- Joined
- Oct 21, 2015
- Messages
- 53,813
- Reaction score
- 10,864
- Location
- Kentucky
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Just wondering
Just wondering
Wow, this is one hell of a thought provoking poll. I keep thinking about it, and wondering what the answer is. I think I decided that we make them extremists. They're always in self preservation mode (and donation collecting mode), which makes them cease to be rational beings, and makes them blow whichever way the wind and money tells them to.
There is no alternative, Politicians make People pissed off and extremists... You get Dumb ignorant people like Nancy Pelosi who knows nothing about guns, telling us what we need and do not need?
Thats like when I have a truck open I am diagnosing the circuit boards, doing voltage reading, testing scr's , diodes, etc. and some retard walks up and gives me his thoughts on whats wrong. Then they stare in some zombified state awaiting a reply as if they solved the cause and effect of the universe...
Once working on an all electric Forklift a guy asked if I was changing the spark plugs? This I fear is what we have in some fields in congress!
There is no alternative, Politicians make People pissed off and extremists... You get Dumb ignorant people like Nancy Pelosi who knows nothing about guns, telling us what we need and do not need?
Thats like when I have a truck open I am diagnosing the circuit boards, doing voltage reading, testing scr's , diodes, etc. and some retard walks up and gives me his thoughts on whats wrong. Then they stare in some zombified state awaiting a reply as if they solved the cause and effect of the universe...
Once working on an all electric Forklift a guy asked if I was changing the spark plugs? This I fear is what we have in some fields in congress!
Politicians know they only have to appeal to the extremes because the people in the middle have no choice but to follow one of the two available choices. So they always go extreme in their views to appeal to the fanatical fringes and the rest of us are screwed.
Which is one reason that I am for opening up all Party Primaries to all voters, especially though voters not affiliated directly with any Party. That would push especially the two main Parties to having to consider those in the middle when campaigning as their Party's Candidate.
Which really doesn't matter because third parties have virtually no chance whatsoever of winning the general election, regardless of the primaries. Besides, there aren't any worthwhile third parties out there IMO, they're all virtually identical to either the Republicans or Democrats on the vast majority of issues, with one or two that they blow completely out of proportion. If you're a one-issue voter, maybe that appeals to you, but for most of us who care about a broad spectrum of issues, third parties are pointless.
Which is why it would end up forcing the two major Parties to become concerned about those who do not identify as with any Party. Independent voters (those who don't identify as any Party) are more likely to choose a more moderate candidate than Party members, especially when it comes to the two major Parties. Third Parties would not benefit with such a system, but they also would not change as much except maybe to attract the more extreme, one issue or just a few issues voters from the major Parties.
No it wouldn't, unless you want to stop the major parties from running at all, which simply won't happen. They have the money, they have the built-in loyalty and they have the influence to get elected where no third party does, or likely ever will. The vast majority of self-identified independent voters still vote for one of the major parties in the end. They know that keeping the lesser of the two evils out of office is more important than making an ultimately impotent political statement.
Which is one reason that I am for opening up all Party Primaries to all voters, especially though voters not affiliated directly with any Party. That would push especially the two main Parties to having to consider those in the middle when campaigning as their Party's Candidate.
I think that the primaries should be ran and paid for by the political parties and not the gov't.
I'm not talking about influencing through Third Parties at all, so I don't understand why you keep bringing them up. That has nothing whatsoever to do with the purpose of opening up all Primaries to anyone, including those outside your own Party. What this would do is force the candidates in the Major Parties to have to consider that those voting for a candidate to represent their Party are not just those within their Party. It could even be limited to each voter can vote in any Primary, but only one Primary. This could reduce the likelihood that a large group from the opposing Party would vote for a "bad" candidate from that Party just to rig the elections.
Hey, I'm in an open primary state, I can vote for anyone I want from any party I want. But it doesn't seem to be getting us better candidates, even in the major two, because the whole political system is inherently broken. Good people don't run. Good people can't win. It's the nature of the system.
There is evidence that both McCain and Romney each got nominated mainly because of open primary states, and each are considered much more moderate candidates than many others we have seen run in the Republican Party. It won't be a cure-all for the system. It likely would only be a small improvement. But it could help, especially if implemented everywhere instead of just a few states.
And McCain and Romney are both crap. They are career political liars. I want better than what we have in Washington D.C.
Great man theory, or the idea that all of history is the result of visionatlry individuals moving their society forward, is simply not an accurate view of reality. Leaders are ultimately the product of their times, and in a representative government like ours, this is only more accurate; someone born into their position has a luxury of eccentricity that elected officials lack.
Trump did not create his followers, nor did Hillary make the DNC susceptible to corruption. They both took advantage of structures and cultural undertones that are largely our own creation, as do all politicians. We have made the bed we currently lie in, and as long as we blame the tip of the iceberg for our titanic issues of partisanship, we won't make any progress towards un-****ing our nation.
That's a different argument altogether. Very few "good" people/candidates even want to become politicians. If they aren't on a ballot anywhere, then it would be hard to get them elected. You could potentially push for a writein effort, but that would take far more effort than we have ever seen anyone make towards even going outside the Two Parties, especially if talking about getting someone to Washington. At the same time, it would be difficult to actually know how legal it would be to writein someone who did not actually express any desire to do the job to begin with (some states don't even have writein as an option). (And I realize that was a tangent.)
So it just isn't that easy when it comes to politics. Who knows though? If insanity really is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, then it seems to me it would be a good idea to change the way we elect our leaders. It is not a good idea though to make huge changes, so this just seems like something that could pave the way to better options.
The problem is, politicians need the political machine more than they need the voters. They know the majority of voters are idiots. They just need to kiss babies and kiss asses to get votes, say the things that the people want to hear, whether there's any way to give it to them or not. If you notice, Trump didn't push religion until after the primaries, then he went full religious retard to get the far-right support he needed. The machine didn't matter until he needed their influence to get the full vote. We're just never going to get better politicians until we get better people. We get the stupidity we deserve and I, for one, am sick of it.