Bipartisan Politics: Does it Hurt America?

ricksfolly · Oct 18, 2010

Goobieman said:
You mean, more precisely, Dems who fear for their re-election are less likely to support legislation that is unpopular with their constituents than Dems who do not fear for their re-election.

Both parties would do it, especially those who have no other life... The realization of not being relevant or needed anymore is a crushing blow.

ricksfolly

Goobieman · Oct 18, 2010

ricksfolly said:
Both parties would do it, especially those who have no other life... The realization of not being relevant or needed anymore is a crushing blow.
ricksfolly

So you agree that the "Dems are more prone to listen to their voters than the Reps because they want to be fair" assertion is false.

Fiddytree · Oct 18, 2010

Ockham said:
6 or 7 party's is one way to look at it. Another is, we as a country of people and voters are too wishy-washy. We need to pick a side - either R or D and stick with it - the problem with this is neither party, were they to gain majority, would listen to the other party's ideas. Bi-partisan views only work when there's a clear majority of one party AND that majority doesn't dismiss the other party as irrelevant. Right now, neither party in a majority would have the ability to listen and take the good idea's of the minority. The reason is our system is sick...

Our system isn't based on civil service or betterment of people or our society - it's based on raising money. At the most basic level - that must be cut out like the cancer it is for anything to improve. Without it, this is all nonsensical rhetoric like "hope and change". Think about it - when a new Senator or House member wins office this November - the first few meetings they have are with lobbyists (and this is both party's folks) and their National Committee members give the new Congresspeople their marching orders for 2011: Raise money for the party. Tell me that's not ****ed up.

We as a public are both "wishy-washy" and partisan. Do not expect to change the public's attitudes with simplistic platitudes.

Government workers are significantly attracted to the idea of civil service and betterment of the people. Money is merely a way to keep it flowing. Lobbyists have their benefits and weaknesses, but I would warn anyone not to bash lobbyists so readily. Lobbyists are not just a detriment, but also one of the benefits of our democracy, allowing a political organization to possibly have disproportionate amount of influence in politics in order to ensure the rights and impact policy for minorities and majorities alike.

ricksfolly · Oct 18, 2010

Fiddytree said:
We as a public are both "wishy-washy" and partisan. Do not expect to change the public's attitudes with simplistic platitudes.

Government workers are significantly attracted to the idea of civil service and betterment of the people. Lobbyists have their benefits and weaknesses, but I would warn anyone not to bash lobbyists so readily. Lobbyists are not just a detriment, but also one of the benefits of our democracy,

CS is also a permanent job with all the perks.

I agree that lobbyists are definitely needed because they have a real understanding of the companies they represent, but they are also subject to bribes and other perks.

ricksfolly

Coronado · Oct 18, 2010

ricksfolly said:
I agree that lobbyists are definitely needed because they have a real understanding of the companies they represent, but they are also subject to bribes and other perks.

ricksfolly

Why the hell would anyone want to bribe a lobbyist?

marduc · Oct 18, 2010

Coronado said:
Why the hell would anyone want to bribe a lobbyist?

trickle down economics?

Ockham · Oct 18, 2010

Fiddytree said:
We as a public are both "wishy-washy" and partisan. Do not expect to change the public's attitudes with simplistic platitudes.

That's what I said - which is why picking one of two instead of 1 of 7 is an easier solution. Restating what I obviously said doesn't make you look smart it makes your words redundant.

Fiddytree said:
Government workers are significantly attracted to the idea of civil service and betterment of the people.

Talk about simplistic --- Government workers are attracted to jobs they can keep and retire from with full benefits with high pay. You're naive view of betterment of the people is laughable.

Fiddytree said:
Money is merely a way to keep it flowing. Lobbyists have their benefits and weaknesses, but I would warn anyone not to bash lobbyists so readily. Lobbyists are not just a detriment, but also one of the benefits of our democracy, allowing a political organization to possibly have disproportionate amount of influence in politics in order to ensure the rights and impact policy for minorities and majorities alike.

When junior congresspeople's jobs for the first two years is raising money, that's not for the betterment of anyone but their re-election campaign. Talk about simplistic and naive platitudes... :lamo

Bipartisan Politics: Does it Hurt America?