Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2024 Presidential Election

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by WuDrWu View Post
    Well, as bad as the WSJ story was, and it was bad, the Time interview may be worse. Yikes.
    Holy cow, Now the Old Gray Lady with an odd "yeah he lies but it's all in good fun" left handed kind of compliment article about Sleepy Joe lying all the time.

    And Politico with an article about how Joe really wasn't involved in Hunter's business, however Joe's staff was BURIED in it.


    This is not Hannity, Alex Jones and Newsmax going after Joe. These are his biggest water carriers (ok, The Wall Street Journal is about as centrist as we can get these days but they are hardly enemies of the administration).

    Nate Silver (538) tweeted something about how abandoning Joe now is very dangerous, but at some point it's not as bad as his numbers. Maybe we're not there yet, but it's worth talking about.




    You just never know what the next 5 months will be like but to me it's most bothersome that Joe's terrible numbers are not affecting the Senate races. His awful term is not being worn by Dems in the Senate (likely the House too but there's much less polling data available). That is bad news for the GOP.

    Has anyone seen the May fund raising numbers? Just curious....as always, follow the money.


    EDIT

    According to CNN, Trump and the RNC raised a staggering $141 million in May. (compare to $76 million in April for Trump and $51 million for Biden and the DNC...the first month Trump and the RNC outpaced the Dems) They also announced that groups supporting Trump raised an additional $150 million.

    Biden and the Dems haven't released their numbers yet. They don't have to until later this month. They are likely not as good. They might be awful.
    Last edited by WuDrWu; 5 days ago.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ShockerPrez View Post
      I think we need to stop putting Senators in the executive branch. Governors or non-politicians.
      I could go along with that. But I'd rather see term limits in the Senate of no more than 8 years and then allow them to run for president if desired. These lifetime Congress people have to go. They are generally the ones who wreck our country in their own interest of power and money in their pockets.

      Comment


      • I've screamed about term limits forever, but 8 years is too restrictive. Senators should be allowed some continuity and an opportunity to span multiple Presidencies.

        16 or even 20 years is where I would begin.

        That would cut some of the teet-sucking lawyer snakes careers in half.
        Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!

        Comment


        • I agree about governors/Senators. Regarding term limits, 8 seems too short, 20 too long.

          Comment


          • I would love term limits, but really, we need to stop electing Senators as Presidents because they suck at the job. Senators' job is to debate topics and bullshit. They can't manage organizations or make decisions. We should not put them forth as presidential candidates.
            "When life hands you lemons, make lemonade." Better have some sugar and water too, or else your lemonade will suck!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Atxshoxfan View Post

              I could go along with that. But I'd rather see term limits in the Senate of no more than 8 years and then allow them to run for president if desired. These lifetime Congress people have to go. They are generally the ones who wreck our country in their own interest of power and money in their pockets.
              8 years would't work. It needs to be in multiples of 6.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by jdmee View Post

                8 years would't work. It needs to be in multiples of 6.
                Two terms works for me.

                Though if the electorate weren't a bunch of sheep, they could take care of that on their own.
                Infinity Art Glass - Fantastic local artist and Shocker fan
                RIP Guy Always A Shocker
                Carpenter Place - A blessing to many young girls/women
                ICT S.O.S - Great local cause fighting against human trafficking
                Wartick Insurance Agency - Saved me money with more coverage.
                Save Shocker Sports - A rallying cry

                Comment


                • Originally posted by pinstripers View Post
                  I agree about governors/Senators. Regarding term limits, 8 seems too short, 20 too long.
                  20 is a start. They should be able to span multiple Presidencies for sure. I wouldn't be opposed to 16 to 18. Whatever number it is, we can all agree that a 30+ year lifer is WAAAY too long.
                  Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by jdmee View Post

                    8 years would't work. It needs to be in multiples of 6.
                    Three 6 year terms is about perfect. Allows for continuity and allows them to span multiple Presidencies in a meaningful way (not just for two years worst case).
                    Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post
                      I've screamed about term limits forever, but 8 years is too restrictive. Senators should be allowed some continuity and an opportunity to span multiple Presidencies.

