Quote:
Originally Posted by ptownrob
While it may relieve high blood pressure to call for throwing all the bums out, our two party system makes such a proposal unworkable. How many of you on the right would vote for the liberal Democrat who is running against the incumbent? I certainly can't imagine any Democrat who would simply vote for the other party to "change out" the entrenched legislature.
And independents wouldn't vote forcefully either. There are many good legislators on both sides, and many bad ones as well. Reality suggests that the system will never change within the status quo. It's been this way since the Federalists and the anti-Federalists.
Why do we think that America could so definitively change the way people think about politics when we can't even speak the same language on these boards? Without a multi-party system, we are condemned to an endless pendulum swing, within another endless pendulum swing, etc., etc.
|
Firs of all, that's why primary elections exist. That's the first shot to get the incumbent out. After that, it becomes a question of guts. Would I vote for someone who is counter to my way of thinking? Yes, as long as the person is not party hack and lapdog! For two years, a change sometimes has great value and eliminates stodgy thinking. The real key is to get them in-and-out before they learn how to get rich playing all of us.
Second of all, if there are good legislators, why is there a composite <20% approval rating?
Can anyone name me five in Congress worth a retirement plan?
There is nothing wrong with the two or multi party system. There is a problem when the party leadership has more power than the voters.