US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[Gehenna]

How do you feel about repealing the 17th Amendment and bringing back electing US Senators based on the state legislatures instead of statewide popular vote like now?

I ninja'd you on this, somehow.

 

[LurkTrawl]

Lobbyist reform is literally impossible. Let me explain why in brief.

It is impossible to define a lobbyist in any meaningful way that doesn't either run afoul of the first amendment or which is simply unworkable. Why? Well, what -is- a lobbyist? Your mind immediately goes to billion dollar company sending people to washington. This is lobbying... but what else is lobbying?

Have you ever contacted your local politician? Congratulations, you are a lobbyist.

Lobbying is any entreatment of a politician to perform an act. This goes from billion dollar companies asking for tax breaks all the way to grandma asking her politician to name a streat after the mayor's dog. Its all lobbying and there is no real way to legislate regulations on it that does not run afoul of the first amendment right of individuals to interact witht he politicians. Lobbying reform is often put on the table as an idea, but the actual nitty gritty of making it is a -nightmare-.

Fair enough but I hope you get that the same argument of needing experience in the job could be used as an argument against presidential term limits. Also I know this is going to be a rather different kind of opinion from my usual political bent but remove corporate personhood.

And yeah I'm not really getting how lobbyists would have any more power than they do now with congressional term limits. It's not like they'll suddenly get an influx of even more cash or something.

But, let me suggest a change tot he system that will get your intended effect and is also workable.


Repeal. The Seventeenth. Amendment.

Fuck the 17th, its the source of so many issues. Senators are not meant to be elected by the public, having them chosen by the state legislatures was meant as a break on insanity and meant that political parties had to always consider their states interests as a whole since it defacto made each senator have to go through its own electoral college. And made it a -lot- easier to primary senators because it meant that senators had to worry about enough rural districts getting pissy.

Never thought about it before but how about that and term limits? I don't understand why they'd need more than four presidential elections' worth of time when becoming a fucking doctor takes less time than that. If someone can't hack it after ten years in the same job, it's not because they lack experience, it's because they're shitty at their job.

 

[Gehenna]

Fair enough but I hope you get that the same argument of needing experience in the job could be used as an argument against presidential term limits.

Yes. And I would apply it, which is also my response to the second half of your post.

 

[GuntPunt]

Never thought about it before but how about that and term limits? I don't understand why they'd need more than four presidential elections' worth of time when becoming a fucking doctor takes less time than that. If someone can't hack it after ten years in the same job, it's not because they lack experience, it's because they're shitty at their job.

Because repealing the 17th Amendment would BE the term limit.

Before passage of the 17th, the average term for a US Senator was less than 6 years, or one full term. After it did pass, you can see skyrocketing term duration for Senators.

 

[LurkTrawl]

Because repealing the 17th Amendment would BE the term limit.

Before passage of the 17th, the average term for a US Senator was less than 6 years, or one full term. After it did pass, you can see skyrocketing term duration for Senators.

I get that but the problem arises that you'd need to amend the constitution for that no? I don't trust a single fucking person sitting in office right now with the power to do that.

 

[Gehenna]

I get that but the problem arises that you'd need to amend the constitution for that no? I don't trust a single fucking person sitting in office right now with the power to do that.

Constitutional changes require ratification by the states, and has to be over specific things. In this case, removal of an amendment. Meaning they'd not actually get any opportunities to fuck anything. They can't insert a new amendment quietly as each and every change has to be signed off on individually. And they cannot remove an amendment -and- add new amendments in the same motion.

Because repealing the 17th Amendment would BE the term limit.

Before passage of the 17th, the average term for a US Senator was less than 6 years, or one full term. After it did pass, you can see skyrocketing term duration for Senators.

The wonderful thing about removing the 17th is that it makes it easier to primary politicians. Meaning those in it for the grift get the boot -fast-, and those who are actually good at their job and want to stay in to master it tend to be well liked as well.

By making it easier to primary them, you ensure that term limits are unnecessary because anyone who would need to be termed out tends to get the boot rather quickly or finds a reason to retire..

