• CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      I still don’t understand what people think that will really do for the American people. I’m for several things - getting the money out of politics, have taxpayer-funded campaigns and stop the insider trading.

      …but I will never understand the term limits thing? If someone is deemed effective by their customers (us), they’ll be re-elected. I don’t see term limits proposed for any other job…

      • Brimos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Based on that logic, it seems you would be just fine with a king or queen in power for as long as the royal blood line flows… you know, as long as their doing a “good job”.

      • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        If someone is deemed effective by their customers (us), they’ll be re-elected. I don’t see term limits proposed for any other job…

        Except that in practice, that’s not how it works, thanks to our BS two party system, if you don’t want a republican to win a seat, you pretty much have to vote for the incumbent, or else the vote will be split by people who barely play attention to politics.

        If we had reached choice voting or similar it wouldn’t be an issue, but we don’t - so it is.

        As for why it would help, it’d fix the issue of DC being a retirement home for one thing. It’d also at least force lobbyists to rebuy politicians all the time

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yes, I’m all for ranked-choice voting. And I understand the problems with our system, I just don’t see how term limits will fix…anything at all.

          • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Again. It would fix senior citizens in politics. Very very few get elected for the first time at 70+, they start younger and then just never retire. If you only have an 8 year window, you can only retire at 8 years older than you started

      • FireTower@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Check my comment to the other guy. Tldr no term limits benefits lobbiest plus I’d rather have 4 people with different beliefs representing my state over the span of 16 years than 1 person. This would better ensure political minority view points get represented to some degree.

      • jayemar
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Also curious why not. Being in a career allows for the development of skills and relationships over time, and there’s certainly an art to building relationships and getting deals done that could improve the more someone is in office.

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, I feel the same way about this. Why is it okay to have a career in virtually any other form of expertise, but we want a bunch of amateurs running government?

          I just don’t get this sentiment, at all. I understand the frustration with government and how flawed it is (because people are flawed), but I don’t understand why the same people who don’t seek “outsiders” and amateurs to, say, drill their teeth or do open heart surgery, will turn around and frown on expertise in government.

          Why?

        • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I agree with you in theory, but really, is that how it often plays out in reality? It doesn’t seem to me that our most senior politicians are generally the most effective. In fact it seems the opposite, they usually tend to be the most corrupt (as measured by the suspiciously huge net worths they have), and the most entrenched in party lines, to the point that they’re not any more effective than any rank and file politician who just does what the party whip says.

          They do tend to be given more authority in committees and such, but I’d argue that doesn’t have much to do with them actually being effective.

          Our congress is filled with career politicians, and the whole thing is a circus

        • FireTower@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Building relationships and making deals is part of the problem funnily enough. Career politicians are more susceptible to corruption lobbying. IMO representatives should be every day Americans not the successor to a political dynasty or someone who spends most of their life in DC under the impression that they are representing the beliefs of people on the other side of the country.

          No one man should have the power of someone with 50 years in office.

          • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            This is why I mentioned getting the money out of politics. That’s the crux of the problem, not having people serve for their lives in government.

  • Vaggumon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    She need more stock trading tips?

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’d be nice to see all of Congress prevented from doing insider trading. I’m sure there would be nearly 100% bipartisan agreement on that - at least among the constituents.

  • billwashere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    As a liberal and an old man can we just say ….

    FFS , just retire you buncha old fucks.