Why is there no qualification test for politicians?

[MarathonMike]

One of the biggest problems about democracy, is that even the dumbest idiot can run for election. This is laudatory for the principles of freedom, but it can have disastrous consequences if the dumb nut gets elected. Just look at the range of dingbats that are in the US Congress and Senate, and most likely, other state and local jurisdictions.

If you want to obtain US citizenship, you will have to sit a reasonably difficult test to verify that you understand the basic facts about the US system, From what I have seen, there are elected lawmakers who would fail this test.

Herschel Walker is probably the best (worst) example of what I am trying to illustrate. Just imagine what would happen if the electorate put that guy in the senate.

As a start, Congress should set basic qualifications for representatives. To be a teacher, a lawyer, an engineer, or any other position you have to be qualified. If you are going to be a lawmaker, then prove that you know how the law works, and how government functions. Let's put an end to electing people to congress who only make government more disreputable.

And while we are at it, put in a test to weed out election deniers, conspiracy proponents and people who are proven liars.

What is your problem with Herschel Walker? Do you know how intelligent you have to be to be a successful running back in the NFL? The playbooks they have to memorize, the work ethic it takes, what's the issue?

 

[Lastamender]

One of the biggest problems about democracy, is that even the dumbest idiot can run for election. This is laudatory for the principles of freedom, but it can have disastrous consequences if the dumb nut gets elected. Just look at the range of dingbats that are in the US Congress and Senate, and most likely, other state and local jurisdictions.

If you want to obtain US citizenship, you will have to sit a reasonably difficult test to verify that you understand the basic facts about the US system, From what I have seen, there are elected lawmakers who would fail this test.

Herschel Walker is probably the best (worst) example of what I am trying to illustrate. Just imagine what would happen if the electorate put that guy in the senate.

As a start, Congress should set basic qualifications for representatives. To be a teacher, a lawyer, an engineer, or any other position you have to be qualified. If you are going to be a lawmaker, then prove that you know how the law works, and how government functions. Let's put an end to electing people to congress who only make government more disreputable.

And while we are at it, put in a test to weed out election deniers, conspiracy proponents and people who are proven liars.

"And while we are at it, put in a test to weed out election deniers, conspiracy proponents and people who are proven liars."

We will get on that right away. Fascist.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I thought it would be a good idea to have qualification tests for posters, but then I realized how boring it would be here without 98 percent of the Democrats.

 

[FA_Q2]

Clinton's presidency was largely successful. He presided over economic prosperity, streamlined a more efficient government and balanced the budget.

He was mediocre in the foreign policy department, however. But the masterful foreign policy of George HW Bush was hard to follow.

Wrong Clinton.

That does speak to how shitty our options have been lately though. In a nation with over 300 million people you would think that democracy would leave behind ruling families.

 

[Papageorgio]

Clinton's presidency was largely successful. He presided over economic prosperity, streamlined a more efficient government and balanced the budget.

He was mediocre in the foreign policy department, however. But the masterful foreign policy of George HW Bush was hard to follow.

I wasn't tlking about Bill Clinton, I was speaking of Hillary and she was as divisive and it would have been a disaster.

 

[Riff Raff]

I wasn't tlking about Bill Clinton, I was speaking of Hillary and she was as divisive and it would have been a disaster.

I read that hastily. I must have seen the word presidential followed by those names. Oops.

I blame caffeine.

I agree about Hillary.

 

[Riff Raff]

Wrong Clinton.

That does speak to how shitty our options have been lately though. In a nation with over 300 million people you would think that democracy would leave behind ruling families.

You're right. The two-party system only promotes from within, excluding outsiders. That needs to change somehow.

 

[Papageorgio]

I read that hastily. I must have seen the word presidential followed by those names. Oops.

I blame caffeine.

I agree about Hillary.

I liked Bill, I bet he would have been great to go have a few beers with and talk politics and policy.

 

[JoeB131]

How am I racist, you retarded moonbat?
Is it racist to be against tyranny?

Booth didn't murder Lincoln because he was against Tyranny.

He murdered Lincoln because he was a racist.

Historian On John Wilkes Booth Killing Lincoln: 'He Was Motivated By Racism'

Adam Goodheart, author of 1861: The Civil War Awakening, addressed the plot to kill President Abraham Lincoln on the 150th anniversary of his assassination at the hands of John Wilkes Booth.

www.cbsnews.com

But mainly, he was motivated by politics and he was especially motivated by racism, by Lincoln's actions to emancipate the slaves and, more immediately, by some of Lincoln's statements that he took as meaning African Americans would get full citizenship."

 

[TNHarley]

Booth didn't murder Lincoln because he was against Tyranny.

He murdered Lincoln because he was a racist.

Historian On John Wilkes Booth Killing Lincoln: 'He Was Motivated By Racism'

Adam Goodheart, author of 1861: The Civil War Awakening, addressed the plot to kill President Abraham Lincoln on the 150th anniversary of his assassination at the hands of John Wilkes Booth.

www.cbsnews.com

But mainly, he was motivated by politics and he was especially motivated by racism, by Lincoln's actions to emancipate the slaves and, more immediately, by some of Lincoln's statements that he took as meaning African Americans would get full citizenship."