 

[Wayfaring_$tranger]

On a slightly different note, though the answer I fear might be similar to my previous question, why does our political class seem determined to get us into a war with the Russians, last time I checked they still have nukes and I'd really rather not live through the movie threads IRL

 

[The Ugly One]

Fair enough but I hope you get that the same argument of needing experience in the job could be used as an argument against presidential term limits. Also I know this is going to be a rather different kind of opinion from my usual political bent but remove corporate personhood.

And yeah I'm not really getting how lobbyists would have any more power than they do now with congressional term limits. It's not like they'll suddenly get an influx of even more cash or something.

Never thought about it before but how about that and term limits? I don't understand why they'd need more than four presidential elections' worth of time when becoming a fucking doctor takes less time than that. If someone can't hack it after ten years in the same job, it's not because they lack experience, it's because they're shitty at their job.

One thing the 17a did is make Senators absolutely unaccountable for imposing spending obligations on state governments. There are a variety of federal laws that basically fuck over state governments, but sound nice to voters, or to donors, or whatever. Prior to the 17a, the governor would let the Senator know, "don't vote for this, or we're not sending you back to Washington," and that was that.

 

[LurkTrawl]

Constitutional changes require ratification by the states, and has to be over specific things. In this case, removal of an amendment. Meaning they'd not actually get any opportunities to fuck anything. They can't insert a new amendment quietly as each and every change has to be signed off on individually. And they cannot remove an amendment -and- add new amendments in the same motion.

Doesn't that take 35 state governors? Not really aware of how that'd be feasible right now given the political landscape at current compared to passing legislation normally.

One thing the 17a did is make Senators absolutely unaccountable for imposing spending obligations on state governments. There are a variety of federal laws that basically fuck over state governments, but sound nice to voters, or to donors, or whatever. Prior to the 17a, the governor would let the Senator know, "don't vote for this, or we're not sending you back to Washington," and that was that.

Yeah, seeming to me like it's a good idea but no idea how difficult it'd be so I've got no idea just how likely that is to ever happen.

 

[thismanlies]

View attachment 3299805

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1527438623452413952?s=19

Seems the Left has grown tired of Elon embarrassing them and has pulled out their favorite smear

I wonder what Tara Reade has to say about digging up #MeToo’s shambling corpse.

 

[Kuritan Deplorable]

On a slightly different note, though the answer I fear might be similar to my previous question, why does are political class seem determined to get us into a war with the Russians, last time I checked they still have nukes and I'd really rather not live through the movie threads IRL

An external scapegoat is a classic answer to any politicians domestic issues. See how they're trying to blame every single issue right now on Russia? They don't want actual war with Russia (for the most part, but helping ukraine keep them weak is just a bonus), what they need is a boogeyman so out of their direct control that they can blame everything on it, and therefore absolve themselves of any wrongdoing in creating the issue.

This only works as long as the average person is ignorant to the nature of the issues in the first place - if someone actually has a good grasp of how things work, they can easily spot political bullshit. If they have barely spent minutes in their life contemplating the existence of vast oil refineries and food processing plants, they're just gonna nod along to a politician saying Russia is why they got no gas or baby formula.

 

[Gehenna]

Doesn't that take 35 state governors? Not really aware of how that'd be feasible right now given the political landscape at current compared to passing legislation normally.

Yeah, seeming to me like it's a good idea but no idea how difficult it'd be so I've got no idea just how likely that is to ever happen.

Term limits for senators would also require a constitutional amendment. Therefore as the one to bring up such an action, my own suggestion was not considering feasibility since I thought it was agreed by implication of the suggestion you made to not really consider it?

If we are talking feasibility, there is no political path to -any- change. Regardless of effectiveness.

 

[Wayfaring_$tranger]

An external scapegoat is a classic answer to any politicians domestic issues. See how they're trying to blame every single issue right now on Russia? They don't want actual war with Russia (for the most part, but helping ukraine keep them weak is just a bonus), what they need is a boogeyman so out of their direct control that they can blame everything on it, and therefore absolve themselves of any wrongdoing in creating the issue.

This only works as long as the average person is ignorant to the nature of the issues in the first place - if someone actually has a good grasp of how things work, they can easily spot political bullshit. If they have barely spent minutes in their life contemplating the existence of vast oil refineries and food processing plants, they're just gonna nod along to a politician saying Russia is why they got no gas or baby formula.

