Would you support REAL term limits?

[CowboyTed]

Hell yes!!! The longer they stay the more corrupt they get.

How about reform the way they are voted... US incumbent election rate is shocking... Reelection happens in the caucus...

Preference voting on multi seat districts would change every thing for the better..

 

[2aguy]

I wrote I am against all dark money no matter the source. Put monetary limits on every one regardless of party.

Moron.....your shitheads control Disney, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and every other major news outlet...you control hollywood, academia. and big tech...Google, Facebook, Twitter., Amazon, Youtube.................you get all of your speech for free and you get to silence anyone who stands up to you.......

You aren't against "Dark Money," you are against anyone raising money to fight you.....that is also why your minions in the IRS blocked conservative groups from getting their tax exempt status and hit them with all the government alphabet agencies so that they couldn't fund raise to oppose you...

You lying piece of crap...

 

[JLW]

Wrong....it is about people like us......that's why shitheads like you in the IRS denied conservative groups their tax exempt status ...........so sell your "Dark Money," bullshit to your biden voters, the only ones dumb enough to buy what you are selling.

LOL...where do you come up with your arguments.

Well, you have done a 180 since your initial post that only Democrats want dark money. Now you are saying you favor it. Make up your mind!

 

[JLW]

Moron.....your shitheads control Disney, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and every other major news outlet...you control hollywood, academia. and big tech...Google, Facebook, Twitter., Amazon, Youtube.................you get all of your speech for free and you get to silence anyone who stands up to you.......

You aren't against "Dark Money," you are against anyone raising money to fight you.....that is also why your minions in the IRS blocked conservative groups from getting their tax exempt status and hit them with all the government alphabet agencies so that they couldn't fund raise to oppose you...

You lying piece of crap...

Are you hitting the booze? Read my posts, I wrote that I am against dark money no matter the source...c'mon.. seriously, man..get with it.

You live in a world where you think everyone is against you. Many of the news organizations you cite, have conservative perspectives. You just choose to ignore it.

 

[Lesh]

It isn't...it's about freedom of speech...and money allows speech....yes, you are a fascist...you control the main stream press, hollywood academia, and the tech companies....you don't want your enemies to be able to have access to any form of communication when it comes to elections....you are a fascist.

More money… more speech

Those with little money have little free speech

 

[Lesh]

LOL...where do you come up with your arguments.

Well, you have done a 180 since your initial post that only Democrats want dark money. Now you are saying you favor it. Make up your mind!

Don’t expect consistency from RWNJs

 

[bripat9643]

There is a direct correlation between the rise of Super packs and dark money to the Citizens United Case. SCOTUS made a decision that money equals speech, therefore it can not be limited. The case is not about peons like yourself put about the super rich and corporations able to send hundreds of millions on political campaigns. You do realize that is dark money, right?

When turds like you use the term "dark money" you really mean Republican money or conservative money. There was never any limit on money until Congress tried to limit money. They limited only money that helped Republicans. They didn't limit union money, free advertising by the liberal media or government money

 

[bripat9643]

I am against all dark money no matter the source. Put monetary limits on every one regardless of party.

Let's limit union money, free media and all speech by incumbent politicians.

 

[bripat9643]

yes to term, no to age.

Older people, that are able to, should run if they want to.

Biden is the evidence against that theory.

 

[struth]

Biden is the evidence against that theory.

well he shouldn’t of been elected the issue there was propagandist, and the fact the party wanted a puppet

that’s not an age thing but a bigger issue

 

[kyzr]

We already have term limits – they’re called elections.

And term limits are fundamentally anti-democratic; the people have the right to elect whomever they want for as long as they want.

True political reform starts at the very local level – top-down efforts such as term limits are no solution.

Elections are a sham because everyone re-elects their incumbents because the government is a "seniority system", duh.

 

[kyzr]

How about reform the way they are voted... US incumbent election rate is shocking... Reelection happens in the caucus...
Preference voting on multi seat districts would change every thing for the better..

No thanks. I like my congressman. But I don't want him in congress the next 50-years.
Lets say 5-terms, 10-years is enough. Say two senate terms, or 12-years is enough.
That way we'd have people who know what its like out here working instead of always in La-La Land.

 

[kyzr]

Let's limit union money, free media and all speech by incumbent politicians.

What about big-tech banning some people and promoting others?
They could avoid posting uncomplimentary info from searches, and promote fake news.

 

[Independent thinker]

Term limits for EVERY public office and all judges. We also need age cut offs.

