Homepage Forums Politics UNTESTED

This topic contains 19 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  Unseen 2 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • Author
  • #10349


    Now it is supported by the majority of Americans.  Things can change.

    Most other solutions I’ve read here require top-down kinds of reform, but I personally would rather focus on grassroots/bottom-up approaches. The politicians are not going to reform themselves, or pass laws in our favor unless enough people push for it. Most recently, Citizens United and Steve Bannon truly fucked up the way Americans get inundated with big dollar media campaigns, and exposed to aggressively packaged, hot-button “journalism”.

    It’s the masses of voters who need to wake up and inform themselves reasonably. I’m thinking of a three-fold (or more) approach: 1) Build a new party that scrutinizes and openly documents every candidate’s bona fides (including voluntary exams), and tracks their behavior and credibility over time; 2) Make this party a NO CONTRIBUTIONS party, i.e. every candidate in the party has an equal chance for recognition if NONE of them accept big money; 3) Help citizens to find vetted or reliablly curated news sources and stories.

    The problem of course is that this would require voluntary participation of both a self-informed electorate, and the candidates. I don’t want to exclude any of your ideas, but point out that we probably need multi-pronged strategies to induce the tipping points needed for positive change.

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by  PopeBeanie. Reason: added 3rd-fold approach

    Trump is the tipping point and possibly we will see people like these women get elected. Hope the video plays wherever you are.



    Beanie, your ideas make sense. But we  know the reality of human nature and capability.

    Having an exam and needing a license for every other conceivable profession or endeavor while permitting an exemption for the highest office is beyond reckless. It is insane.  Can’t just sit on a jury.  Even in law we protect the accused by giving voir dire to defense.  Get the biased or incompetent jurors out of there!  Yet we are willing to allow a candidate who has not proven anything to run?  But wait.  If they are not born here or naturalized they are not eligible.  Thus we do worry about their loyalty.  But we don’t about their competence! It is insane.  And it may not seem to be cuz custom has made us all into idiots.  But it is insane.



    I think we took the whole “Anybody can be President” a little too far lol…I mean I think honestly that when they wrote the Constitution, they honestly believed that the checks and balances of power would work, but they don’t work when everyone is so fucking brainwashed! The Founding Fathers didn’t account for utter stupidity.




    All current polling suggests that people not only feel good about the economy but give Trump credit for its success. In an NBC-Wall Street Journal poll released last week, 50% of Americans approved of the job Trump was doing with the economy while only 34% disapproved. Those numbers on the economy were far better than how people said Trump was handling immigration (41% approve/51% disapprove) or the US relationship with Russia (26% approve/51% disapprove).
    And yet, in that same NBC-WSJ poll, just 45% approved of Trump’s performance as President overall while 52% disapproved.
    That disconnect isn’t a fluke. In the Real Clear Politics aggregate of polls, 50.4% approve of Trump’s handling of the economy while 42.3% disapprove. The RCP average of Trump’s overall job performance produces this: 43.3% approve, 52.9% disapprove.

    FROM… Donald Trump’s very weird polling problem

Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.