                      16 or even 20 years is where I would begin.

                      That would cut some of the teet-sucking lawyer snakes careers in half.
                      Senate terms in the Constitution were established at 6 year terms (2 per state as a compromise for small states where HOR are 2 year terms based on population which put more power into the large states). 6 year terms were to give some stability to the Senate where the HOR would possibly be constantly in flux. There is a certain amount of balance in this compromise. Most populated cities/states are blue cities/states, and it could have really caused an imbalance if this compromise wouldn't have happened.

                      We have three problems in Washington imo.

                      1. The President/Independent Agencies have too much power (which is connected to #3) which has developed over time, and Democrats love the power all the time, and Republicans have too (although it has been curbed a little on the Republican side by the Tea Party influx). However, the Tea Party influencers have done some dumb things recently (see Matt Gaets from Florida who has a safe district no matter what he does)
                      2. Congressmen (Senate and HOR) who never leave Washington, and become lobbyists after they leave Congress.
                      3. Non-elected agency personnel who are hired for life, and never leave, so they start to make decisions that should be left up to President, VP, and Cabinet leaders. Somehow their power needs to be curbed.

                      Two-Three terms for Senate could be good (maybe 4 two year terms for HOR), but the biggest corruption problem that we have is that our Congressmen don't ever leave Washington, and often become lobbyists (both foreign and domestic). That is where the Constitutional restrictions should be made (on lobbying at the National level) to curb corruption. There should be a number of years outside of Congress that former members must have another job prior to becoming a lobbyist.

                      Who has to introduce these changes? 38 states have to initiate Constitutional changes, or our very own two houses of Congress has to initiate these Constitutional changes. It's next to impossible to change the Constitution, so I'm not hopeful for reforms in these areas.
                      Last edited by Shockm; 4 days ago.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post

                        Three 6 year terms is about perfect. Allows for continuity and allows them to span multiple Presidencies in a meaningful way (not just for two years worst case).
                        I would prefer 2 but would GLADLY accept 3 vs nothing.

                        12 years will span AT LEAST 2 Presidents. If you can't make a dent in 12 years move the eff along.

                        5 terms in Congress in plenty. That's 10 years. Again, I'd prefer 3-4 but I'd GLADLY take 5 over none.


                        And am I the only one that thinks this is a winning move for either Presidential candidate? To me at least........

                        If Trump were to come out and say the following:


                        1)You all know we need to drain the swamp. I need your help. In fact, it's on YOU to drain the swamp but here's what I'll do to help.

                        2)In the first month I will work with Congress to submit legislation for the 28th Amendment to the Constitution calling for term limits for The House and Senate.

                        3)If 2 terms is good enough for the President (and it is) then it's good enough for Congress. There are plenty of smart people in every state that are capable of representing all of their constituents. It shouldn't be the same people year after year, on either side of the aisle.

                        4)Then each state, the People of this great Republic, can decide if they want DC and the swamp drained. And I will hold Congress accountable, whether it's controlled by Republicans or Democrats. If they won't pass it or it bogs down, we'll let you know why they are cowards.

                        Comment


                        • a winner

                          Comment


                          • While we're at it, stop electing senators through direct elections and put it back with the state legislatures.
                            "When life hands you lemons, make lemonade." Better have some sugar and water too, or else your lemonade will suck!

                            Comment


                            • Is there something in the Constitution about how the President and VP candidates cannot be from the same state?

                              Wouldn't that eliminate Marco and Byron Donalds, unless they give up their seats and move out of Florida? I think it's safe to say Trump isn't leaving the Sunshine State.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by WuDrWu View Post
                                Is there something in the Constitution about how the President and VP candidates cannot be from the same state?

                                Wouldn't that eliminate Marco and Byron Donalds, unless they give up their seats and move out of Florida? I think it's safe to say Trump isn't leaving the Sunshine State.
                                yes, but changing a residence is easy enough

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X