Yeah but most people would be smart enough to pick a scapegoat that can't start a nuclear holocaust

 

[LurkTrawl]

Term limits for senators would also require a constitutional amendment. Therefore as the one to bring up such an action, my own suggestion was not considering feasibility since I thought it was agreed by implication of the suggestion you made to not really consider it?

Well no because admittedly it'd never ever happen. Let's be real here.

If we are talking feasibility, there is no political path to -any- change. Regardless of effectiveness.

Which is why I've never really looked into it or alternatives, any change to the current system that would actually be good for america isn't going to happen. And I tend to not think long and hard about impossible ideas or wishes.

Edit: Perhaps when the olds get phased out but another "let's be real" moment is the realization that the new blood will likely be as greedy, as stupid, and as malicious as their predecessors so we're kind of just fucked even if all the geriatrics keel over.

 

[Gehenna]

Well no because admittedly it'd never ever happen. Let's be real here.

Which is why I've never really looked into it or alternatives, any change to the current system that would actually be good for america isn't going to happen. And I tend to not think long and hard about impossible ideas or wishes.

Edit: Perhaps when the olds get phased out but another "let's be real" moment is the realization that the new blood will likely be as greedy, as stupid, and as malicious as their predecessors so we're kind of just fucked even if all the geriatrics keel over.

Its... less impossible than you think in the long-term. The republicans are being taken over by a populist movement which will bend to the popular will. All you'd need to get them on board is enough popular support.

The Democrats are a bit iffier. It all depends on what happens when they collapse and who manages to put the pieces back together and under what ideology.

 

[Compositesludge]

The Democrats are a bit iffier. It all depends on what happens when they collapse and who manages to put the pieces back together and under what ideology.

Well, let's narrow this down a little. Do you consider "panicked shrieking" an ideology?

 

[Gehenna]

Well, let's narrow this down a little. Do you consider "panicked shrieking" an ideology?

That'd be part of the process of the collapse not what comes after. So no. But it will be cathartic to watch.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

White liberals have negative ingroup preference. I think they're the only large group known to exhibit this trait. Abortion is their chance to kill a member of their group and get away with it.

The unspoken and forbidden question being, since this is such an unnatural situation it must not have happened naturally. So what is the artificial cause of it, and how do we stop it?

We all know it's some combination of "the jews" and "the marxists" but it'd be nice to actually have that confirmed.

 

[Kuritan Deplorable]

Yeah but most people would be smart enough to pick a scapegoat that can't start a nuclear holocaust

Correct, and most people also wouldn't decide to try and prop up a senile puppet and an incompetent as heads of government, then burn their entire establishment down trying to keep the ship above water, instead of conceding that they're gonna have to take an L and prep for next time.

The democratic party has shown recent difficulties with rational decisions.

 

[Dracula's Spirit Animal]

Since I posted this Elon has tweeted the following -
View attachment 3298933
Elon what's your Farms account bro, DM me I have ideas.

ClownWorld is very profitable this year.

We haven't really had one since the 60's did the hard work of dismantling it in the name of equality.

The American Dream got murdered by Hippies like a movie starlet around a Manson girl.

This bit from Martian Chronicles never gets old, IMO (although he misread which group would be the problem):

