2018 & 2020 Fast Approaching

felexsanders

Banned
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
33
Reaction score
2
Location
USA
2018 and 2020 will be here before we know it and already I am seeing signs of things that ought not to be. For one the Democratic Party is looking like a mish mash of runners in the presidential as is the Republican Party. The fact that non professional people want to run for office is a disturbing trend in our political election process. It will lead to more of the same as we have right now and that can’t be tolerated. If Trump has not taught us one thing it is to make sure that any candidate for president is qualified and sane and this means proper vetting in the candidacy portion of the election.

I have some ideas as to how this can be accomplished tell me what you think.

1. A committee is set up to vet all candidates that desire to run for office checking and re-checking their backgrounds and qualifications to include but not be limited to a.) Complete physical and mental evaluation by highly regarded professionals in their field to determine their physical, emotional and mental status b.) Complete evaluation and research into their personal and professional backgrounds to weed out unethical and immoral conduct and to determine if they have the appropriate education and experience for the position and c.) Complete legal both civil and criminal background checks to determine if there are pending lawsuits and/or other legal actions pending against the candidate in question.

If a candidate is found not to meet certain minimum standards of any of the above then said candidate would be immediately disqualified.

2. Banning of all Super Pac’s from operating for or against any candidate with or without their permission.
3. Banning all attacks against any candidate by any other candidate in a derogatory manner that would have a negative affect against any other candidate.
4. Banning any and all negative ads directed toward a candidate.

Any candidate found guilty of any of the above would be immediately disqualified and any entity violating any of the above would be subject to judicial review and perhaps prosecution for interfering with the election process.

Last but not least and one thing I am sure would be the most difficult is to amend the voting section of the Constitution to state the popular instead of the electoral college vote be the means of election within the United States.

It is imperative that our election process be overhauled to become way more ethical and professional in every area. The last election proved to me that we are returning to the Wild West when it comes to our elections and we look and feel like a rabble instead of an educated nation with the most sophisticated election process in the world. We must get the election process under control and begin hiring people for our elected positions who are educated, professional, experienced and ethical in every sense of the words.
 

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,114
Reaction score
8,867
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
modifying article 2 and shitcanning the 1st and 12th amendments would require a constitutional convention, followed by a lengthy process of state by state approvals.

this particular hat trick will never happen, and you couldn't get even one of them done by 2018 or 2020.
 

Gregg

Life is good
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
248
Age
77
Location
In my house on the river
The Republicans went through hell in 2016 and won.
The Democrats informally did much of what you propose (or similar to it) and lost.
Even with somewhat opposite approaches both parties ended up with candidates who had high unfavorable ratings.
Voters generally don't like hand-picked/annointed candidates (Bob Dole and Hillary Clinton come to mind).
 

cmhbob

Did...did I do that?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
5,770
Reaction score
4,954
Location
Green Country
Website
www.bobmuellerwriter.com
Those are all so highly subjective as to be unenforceable. Who decides "appropriate" or "immoral?"

Given the way the legal system in this country works (anyone can sue anyone for anything), I'm not that concerned about pending lawsuits, nor would I be concerned to see several settled out of court.
 

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
1. A committee is set up to vet all candidates that desire to run for office checking and re-checking their backgrounds and qualifications to include but not be limited to a.) Complete physical and mental evaluation by highly regarded professionals in their field to determine their physical, emotional and mental status b.) Complete evaluation and research into their personal and professional backgrounds to weed out unethical and immoral conduct and to determine if they have the appropriate education and experience for the position and c.) Complete legal both civil and criminal background checks to determine if there are pending lawsuits and/or other legal actions pending against the candidate in question.

If a candidate is found not to meet certain minimum standards of any of the above then said candidate would be immediately disqualified.

2. Banning of all Super Pac’s from operating for or against any candidate with or without their permission.
3. Banning all attacks against any candidate by any other candidate in a derogatory manner that would have a negative affect against any other candidate.
4. Banning any and all negative ads directed toward a candidate.

Any candidate found guilty of any of the above would be immediately disqualified and any entity violating any of the above would be subject to judicial review and perhaps prosecution for interfering with the election process.

I oppose every single one of those ideas, and as William said, every single one of them is blatantly unconstitutional. And should be.