It's time to stop making public service a windfall

I disagree with the term limit thing on both counts. It is not the panacea that those who favor it believe. I favor having both politicians and judges be experienced. Term limits are not the answer but I wouldn't be against something that makes it so these people aren't just automatically re-elected over and over. If you were to get a good one in office I favor them being re-elected many times. We don't need a constant swarm of rookies at all times.

 

[toobfreak]

Term limits for EVERY public office and all judges. We also need age cut offs.

Yes to term limits but not age. It is hard enough finding good people, I don't want to have to vote for some inferior because some 66 year old guy with a much better idea can't run because he is one year over your arbitrary age limit.

If you have TERM limits then you won't have many very old politicians anyway.

And SCOTUS judges are too hard to find good ones, they need to be exempt.

 

[Coyote]

While I support term limits on the president...and probably the Supreme Court (a lifetime position is iffy)...I have mixed feelings about other public offices.

The reason is governance is the job most critical to our country's ability to be successful, yet it's the only job where we seem to admire inexperience as a virtue and even demand it. We no longer live in the simpler times of gentlemen farmers and part time legislators who's main occupations were elsewhere. Things are so much more complex now.

Experience includes the following positives - connections, with fellow law makers, with public and private entities, with how the rule of law and the Constitution work in the real world (rather than the hyposthetical)...it also means learning when and how to compromise in order to get something passed, how to negotiate so you can pass bills containing something that your constituents value (but maybe no one else does) - because that is your job. I think it takes time to gain that as well as to gain the political clout to make things happen. It can be good and it can be bad. It can lead to wiser choices, less gridlock, mentorship or it can lead to entrenched power locking out new faces and new ideas.

The other thing is someone mentioned total term limits, which (if I understand it correctly) views it as a cummulative amount of years based on all public offices. That would seem to even more severely cut into a person's ability to gain experience since many lower offices provide just that.

I know if I need surgery, I want someone with experience in that kind of surgery; or if I need work done on the foundation of my house, I absolutely want experience. But, if I'm looking for someone to build a fence - I might not care as much about experience. Politics is the same way - everyone can make promises but how well do they actually govern and fulfill them?

So...how would we work in term limits yet keep needed expertise and experience?

 

[kyzr]

While I support term limits on the president...and probably the Supreme Court (a lifetime position is iffy)...I have mixed feelings about other public offices.

The reason is governance is the job most critical to our country's ability to be successful, yet it's the only job where we seem to admire inexperience as a virtue and even demand it. We no longer live in the simpler times of gentlemen farmers and part time legislators who's main occupations were elsewhere. Things are so much more complex now.

Experience includes the following positives - connections, with fellow law makers, with public and private entities, with how the rule of law and the Constitution work in the real world (rather than the hyposthetical)...it also means learning when and how to compromise in order to get something passed, how to negotiate so you can pass bills containing something that your constituents value (but maybe no one else does) - because that is your job. I think it takes time to gain that as well as to gain the political clout to make things happen. It can be good and it can be bad. It can lead to wiser choices, less gridlock, mentorship or it can lead to entrenched power locking out new faces and new ideas.

The other thing is someone mentioned total term limits, which (if I understand it correctly) views it as a cummulative amount of years based on all public offices. That would seem to even more severely cut into a person's ability to gain experience since many lower offices provide just that.

I know if I need surgery, I want someone with experience in that kind of surgery; or if I need work done on the foundation of my house, I absolutely want experience. But, if I'm looking for someone to build a fence - I might not care as much about experience. Politics is the same way - everyone can make promises but how well do they actually govern and fulfill them?

So...how would we work in term limits yet keep needed expertise and experience?

Even though the pols have term limits, their staff can transfer and keep the experience. If the seat switches parties its the same as now, all new staff.
I tend to disagree with your assessment that politicians actually have expertise and experience. They know how to raise money and get re-elected, unless they are in "safe" districts, then there are no re-election issues.
Rand Paul is an eye doctor. Crenshaw was a Navy Seal. I'm sure many others had careers before running. I want the pols to know what workers are facing and to make things better instead of partisan hackery. I especially value ex-military experience.

 

[bripat9643]

People vote how they want. Don’t like it? Don’t care.

Then why did you jump into this discussion?

 

[colfax_m]

Then why did you jump into this discussion?

Because people want to tell me how I can vote.

 

[bripat9643]

Because people want to tell me how I can vote.

You said you don't care.