Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

stirs

Government Shutdown

520 posts in this topic

Over 90% of Congressional incumbents are reelected to office, yet Congress as a whole has an approval rating of less than 10%.

 

Solution: Get rid of political gerrymandering of districts and limitless campaign contributions by billionaires and big business.

 

Then, and only then, will the percentage of incumbents reelected tumble. 

 

Once that happens, most Congressmen will quickly reevaluate their views to align more closely with the majority of American citizens, instead of their extremist deep pocketed sponsors.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look that way...the debt is nothing to worry about folks.

 

Carrying debt at the highest levels in the history of the nation (outside of a very brief period during WW2) is not a bad thing.

 

All is good, keep reading US Weekly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the infamous words of Vice President Dick Cheney:

 

"Deficits don't matter."

 

Think about this: How do we EVER pay off the Debt if the moment we take in enough in taxes to start paying it off, Republicans use it as an excuse for tax cuts?

 

It is worth remembering just how we got here. When the Bush Administration took office, they were handed a balanced budget in which the government was actually collecting more in taxes than it needed to run the federal government.

 

Less than two years later, O'Neill was warning of a HALF-TRILLION DOLLAR deficit for 2003. The surplus revenue under Clinton was used to start paying off our Debt which had exploded under Reagan and the first President Bush.

 

Presidential candidate George W. Bush actually campaigned on the fact that because we were collecting more in taxes than it takes to run the government, that means we were being "overtaxed", telling cheering crowds, "It's not the government's money, it's YOUR money!", and therefore deserved a "tax cut"... the much heralded "Bush Tax Cut" that we are fighting over today, despite the fact that the original premise in support of them... a budget surplus... hasn't existed in over 12 years.

 

http://crooksandliars.com/mugsy/ten-years-ago-today-bush-fires-economic-team

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redistricting, gerrymandering and voter suppression laws are the football equivalent of-

 

"We cannot put a team good enough to even compete on a level playing field, so we'll simply start paying people off to change the rules, cheat when nobody is looking and hope that no one catches us in the act."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redistricting, gerrymandering and voter suppression laws are the football equivalent of-

 

"We cannot put a team good enough to even compete on a level playing field, so we'll simply start paying people off to change the rules, cheat when nobody is looking and hope that no one catches us in the act."

 

Agreed with one slight exception.

 

Our political system is so broken, those on the right show little to no concern about being caught cheating anymore.  They brag about how voter suppression will guarantee victories for them on tape to their loyal minions, then turn around and provide feeble lies about statistically non existent voter fraud to the general public.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over 90% of Congressional incumbents are reelected to office, yet Congress as a whole has an approval rating of less than 10%.

Solution: Get rid of political gerrymandering of districts and limitless campaign contributions by billionaires and big business.

Then, and only then, will the percentage of incumbents reelected tumble.

Once that happens, most Congressmen will quickly reevaluate their views to align more closely with the majority of American citizens, instead of their extremist deep pocketed sponsors.

They are never going to reverse this....unfortunately. Once you open this money vault it will be impossible to seal back up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are never going to reverse this....unfortunately. Once you open this money vault it will be impossible to seal back up.

 

I don't know if it is impossible to reverse, but it is difficult to imagine a scenario where reforms are possible when our supposed "political representatives" are stooges for powerful moneyed interests and the majority of the judges on the United States Supreme Court are bought and paid for as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as Obamacare goes, I think if I were a Republican, I would just say, "we tried to stop it, but cannot".  Here you go America, enjoy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The impact of recent Gerrymandering is greatly overstated by the left these days.  The reality is that republicans would control the House even if congressional districts went back to what they were 5-10 years ago.  The problem with the belief is that they use nationwide vote totals which are completely irrelevant irt the house elections.  Which is how the founders designed things. 

 

 

What if we “re-run” the 2012 House election, but using the old districts? We have done that simulation, using the 2008 presidential vote in both the old and new districts to capture how the redistricting might have moved partisans around. If we assume that nothing else affects House election outcomes but the partisanship of the districts—in other words, if we allow redistricting to have its maximum possible effect—we find that the 2011 redistricting cost Democrats 7 seats in 2012. This is not nothing, but it’s far less than what the Democrats needed to take back the House and about half what Wang estimated.

 

The effect is even smaller if we incorporate other important factors. Incumbency is the most important of these: lots of Republicans who were running as challengers or in open seats in 2010—and then won—ran as incumbents for the first time in 2012. We know that incumbency is a powerful factor in House elections, bringing candidates greater visibility, adding to their campaign coffers, and deterring quality challengers from running. On average, an incumbent in 2012 ran five percentage points ahead of a non-incumbent candidate from the same party in a similar seat. Sixty-one seats were were decided by less than this margin.

 

More important, once we took incumbency into account, the apparent effect of gerrymandering vanished. That is, the ability of Republicans to retain the House majority may have been due to incumbency advantage, not new and more favorable districts.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as Obamacare goes, I think if I were a Republican, I would just say, "we tried to stop it, but cannot".  Here you go America, enjoy.

 

Agreed, its time to give up that fight and let the chips fall where they may. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites