Congress - Maybe it's OUR fault

Originally posted by whodey
I think the system needs to be decentralized and limited to the point that polls begin to show that their is democratic representation.

Can you be more specific? What polls? By what mechanism specifically would such decentralization occur? What if "the polls" indicate there is no "democratic representation" at any level?

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
US voters elected Obongo for a second term that proves how stupid they are.

And the choice we were given was Obama or a man who said he did not give a rip for 47% of the voting electorate! Big Business buys our political choices. Without that $, a candidate has no chance of getting the media ads and coverage essential to win an election. Americans have been bought an sold.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Can you be more specific? What polls? By what mechanism specifically would such decentralization occur? What if "the polls" indicate there is no "democratic representation" at any level?

I assume that you agree that accurate polls could be taken of the populace to determine if they are being represented properly, at least, by their own perspective. The trick would then be to keep the polls from being tampered with by the powers that be if they bore much weight. As it stands now, it is embarassing to have horrible approval ratings, but it is still OK.

Originally posted by Phranny
And the choice we were given was Obama or a man who said he did not give a rip for 47% of the voting electorate! Big Business buys our political choices. Without that $, a candidate has no chance of getting the media ads and coverage essential to win an election. Americans have been bought an sold.

Congress is but dung in the eyes of the American public and has been for a very long time. However, running for president has become a popularity contest, for which, they are able to keep enough support to win a second term, but when they leave office their approval ratings are in the tank.

I find it interesting how modern day presidents are able to manipulate support to win second terms these days and if it is even sustainable throughout two terms. More than likely, they simply don't care at the end of the second term, much like Congress has not cared about having the support of the American public for decades.

Originally posted by whodey
I assume that you agree that accurate polls could be taken of the populace to determine if they are being represented properly, at least, by their own perspective. The trick would then be to keep the polls from being tampered with by the powers that be if they bore much weight. As it stands now, it is embarassing to have horrible approval ratings, but it is still OK.

But can you be more specific about how you would have the organization structure of government depend on approval ratings? How would it work, in practise, assuming an accurate way to determine approval ratings (e.g. a referendum)?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
But can you be more specific about how you would have the organization structure of government depend on approval ratings? How would it work, in practise, assuming an accurate way to determine approval ratings (e.g. a referendum)?

My point here is that the system could perhaps work itself out if we were able to vote for everyone in Congress. Of course, it would not be necessary if they did not have the purse strings.

Those that have the purse strings MUST be electable by all who are manipuated by those in control. This means politicians like Nancy Pelosi who could only win election in San Fran and no where else on the globe would go bye bye.

So either give voters the right to vote for all of them or take away their power of the purse which they stole at the beginning of the 20th century.

Originally posted by whodey
My point here is that the system could perhaps work itself out if we were able to vote for everyone in Congress. Of course, it would not be necessary if they did not have the purse strings.

Those that have the purse strings MUST be electable by all who are manipuated by those in control. This means politicians like Nancy Pelosi who could only win electio ...[text shortened]... hem or take away their power of the purse which they stole at the beginning of the 20th century.

You don't like living in a Republic apparently.

Originally posted by whodey
My point here is that the system could perhaps work itself out if we were able to vote for everyone in Congress. Of course, it would not be necessary if they did not have the purse strings.

Those that have the purse strings MUST be electable by all who are manipuated by those in control. This means politicians like Nancy Pelosi who could only win electio ...[text shortened]... hem or take away their power of the purse which they stole at the beginning of the 20th century.

So all this raging you've done about decentralization was just because you don't like the way people vote for Congressmen? But isn't that much the same, in many cases, to the way people vote for their State legislatures?

Originally posted by sasquatch672
I think my Congressman is doing a great job. He is obstructing the Marxist, collectivist, liberal agenda. It's the Nancy Pelosis of the world that need to be flushed down the crapper.

So I gather you are not Democrat....