Can ANYBODY fix our political system?

[Anagram]

But look what is happening at the Presidential level. The Democrats had a choice or did they? The Party bosses had already picked their candidate and assigned all the super delegates to her and underminded all the others with everything they had.

What the DNC did wasn't good, but people could've still voted for Sanders if they wanted. The Superdelegates didn't determine result.

The GOP had a choice but they don't like the one the people chose and they are doing their damndest to undermine him.

I don't see the problem with this at all either. Donald Trump is very different policy wise than most Republicans. If the people want him that's great, but no Republican should feel obligated to support him.

We honestly don't have much say in the process or who governs us at all. Most newcomers are shut out early on and the Party operatives make sure they gain no traction. And they pretty well hand pick those they intend to allow into the club.

And why wouldn't this continue to happen? Why wouldn't the people in power continue to favor other people like them?

 

[Fishking]

Well start shooting at the government then and let us all know how it turns out.

As much as I defend the second amendment, and revolution as a proper and necessary tool of the People, in our current state a successful revolution is all but impossible. The US government isn't sitting across an ocean with only wind powered ships to clear the distance. It's right here, and the tech is different, and the monitoring is different, and the policing is different, the scales of force are different, the propaganda is different. It's a HUGE mountain to climb and I don't think that, at this time, it can be pulled off.

You assume that all government entities would be of one mind against the people. For example, policing is done at the state level and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be on board with the federal. That's the majority of the government's power to monitor the people, right there.

 

[AlbqOwl]

What the DNC did wasn't good, but people could've still voted for Sanders if they wanted. The Superdelegates didn't determine result.



I don't see the problem with this at all either. Donald Trump is very different policy wise than most Republicans. If the people want him that's great, but no Republican should feel obligated to support him.



And why wouldn't this continue to happen? Why wouldn't the people in power continue to favor other people like them?

If you don't see a problem with a rigged system, power to you. But it is rigged which is why they hold all the ower and we really have very little

 

[Anagram]

If you don't see a problem with a rigged system, power to you. But it is rigged which is why they hold all the ower and we really have very little

We hold all of it, we just don't necessarily use it. If you don't change the electorate, any system is going to run into these same problems.

 

[AGENT J]

That is why I will vote for Trump. I know he is a flawed candidate, but so is Hillary And Trump is the ONLY one left standing who has any chance at all to shake up the status quo. And that is exactly why both major parties are trying to derail him even if it means electing Hillary. They care much more about maintaining their power and the status quo than they care about us.

Ill could never vote for trump, while I agree with you, he can in fact shake up the status quo "HE" isn't worth the risk. But to each their own, like I said IMO who cares if the status quo of the car is shaken up if the car has 4 flat tires, broken windows and a locked up engine. no way!

I just can't do it and believe me I WANT TO, I want a candidate the will shake up the system and change it but not a candidate that could break it and leave it unable to be fixed in any direction. I also can't come up with one negative against salary that trump doesn't also have. I view it has electing Hillary is the same old same old and its like playing with and defusing our largest bomb (a bunker buster) and i don't want that but its better than electing trump which is electing someone just as dishonest, manipulative and hypocritical as any politician if not worse. But with him its like playing with and defusing a nuclear bomb. One we can definitely rebuild from the other maybe not.

but like I said, thats me, to each their own.

 

[blackjack50]

First of all we the people are 300 million people with 300 million guns no matter how we split, the entire military is only 500,000. Second of all the military would divide as well, those on the side of the constitution and those on the side of the corrupt government. It would never be the people against an undivided military. In fact the military siding with the people would be the driving force and the power behind the coup.

You would only have to shoot a few politicians really.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

 

[polgara]

Thanks polgara and absolutely. This is what the Founders intended the federal government to be in the first place. But we were warned that as soon as those in government found they could vote themselves benefit using our money, it would start going downhill fast. I can't imagine what kind of grass roots pressure would be necessary to get such an amendment passed, but I sure would be willing to lead the charge in my area.

Knowing how many in this area agree with you, I'll join you! :thumbs: Kasich, our Governor, has been criss-crossing the country for a long time trying to get a majority of States to agree to a Balanced Budget Amendment to our Constitution, so maybe that will also get handled. We can't continue adding to our debt willy-nilly, but some States don't seem to be worried about their debt - maybe thinking the Federal government will bail them out? That sure won't seem fair to those who try to be fiscally responsible, but if a majority of States join in to pass such an amendment, would any be permitted to opt out? Who knows?

 

[Fishking]

Alright, well start 'er up and let's see how successful it is then. Yes? Or is this just a "talk the talk, but only talk" sort of thing?

You don't just "start 'er up". What turns out to be the catalyst is never predictable. The Arab Spring started with some nobody setting himself on fire in Tunisia. You're conflating what is possible with how does it start.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

Could you name someone you believe actually could fix our political system and get things going back in a positive direction?

Can be somebody running, somebody already in office, a former politician, someone who has never run and/or served... the field is wide open for this question. In an ideal world, if you could pick the one person capable of doing good (must be alive and not so old that they are not mentally capable, is the only restriction), who would that person be?

It'll never change until we get money out of politics. ALL money.

How we accomplish that is the hard part. Anyone got any ideas?

 

[Fishking]

Theres no one person IMO, even a great present has to deal with the gridlock in the houses etc. Only we the people can do it and it will take time. Unfortunately there is no quick fix. We have to get away from the two party system and people have to be more active in all politics all the time. not just on voting day for the president. The overall system itself isnt really bad, its the people we give the keys to. We can complain about how what bad drivers they are but we keep giving them the keys.

oooops they run a stop sign . .its ok because we like their policy on guns . . . oooops they get a DUI . . . its ok because we like their policy on abortion . . . ooooops they do a hit and run . . . its ok because I dont think they cater to a group I dont like . . .etce . . .etc

if we dont break the two party system then we'll need rules to break it, no more "voting majorities" in the houses or some system that at least allows voting to happen in away people just have to vote yes or no instead of positioning all the time. And the other rules that would probably be good is rules on the construction of bills. No bill about gay rights, or clean energy, or coal grant should contain things like infrastructure spending, military spending, education finance. THATS ****ING RETARDED! . . oooo. sorry . . i vented for a second lol Bills should be ONE main issue and RELATED sub issues are allowed. Not totally different ones. Anyway that would be a start IMO.

We agree on something.

 

[AlbqOwl]

We hold all of it, we just don't necessarily use it. If you don't change the electorate, any system is going to run into these same problems.

I wish I could be as optimistic as you. I'm afraid I can't be.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Knowing how many in this area agree with you, I'll join you! :thumbs: Kasich, our Governor, has been criss-crossing the country for a long time trying to get a majority of States to agree to a Balanced Budget Amendment to our Constitution, so maybe that will also get handled. We can't continue adding to our debt willy-nilly, but some States don't seem to be worried about their debt - maybe thinking the Federal government will bail them out? That sure won't seem fair to those who try to be fiscally responsible, but if a majority of States join in to pass such an amendment, would any be permitted to opt out? Who knows?

Most state laws do require the state to have a balanced budget. And there is no reason whatsoever that the federal government cannot operate on a balanced budget.but there is absolutely no incentive for the permanent political class to do so. They figure they'll have theirs and be long gone before it all comes apart. And we all know whoever is holding the bag at the time it happens will get the blame, not those who used it to their advantage over many decades. Leftists still blame George W. Bush for the 2008 housing bubble crash even though he himself did his best to sound the alarm and he had very little to do with it. He does share some of the blame for not vetoing the excessive spending bills Congress sent him but it takes a very tough President to incur the wrath if they actually do their job in that regard.