“Yes, one of those, Bigelow. He and Lovecraft and Hawthorne and Ambrose Bierce and all the tales of
terror and fantasy and horror and, for that matter, tales of the future were burned. Heartlessly. They passed a
law. Oh, it started very small. In 1950 and ‘60 it was a grain of sand. They began by controlling books of
cartoons and then detective books and, of course, films, one way or another, one group or another, political
bias, religions prejudice, union pressures; there was always a minority afraid of something, and a great
majority afraid of the dark, afraid of the future, afraid of the past, afraid of the present, afraid of
themselves and shadows of themselves.”
“I see.”
“Afraid of the word ‘politics’ (which eventually became a synonym for Communism among the more
reactionary elements, so I hear, and it was worth your life to use the word!), and with a screw tightened here, a
bolt fastened there, a push, a pull, a yank, art and literature were soon like a great twine of taffy strung
about, being twisted in braids and tied in knots and thrown in all directions, until there was no more
resiliency and no more savor to it. Then the film cameras chopped short and the theaters turned dark. and
the print presses trickled down from a great Niagara of reading matter to a mere innocuous dripping of
‘pure’ material. Oh, the word ‘escape’ was radical, too, I tell you!”
“Was it’?”
“It was! Every man, they said, must face reality. Must face the Here and Now! Everything that was not
so must go. All the beautiful literary lies and flights of fancy must be shot in mid-air. So they lined them up
against a library wall one Sunday morning thirty years ago, in 1975; they lined them up, St. Nicholas and
the Headless Horseman and Snow White and Rumpelstiltskin and Mother Goose - oh, what a wailing! - and
shot them down, and burned the paper castles and the fairy frogs and old kings and the people who lived
happily ever after (for of course it was a fact that nobody lived happily ever after!), and Once Upon a Time
became No More! And they spread the ashes of the Phantom Rickshaw with the rubble of the Land of Oz;
they filleted the bones of Glinda the Good and Ozma and shattered Polychrome in a spectroscope and served
Jack Pumpkinhead with meringue at the Biologists’ Ball! The Beanstalk died in a bramble of red tape!
Sleeping Beauty awoke at the kiss of a scientist and expired at the fatal puncture of his syringe. And they
made Alice drink something from a bottle which reduced her to a size where she could no longer cry
‘Curiouser and curiouser,’ and they gave the Looking Glass one hammer blow to smash it and every Red
King and Oyster away!”

View attachment 3299305

Alright, ClownWorld, you are paying dividends.

Yes, and you need to go back and re-read what Gehenna has posted about her selection as VP. She was not chosen because she's from the Bay Area or wielded massive influence. She was chosen because she was literally the only option available after Biden opened his fat mouth. The Democrats needed an ambitious yet (theoretically) easily controlled black woman with no gaffes the media couldn't help bury, and dumb enough to think she'd be allowed to have a major role in decision-making. That is a very short list, mostly consisting of her and potentially Stacy Abrams. But Stacy Abrams would be forced to concede her loss in Georgia which she still hasn't done, and is also arrogant enough to demand actual power, making her unable to be easily controlled. She's also about as unphotogenic as any other fat black woman, and her smiling would be enough to put off half the country from voting for her thanks to losing their lunches at the sight of her teeth.

I honestly thought he (they) would have picked Susan Rice, but maybe she suffered from too much of what Gehenna pointed out: being too dirty.

Lobbyist reform is literally impossible. Let me explain why in brief.

It is impossible to define a lobbyist in any meaningful way that doesn't either run afoul of the first amendment or which is simply unworkable. Why? Well, what -is- a lobbyist? Your mind immediately goes to billion dollar company sending people to washington. This is lobbying... but what else is lobbying?

Have you ever contacted your local politician? Congratulations, you are a lobbyist.

Lobbying is any entreatment of a politician to perform an act. This goes from billion dollar companies asking for tax breaks all the way to grandma asking her politician to name a streat after the mayor's dog. Its all lobbying and there is no real way to legislate regulations on it that does not run afoul of the first amendment right of individuals to interact with the politicians. Lobbying reform is often put on the table as an idea, but the actual nitty gritty of making it is a -nightmare-.


But, let me suggest a change to the system that will get your intended effect and is also workable.


Repeal. The Seventeenth. Amendment.

Fuck the 17th, its the source of so many issues. Senators are not meant to be elected by the public, having them chosen by the state legislatures was meant as a break on insanity and meant that political parties had to always consider their states interests as a whole since it defacto made each senator have to go through its own electoral college. And made it a -lot- easier to primary senators because it meant that senators had to worry about enough rural districts getting pissy.

That one always seemed weird for your country. And when it happened. I don't get the motivations that drove that one. Then again, your next amendment was the 18th, so maybe there was some proto-dangerhair shit happening. [Cough suffragettes cough 19th cough women shouldn't vote]

I wonder, though, other than that, what could possibly correct that now? What could drive the elected to be actually electable for the good of their constituents? Certainly nothing that would ever get voted for in congress or the senate or state houses.

"If you are elected for public office, you are no longer allowed, for your lifetime, to hold any job outside of public office, but will receive a yearly pension ten times in excess of the mean income of those in your constituency. You are not allowed to receive gifts, rewards, stock, or other renumeration, nor is your spouse, on penalty of death."

If military members need to give up some of their constitutional rights, then politicians should as well.