'19 Special & '20 Congressional Election Thread

[RJKarl]

But you call me "an establishment Democrat" while for at least as long as you have been alive I have opposed a cornerstone of their policy in campaign financing.

Give me a hint how many more times will I have to say -take the power- before some of you will actually pay attention? My bad, because RJ says you must ignore it as it doesn't fit your prejudice.

 

[Strickland33]

I generally don't listen to people who talk about themselves in the third person.

 

[Biff Tannen]

BiffTannen takes note.

 

[BillBrasky]

But you call me "an establishment Democrat" while for at least as long as you have been alive I have opposed a cornerstone of their policy in campaign financing.

Give me a hint how many more times will I have to say -take the power- before some of you will actually pay attention? My bad, because RJ says you must ignore it as it doesn't fit your prejudice.

Totally agree with you about taking the power. In order to do that we need vanquish the do-nothings that have been dragging the major liberal political party down for 40 years. Acknowledging how underwhelming and disappointing they have been is a good first step.

 

[RJKarl]

Some have and some haven't. But don't do it haphazardly. If you pick the right ones and win, even those who remain will be afraid and move.

But then again, you keep telling me I'm just an establishment crony.

 

[TownieDeac]

For what it's worth, Amy McGrath raised $41 million, and will lose to Booker who raised just over $800k.

 

[PhDeac]

For what it's worth, Amy McGrath raised $41 million, and will lose to Booker who raised just over $800k.

We have a Townie News projection from the DC bureau. Charles Booker has won the Kentucky Democratic Party primary and will face Mitch McConnell in November.

 

[RJKarl]

For what it's worth, Amy McGrath raised $41 million, and will lose to Booker who raised just over $800k.

Booker is only up 2000 votes as of a few hours ago. The election will turn on when those hundreds of thousands of mail-in votes were cast. If they were sent in late, he's got a great chance. If it was earlier, he could be in a lot of trouble.

 

[redwing42]

Exactly. They want to keep their kush $150K/year part-time jobs which also nets them hundreds of thousands of dollars on the side.

Establishment Dems care far more about themselves than their constituents. If it was the opposite these common sense reforms would have already been enacted. Instead we give compromise soup which isn't that much more progressive than ideas proposed by Nixon.

Establishment Dems are either grossly disingenuous, or really bad at their jobs. Either way it is time for them to go. They are failures.

The answer is term limits...or at least part of the answer. 5 terms as representative, either 2 or 3 as Senator. Of course, that will likely never happen either.

 

[IamThunderbolt]

The answer is term limits...or at least part of the answer. 5 terms as representative, either 2 or 3 as Senator. Of course, that will likely never happen either.

Supreme court too.

I like 1 18-year term, filled every 2 years. Each President gets to nominate 2 justices/term.

 

[RJKarl]

The answer is term limits...or at least part of the answer. 5 terms as representative, either 2 or 3 as Senator. Of course, that will likely never happen either.

Term limits, without rigid campaign finance laws, would make Congress infinitely more corrupt than it is. There would be two options for the constant turnover. The first is only rich people could afford to run. The second is big money PACs/SuperPACs would own the candidates even more. After you win and know you can't return, votes would be up for sale even more. In the last year of your term limit, members would be begging for jobs.

It sounds good until you think about the nuts and bolts.

 

[Highland Deac]

The answer is term limits...or at least part of the answer. 5 terms as representative, either 2 or 3 as Senator. Of course, that will likely never happen either.

When the Constitution was written, the average life expectancy for a man was somewhere in his 50s. If they had known that lifetime appointees would someday routinely live into their 80s or 90s, I doubt that they would have included that provision, and would instead have included some form of term limits for federal judges, SC justices, and similar positions instead of lifetime appointments. I also agree that term limits (or at least a maximum age limit) should be included for elected officials as well. Even if you can physically serve as a Senator or Congressman into your 80s and 90s, the mental aspect isn't nearly as clear. Maybe having 75 be the maximum age would be a good place to start, although as you said, my guess is that the leading pols in both parties would fight like hell to keep that from happening.

 

[deaconson]

Whoa whoa whoa

Discussing what the framers of the constitution would want now is a non starter.

Am I misremembering or were many of us taught a long time ago that the constitution was a living, breathing, document?

 

[Biff Tannen]

Whoa whoa whoa

Discussing what the framers of the constitution would want now is a non starter.

Am I misremembering or were many of us taught a long time ago that the constitution was a living, breathing, document?

Depends on the issue.

 

[WFFaithful]

Whoa whoa whoa

Discussing what the framers of the constitution would want now is a non starter.

Am I misremembering or were many of us taught a long time ago that the constitution was a living, breathing, document?

That's your Marxist public school indoctrination coming through.

 

[Kory]

fwiw

 

[RJKarl]

fwiw

Hmmm...sounds like what I've been posting since before the election...

 

[ChrisL68]

I hope Democrats get behind whoever wins because effectively either one of them could accomplish the same thing in the unlikely event either beats Mitch McConnell.

 

[WakeForestRanger]

 

[RJKarl]

And is at the Supreme Court trying to kill millions of Americans who have pre-existing conditions.