His reasons dont reflect on my glee that the sumbitch got his head blown off.
He did what millions of other Americans should have done.

 

[Riff Raff]

Booth didn't murder Lincoln because he was against Tyranny.

He murdered Lincoln because he was a racist.

Historian On John Wilkes Booth Killing Lincoln: 'He Was Motivated By Racism'

Adam Goodheart, author of 1861: The Civil War Awakening, addressed the plot to kill President Abraham Lincoln on the 150th anniversary of his assassination at the hands of John Wilkes Booth.

www.cbsnews.com

But mainly, he was motivated by politics and he was especially motivated by racism, by Lincoln's actions to emancipate the slaves and, more immediately, by some of Lincoln's statements that he took as meaning African Americans would get full citizenship."

Negroes hadn't even made up their "dats waycist!" meme yet. That wasn't until the 60's — er, the 1960's, that is.

 

[Riff Raff]

I'm not even a fan of the federal government involving themselves in muh roads.

Biden's gay transportation secretary says roads are "waycis."

 

[JoeB131]

His reasons dont reflect on my glee that the sumbitch got his head blown off.
He did what millions of other Americans should have done.

For what.

Spell it out for me, what HORRIBLE THING did Lincoln do?
Well, he saved the Union. That was kind of a good thing.
He ended slavery. Most sensible people would consider that a good thing.
He disabused this country of the notion that it could really operate as independent states and still be effective as a nation.

The biggest mistake we made after the Civil War was NOT doing what we did to Nazi Germany after the War. Hang all the fucking leaders and make sure that ANYONE who reads a history book knows the Confederacy was the bad guys.

Negroes hadn't even made up their "dats waycist!" meme yet. That wasn't until the 60's — er, the 1960's, that is.

No, the 1960's are when black people stopped putting up with it.

 

[TNHarley]

For what.

Spell it out for me, what HORRIBLE THING did Lincoln do?
Well, he saved the Union. That was kind of a good thing.
He ended slavery. Most sensible people would consider that a good thing.
He disabused this country of the notion that it could really operate as independent states and still be effective as a nation.

The biggest mistake we made after the Civil War was NOT doing what we did to Nazi Germany after the War. Hang all the fucking leaders and make sure that ANYONE who reads a history book knows the Confederacy was the bad guys.



No, the 1960's are when black people stopped putting up with it.

"the end justifies the means" is just something stupid authoritarians say.

 

[Dayton3]

If you have something as the OP suggests doesn't it make just as much or even more sense that the voters show at least a minimum amount of knowledge regarding the electoral system, the government and the issues before they are allowed to vote?

 

[Stryder50]

Best of British luck on your "informed electorate".. look at all the "electorate" that believe the lies
they are being fed.

That happens on both sides of the political fence/divide.
If one gets a 'proper' education they should have the tools to filter such.
However, as we often hear, one person's lies are another person's truth.

BTW, your OP is classic illustration of how you are an example of what you complain about.

 

[JoeB131]

"the end justifies the means" is just something stupid authoritarians say.

That's kind of retarded, isn't it? Um, how was he supposed to acheive those goals otherwise.

WE ARE ALL BETTER OFF BECUASE OF LINCOLN. Except maybe the plantation owners, but honestly, fuck those guys.

 

[TNHarley]

That's kind of retarded, isn't it? Um, how was he supposed to acheive those goals otherwise.

WE ARE ALL BETTER OFF BECUASE OF LINCOLN. Except maybe the plantation owners, but honestly, fuck those guys.

I guess by not defying the SC, shitting on all of our rights and burning the Constitution. He abused his power. That is NEVER ok.
Yeah, fuck those guys.

 

[JoeB131]

I guess by not defying the SC, shitting on all of our rights and burning the Constitution. He abused his power. That is NEVER ok.
Yeah, fuck those guys.

I'm sorry, what "rights" are those? I mean, I guess I don't have the right to own a slave anymore, but since I never wanted a slave, that's probably not a big deal. I find a cat enough of a pain in the ass to maintain.

There's a reason why the President is the Commander and Chief, and the main reason is when you are at war, there isn't really time to go to committee.

 

[TNHarley]

I'm sorry, what "rights" are those? I mean, I guess I don't have the right to own a slave anymore, but since I never wanted a slave, that's probably not a big deal. I find a cat enough of a pain in the ass to maintain.

There's a reason why the President is the Commander and Chief, and the main reason is when you are at war, there isn't really time to go to committee.

He suppressed everyone of the bill of rights, shut down the media, habeas corpus, ignored the SC, scorched Earth..
The constitution doesnt give the president those powers regardless of your emotion.
He was a tyrant by a definition of the word.
I know you dont care or probably even understand. Because you are a boot licker. An authoritarian.
You dont care what the gov does as long as you agree with it.
Frankly, its pathetic. People just like you are why shit like NAZI Germany happened.