Author
Topic: OT-Politics Thread: please TRY to keep it civil, you damned dirty apes
(Read 3084914 times)

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38444 on:** October 27, 2024, 11:06:23 AM »

Actually, those who don't vote are completely able to complain about the results.

I don't see much use in proposing things that simply will not and cannot happen. It's akin to saying "If only people were smarter.".

GopherRock · « **Reply #38445 on:** October 27, 2024, 12:13:46 PM »

I have yet to hear a good argument from any quarter about how term limits are a good thing. The only thing they accomplish is making the legislative branch even more beholden to Big Lobby than they already are.

I'd be much more open to mandatory retirement ages. It already exists in the system.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38446 on:** October 27, 2024, 12:15:02 PM »

Folks want term limits on politicians they hate.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38447 on:** October 27, 2024, 02:17:17 PM »

I'm not getting two rather annoying emails a day labeled as being from the Harris folks. I think they probably are from some Trump group, they are quite annoying, easily junked of course.

847badgerfan · « **Reply #38448 on:** October 27, 2024, 02:57:57 PM »

Quote from: GopherRock on October 27, 2024, 12:13:46 PM

I have yet to hear a good argument from any quarter about how term limits are a good thing. The only thing they accomplish is making the legislative branch even more beholden to Big Lobby than they already are.

I'd be much more open to mandatory retirement ages. It already exists in the system.

I'm much more on the fence about that one.

Mandatory retirement is good. 65? 70?

You're done.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #38449 on:** October 27, 2024, 04:04:09 PM »

Quote from: GopherRock on October 27, 2024, 12:13:46 PM

I have yet to hear a good argument from any quarter about how term limits are a good thing. The only thing they accomplish is making the legislative branch even more beholden to Big Lobby than they already are.

I'd be much more open to mandatory retirement ages. It already exists in the system.

I would assume the logic is that you don’t have people who become “career” politicians in a particular role. So you don’t have some 30 year mayor of Chicago or something.

And to a degree, I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong. But I do think there are certain jobs where it becomes a disservice because of the learning curve.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #38450 on:** October 27, 2024, 04:05:21 PM »

Quote from: 847badgerfan on October 27, 2024, 02:57:57 PM

I'm much more on the fence about that one.

Mandatory retirement is good. 65? 70?

You're done.

Is that a term limit? Or an age limit? I generally feel like 70 is a good idea. And if you’re older than that, and you still wanna work in that field, you can work for someone.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #38451 on:** October 27, 2024, 04:30:58 PM »

The founding fathers specifically stated that the role of politician wasn't to be a career. They had that in Britain and weren't fans of it.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38452 on:** October 27, 2024, 05:05:37 PM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on October 27, 2024, 04:30:58 PM

The founding fathers specifically stated that the role of politician wasn't to be a career. They had that in Britain and weren't fans of it.

Which one specifically stated that in those words?

I agree they viewed it as a service to be taken on for a time, and then like Cincinnatus, go back to your real job. They also of course liked the concept, most of them, of an Electoral College, with Electors to be chosen by some means determined by each State. They also winked at slavery, since many owned slaves. And they also feared government and never would have dreamed of a Federal government of the scope and size we have today.

If they really didn't want professional long term politicians in office, they could have put term limits in the Constitution at the time. And some of them of course ended up being long term politicians.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38453 on:** October 27, 2024, 05:07:32 PM »

Quote from: bayareabadger on October 27, 2024, 04:05:21 PM

Is that a term limit? Or an age limit? I generally feel like 70 is a good idea. And if you’re older than that, and you still wanna work in that field, you can work for someone.

I personally would like an age limit, but that too is not in the cards, so I don't pine for it. Most companies have age limits.

I retired early, I cannot imagine working a job into my 70s other than one which is what I would do anyway.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #38454 on:** October 27, 2024, 05:56:44 PM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on October 27, 2024, 05:05:37 PM

Which one specifically stated that in those words?

I agree they viewed it as a service to be taken on for a time, and then like Cincinnatus, go back to your real job. They also of course liked the concept, most of them, of an Electoral College, with Electors to be chosen by some means determined by each State. They also winked at slavery, since many owned slaves. And they also feared government and never would have dreamed of a Federal government of the scope and size we have today.

