehem Bill said:
I agree that Hilary is far more likely to be the D than Jeb is to be the R

In the event that they both make it to the general, I'd vote third party like last time - voted for Dr Jill Stein because I didn't want more Obama or Romney. my political minded friends considered it a wasted vote but oh well
Click to expand...

I don't and I say good for you. I voted for Gary Johnson. For me a wasted vote was one cast for either Romney or Obama. They were voting for business as usual.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Really? Another Bush, possibly another Clinton? What has happened to this great nation? Is this the best out of all the people in this country we can do? Or are we just subjects to a ruling class elite who could give a **** about you or me?


Sad reality is, there are those cheering for these royals and thier race for power.
Click to expand...

Well said. The money behind campaigns and PACs is running this nation. The last name is the other factor. Our nation has become too partisan to think for ourselves.
 
Perotista said:
Yep, campaign slogans are so important. A catchy slogan that can fit on a bumper sticker is worth millions of votes. I agree, elections today are won by the candidate who lies the best and can get the most people to believe his lies. Truth, solutions to problems, visions, ideas, do not have any place in today's political campaigns. Today's campaigns are designed to make the voter hate the other guy a little bit more than they hate you. It is all about divide and conquer.

Then when it comes time to govern, since those who won have divided us so much in order to win, they wonder why they can't govern. Why so many people are dead set against them regardless of what they try to do. Hate boils to the surface. But it is the candidates and those elected own fault.
Click to expand...

The next Presidential candidate should run on the idea of Hope and Change plus there should also be a dialogue on race in the country.

On the other hand it might also be a time to get serious.
 
Perotista said:
As of this point in time, I do not think Christie is going anywhere.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I think Christie's chances took a nose dive when he overplayed his act in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, going out of his way to appear centrist.
 
j-mac said:
Ours is a country of voting for the lesser of two evils, has been for a long time...Myself, I would vote for Bush, but I damned sure wouldn't like it....We have to find a way to break this progressive lurch in our society...Whether Republican, or Democrat, progressivism is killing this country.
Click to expand...

The only long term solution to the problem would be congressional term limits. There would be enough turnover in congress to keep politicians closer to mainstream Americans in philosophy. It would take a constitutional amendment.
 
ObamacareFail said:
The only long term solution to the problem would be congressional term limits. There would be enough turnover in congress to keep politicians closer to mainstream Americans in philosophy. It would take a constitutional amendment.
Click to expand...

Term limits incentivize corruption.
 
Jack Hays said:
Term limits incentivize corruption.
Click to expand...

They incentivize somewhat incoherent political choices (due to somewhat quick turnover), but I'm not sure I agree that it incentivizes corruption to an equal or greater extent than without.
 
Fiddytree said:
They incentivize somewhat incoherent political choices (due to somewhat quick turnover), but I'm not sure I agree that it incentivizes corruption to an equal or greater extent than without.
Click to expand...

Office holders who know they must leave in x years are vulnerable to hints (or outright offers) of future lucrative employment or consulting consideration.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Agreed. I think Christie's chances took a nose dive when he overplayed his act in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, going out of his way to appear centrist.
Click to expand...

Actually I think bridgegate is what is doing him in. That the possibility of a couple of more scandals lurking in the wings.
 
Jack Hays said:
Term limits incentivize corruption.
Click to expand...

The opposite is true. Without term limits, you have entrenched power. Once a senator or congressman has served a few terms, they build up a financial war chest and group of donors that is hard to break. Newcomers stand little to no chance in most cases. Entrenched power incentivizes corruption.
 
Perotista said:
Actually I think bridgegate is what is doing him in. That the possibility of a couple of more scandals lurking in the wings.
Click to expand...

I think bridgegate was just the last straw.
 
ObamacareFail said:
The opposite is true. Without term limits, you have entrenched power. Once a senator or congressman has served a few terms, they build up a financial war chest and group of donors that is hard to break. Newcomers stand little to no chance in most cases. Entrenched power incentivizes corruption.
Click to expand...

I must disagree. An incumbent in a safe seat has less incentive to put himself/herself up for sale.
 
Jack Hays said:
I must disagree. An incumbent in a safe seat has less incentive to put himself/herself up for sale.
Click to expand...

We will have to disagree on that one. It is the long time incumbents are are committing the corruption. Just look at Charles Rangel and Nancy Pelosi.
 
ObamacareFail said:
We will have to disagree on that one. It is the long time incumbents are are committing the corruption. Just look at Charles Rangel and Nancy Pelosi.
Click to expand...

And the first termer from Staten Island is off to prison. To say that term limits incentivize corruption is not to say that lack of limits eliminates corruption.
 
Jack Hays said:
And the first termer from Staten Island is off to prison. To say that term limits incentivize corruption is not to say that lack of limits eliminates corruption.
Click to expand...

Good! Now when are Rangel, Pelosi, and others going to prison as well? Why is McCain still a Senator? Remember the Keating Five? Why did not Barney Frank go to prison when his house was used as a male prostitution bordello?
 
ObamacareFail said:
Good! Now when are Rangel, Pelosi, and others going to prison as well? Why is McCain still a Senator? Remember the Keating Five? Why did not Barney Frank go to prison when his house was used as a male prostitution bordello?
Click to expand...

McCain was not guilty of anything.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I think bridgegate was just the last straw.
Click to expand...

Perhaps among Republicans, but independents like the idea of across the aisle cooperation. It is among independents that Christie has dropped the most.
 
Perotista said:
Perhaps among Republicans, but independents like the idea of across the aisle cooperation. It is among independents that Christie has dropped the most.
Click to expand...

I am a conservative independent. And I do like the idea of across the aisle cooperation.....just not to the point where all values the republican party claims to represent are compromised for the sake of "bipartisanship".
 
It appears all we can do is elect Bushes and Clintons. We need something else.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I am a conservative independent. And I do like the idea of across the aisle cooperation.....just not to the point where all values the republican party claims to represent are compromised for the sake of "bipartisanship".
Click to expand...

I can understand that. But sometimes if one gains 50% of the value one wants and stand for is better than nothing at all. Your pragmatic presidents understood this. Of course there are some issues where one wouldn't compromise, so it all depends on the issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom