Winston
Platinum Member
.
Regarding senators, it was not the governor that selected the senators, it was the state legislatures. Forcing that appointment process to be approved by the governor, with the requirement of a supermajority from the state legislature, should alleviate the problem of backroom dealings that you addressed. Additional protection could come from Mason's proposal, that no congressional delegate or senator serve subsequent terms. Your complaint about backscratching ignores the reality, that under the status quo congressional representatives actively solicit that backscratching for the purpose of fund raising
But your final paragraph morphs into a partisan rant that eloquently demonstrates the "ignorance" that you attempt to complain about. A president, like a CEO, has one major responsibility. In effect, they are a cheerleader, first and foremost. Regardless of any accomplishment that you wish to attribute to Trump, from the very beginning of his campaign to the catastrophic end, he divided this nation. Leaders unite, they do not divide. Reagan, as much as I opposed his positions, bought this nation together and performed the cheerleading function to great effect. Bush Jr., same thing, he united this nation after 9/11 even though he was put into office after a contentious election.
Most presidential scholars rate Buchanan as the worst president in history. Why? Because he did precisely what Trump did, he divided this nation further at a time when it was already fracturing. I have no doubt, he will displace Buchanan as the worst president in history. And the bit about Biden accomplishing little while enriching himself is laughable. Almost every senator, and dozens of representatives, have a much higher net worth than Biden. Trump, on the other hand, refused to divest himself from his business, actively sought to use his position to enrich himself and family members, and completely weaponized the justice department like it was his personal goon squad.
Well, it appears we agree with how to handle the press. The power of the consumer can alleviate the problem of the press, but how can we educate the consumer? The simple solution is through our public education system and yet that is just one of the many points of contention between the two opposing factions that dominate the American public. Our society has degraded to the point that we can't even agree as to what should be taught in our schools. State legislatures are taking the unprecedented step of actually banning certain concepts from being taught. That is indicative of a despotic government, not a democracy.I want to address a few things here. First, the two candidate bit, which is due to our two party system and the inability of a third party to make a significant impact other than to be the "spoiler" as it were, Teddy Roosevelt or Ross Perot, the only thing either achieved was to swing the election to Wilson and Clinton. And they were the most successful third party candidates in our history. Teddy probably did it on purpose.
But the problem begins with a lack of voter participation, especially in the primaries. Republican efforts to further restrict access to voting will only exacerbate the problem. But in the status quo, only the motivated base bothers to vote in primaries. So the primary winner is usually the person furthest to the left or the right. Then they have to swing to the middle. If there was greater participation during the primaries that problem could be curtailed. Maybe open primaries could be the answer. But then you have yahoos who would attempt to sabotage a particular candidate. Which points to a deeper problem, many voters see this as a damn game instead of the serious business that it is.
Now, to the test. Actually, there is one group of voters that have already passed a test. Quite frankly, from some of the posts I see here, a test that many posters could not pass. The citizenship test and naturalized citizens. And yeah, if someone can't pass that test they probably should not be eligible to vote, for at least two years. You get one shot, and 60% is passing.
But one of our biggest problem is the Senate. The founders never intended for Senators to be elected, and they should not be. The job of a representative is to represent their district. But a senator's job is to seek the best solution for the country, not necessarily their state. When elected, they are dependent on their constituents, and there in lies the problem. From the nomination of justices, to something as important as an infrastructure bill, for the last decade the Senate has been little more than a cesspool. Time we revoked the 17th amendment.
And since I am on the subject, George Mason argued quite forcible, that no member of Congress should be eligible for re-election. I am not advocating term limits, a senator or a representative can be elected as many times as they can win, they just can't serve back to back terms. The founders never intended for Congress to be filled with "professional" politicians. It was meant to be a "citizens council". Today, representatives and senators are little more than over-payed telemarketers. They spend hours and hours each week attempting to raise money for their re-election. Time for that to end.
Finally, to the press. The solution is simple, albeit probably impossible. When the press was limited to newspaper journalist and three television networks they maintained a type of gentleman's agreement, certain things were off limits when it came to politicians. In today's environment a Kennedy, or a Eisenhower, or even a Roosevelt, could have never negotiated through the incessant press. The solution is for the consumer to kick these asshole, and quite honestly, worthless partisan news sites, to the curb. When they violate that gentleman's agreement from back in the day, consumers boycott them and their advertisers.
I'll start of with the last part of your statement first. What can you do to the press? Nothing except quit buying their papers, going to their news sites or blogs. But the government can't do a thing to them under our Constitution which as I previously mentioned, cannot be changed. Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are two things that will never be amended in this document.
The Senate was designed to give states equal power unlike the House that has one representative for X amount of people. That was to insure we don't have mob rule in our federal government and we don't have a pure democracy. We are a republic. It's also the reason for electoral colleges. I'd rather the people pick the Senators instead of the Governors. We have enough back room deals and back scratchingh as it is. We don't need to open the doors to more.
The easier you make it to vote, the more stupid and politically ignorant voters you will draw in. This last election was a perfect example. Donald Trump was the best President we've had since Reagan, and he was voted out and replaced with a dementia patient? Even his own party wanted to strip him of exclusive powers over our nuclear arms because his mental condition is so concerning. The guy has used his political positions to enrich his family, his son was under FBI investigation for a matter he too was involved in, he spent nearly a half-century in the federal government and accomplished nothing, and people voted for him over a very successful President? That can only happen if you have a bunch of stupid and politically ignorant voters which Democrats are doing everything in their power to try and keep it that way, because stupid people and the politically ignorant will most always vote Democrat.
Regarding senators, it was not the governor that selected the senators, it was the state legislatures. Forcing that appointment process to be approved by the governor, with the requirement of a supermajority from the state legislature, should alleviate the problem of backroom dealings that you addressed. Additional protection could come from Mason's proposal, that no congressional delegate or senator serve subsequent terms. Your complaint about backscratching ignores the reality, that under the status quo congressional representatives actively solicit that backscratching for the purpose of fund raising
But your final paragraph morphs into a partisan rant that eloquently demonstrates the "ignorance" that you attempt to complain about. A president, like a CEO, has one major responsibility. In effect, they are a cheerleader, first and foremost. Regardless of any accomplishment that you wish to attribute to Trump, from the very beginning of his campaign to the catastrophic end, he divided this nation. Leaders unite, they do not divide. Reagan, as much as I opposed his positions, bought this nation together and performed the cheerleading function to great effect. Bush Jr., same thing, he united this nation after 9/11 even though he was put into office after a contentious election.
Most presidential scholars rate Buchanan as the worst president in history. Why? Because he did precisely what Trump did, he divided this nation further at a time when it was already fracturing. I have no doubt, he will displace Buchanan as the worst president in history. And the bit about Biden accomplishing little while enriching himself is laughable. Almost every senator, and dozens of representatives, have a much higher net worth than Biden. Trump, on the other hand, refused to divest himself from his business, actively sought to use his position to enrich himself and family members, and completely weaponized the justice department like it was his personal goon squad.