If they really didn't want professional long term politicians in office, they could have put term limits in the Constitution at the time. And some of them of course ended up being long term politicians.

Okay, I'll google it for you.

Thomas Jefferson was also wary of abandoning rotation, and wrote to his friend Edward Rutledge in 1788, “I apprehend that the total abandonment of the principle of rotation in the offices of president and senator will end in abuse. But my confidence is that there will for a long time be virtue and good sense enough in our countrymen to correct abuses.”
"I proposed the representatives (and not the people) should choose the [State] Senate... To make them independent I had proposed that they should hold their places for nine years and then go out (one third every three years) and be incapable forever of being re-elected to that house. My idea was that if they might be re-elected, they would be casting their eye forward to the period of election (however distant) and be currying favor with the electors and consequently dependent on them. My reason for fixing them in office for a term of years rather than for life was that they might have an idea that they were at a certain period to return into the mass of the people and become the governed instead of the governor, which might still keep alive that regard to the public good that otherwise they might perhaps be induced by their independence to forget." -- Thomas Jefferson
.
George Washington obviously was a reluctant leader and considered himself a surveyor or farmer ahead of a president. You might take a look at George Washington's Farewell Address, where he discusses both his own self-imposed term limit and the danger of political parties.
.
There was a term-limit included in the Articles of Confederation, which was then booted out in a split-support outcome. The youngster of the group, James Madison, was against term limits. I wonder why.
.
Many state legislatures incorporated term limits, as the idea didn't make it into the Constitution.
.
That most of the framers felt that all congressmen/senators/president, would have “real” jobs, and serve in the political arena for only a short time. Also, life expectancy was much shorter, and the concept of a person serving for decades was unthinkable. There is no provision for pensions in the constitution, because none of the framers thought that any politician would serve there as a career, and remain in office for decades. The first president to receive a pension, was Harry Truman!
.
Basically, the job of politician was supposed to be like the job of referee. You do it for a time and/or on the side. It's called public service for a reason - you do the people a solid for a while, not forever. You do your bit.
Thanks to Trump, many people learned that many things we may have considered rules or laws were simply norms, a la the 2-term president (until 1951).
.
If we could stop acting like the Constitution is some pristine document from on-high and would actually evolve our foundations, slow gradual change over time would help avoid the horseshit political environment we find ourselves in. Everyone hating congress, but their being re-elected 95% of the time, is fucking embarrassing. Much of their day-to-day is literally sitting in a phone bank across the street from the Capitol building, asking for money.
Not a great use of lawmaking time.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38455 on:** October 27, 2024, 06:02:54 PM »

I view the Constitution as a rather important document with safegiards that one would view as rather essential if we are about to elect a "fascist".

It is difficult to amend, but two ways of doing that are available in theory if there is a near consensus.

I don't see where any Founder "specifically stated" what you asserted. As I noted, there was a belief that being a politician was a more or less short term service role. They didn't specifically state that as a need or desire.

Maybe I don't understand the term "specifically stated". As in, literally.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #38456 on:** October 27, 2024, 06:04:25 PM »

I could have George Washington's plea for term limits written in his own blood and you wouldn't accept it because I posted it.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38457 on:** October 27, 2024, 06:08:42 PM »

If he "specifically stated" the thing, I'd certainly agree. I don't think any of them did, it was more of an "understanding", I doubt many of them foresaw the concept that a person would want to be in politics for 40 years. The pay at the time was pretty bad, and the job itself was pretty onerous.

I'd guess they viewed Cincinnatus as the model, a person who would "serve" for a time, and then go back to work, as I stated, specifically, earlier.

Why does a wealthy person stay in politics these days? I think it's the status, being recognized as someone important. Most wealthy folks I suspect want the opposite.

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: OT-Politics Thread: please TRY to keep it civil, you damned dirty apes

Cincydawg

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

GopherRock

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

Cincydawg

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

Cincydawg

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

847badgerfan

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

bayareabadger

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

bayareabadger

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

OrangeAfroMan

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

Cincydawg

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

Cincydawg

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

OrangeAfroMan

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

Cincydawg

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

OrangeAfroMan

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out

Cincydawg

Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out