However, I would be strongly in favor of a 33% sales tax on all campaign spending, with the money going to committee of nonpartisan fact checkers with the authority to investigate and vet all campaign advertising claims, and run ads detailing their findings.
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
11,660
Reaction score
6,549
Location
west coast, canada
I would suggest that there be a regulation that you have to work your way up: before you run for mayor, you have to be elected as a councilor, before you run for governor, you have to be elected as mayor, and before you run for president, you have to be elected as a governor, a congressperson or a senator. People have to be able to see you in action, to see if you can work with others, and how you go about getting stuff done. None of this 'man rides out of no-where' straight into the top job. (At whatever level.)
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
I would suggest that there be a regulation that you have to work your way up: before you run for mayor, you have to be elected as a councilor, before you run for governor, you have to be elected as mayor, and before you run for president, you have to be elected as a governor, a congressperson or a senator. People have to be able to see you in action, to see if you can work with others, and how you go about getting stuff done. None of this 'man rides out of no-where' straight into the top job. (At whatever level.)

Does that happen in Canada? I can't imagine anything of this sort being enacted in the U.S., for a raft of Constitutional reasons.

caw
 

cmhbob

Did...did I do that?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
5,770
Reaction score
4,954
Location
Green Country
Website
www.bobmuellerwriter.com
That would force us to have career politicians, and I can't see that we've done so well with that.

Lots of people seemed to like the last non-career politician we had as POTUS.
 

felexsanders

Banned
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
33
Reaction score
2
Location
USA
Yes I am if the critical statements are damaging to the character or if they are conjecture or lies and if it is wholly unwarranted being used simply to gain an advantage. I am just sick and tired of all of the lies and deceit, it is not what we are as human beings and not what we are as a nation. Were better than that. Now if a candidate is unfit in most every way then it is the duty of all who know to unveil his or hers position as being compromised. Trump is a good example. A villain must be unmasked and swiftly.
 

felexsanders

Banned
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
33
Reaction score
2
Location
USA
I can not hold with deceit and lies and especially coming from the chief exec. of the nation. Never! True most all have lied in office but this guy takes the golden ring for such. Besides he's a mental disaster.
 

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
Yes I am if the critical statements are damaging to the character or if they are conjecture or lies and if it is wholly unwarranted being used simply to gain an advantage.

To gain an advantage? Isn't that the motivation for doing anything in a presidential race? To gain an advantage. That's the point. To win, right?

And who gets to decide what is "damaging to character" or is "conjecture or lies"?

- - - Updated - - -

That would force us to have career politicians, and I can't see that we've done so well with that.

Lots of people seemed to like the last non-career politician we had as POTUS.

I didn't.
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
11,660
Reaction score
6,549
Location
west coast, canada
Does that happen in Canada? I can't imagine anything of this sort being enacted in the U.S., for a raft of Constitutional reasons.

caw
Nope. We have the same dumb 'all comers' system.
In the last mayoral campaign, among other newbies, we had one guy who had been in private (somewhat dodgy) business. His only previous attempt at running for office had been to run for MP in a previous Federal election. In the local election he was running for mayor, not city councilor, with no reputation as one of those people who is involved in local politics, getting involved in the community, etc. So how do we know what he would be like if he were to get the Big Chair? Like other businessmen who get into politics, he has no track record of working with others. For all we knew, his sole interest in the job was to make it easier for his previous occupation to flourish.

It's people like that who ensure that our current mayor gets re-elected, term after term. When the voters eliminate the out-of-nowhere contenders, the one-issue ponies, the agitators-for-the-sake-of-agitation, and the dissenters, there's no one but the mayor left.
(We have one guy who constantly haunts the 'letters to the editor' page in the local paper. He has no actual ideas of his own, no solutions, but he's always against whatever the mayor/council have done. He may be useful as a gadfly, but we have no idea what he would do if he gained power - complain about his own actions?)
 

M Louise

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
291
Reaction score
86
Location
Southern hemisphere
I've just finished reading a piece in the New Yorker, David Remnick in conversation with NYT correspondent Maggie Haberman on covering Trump. They talk about the family nepotism, the sleazy corrupt company Trump keeps, the 'gang wars' inside the White House and the irrational slew of lies. Then Maggie Haberman says: 'Look, I think that he has an amazing belief in his own ability to will what he thinks into reality. '

That insight is a little scary because it explains for me why Trump's claims and counter-claims and denials are so compelling to many people. He believes himself, believes in himself, and they find that confidence impressive. If he was just given a fair chance and enough time, as he says and they agree, he could do what he says he wants to do. Right now he's being held back by distractions and obstacles and unfairness. The logic of Trump makes no sense to me if I think of 'logic' but strength of conviction counts for so much. Just how far might he go?
 

felexsanders

Banned
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
33
Reaction score
2
Location
USA
To gain an advantage? Isn't that the motivation for doing anything in a presidential race? To gain an advantage. That's the point. To win, right?

And who gets to decide what is "damaging to character" or is "conjecture or lies"?

- - - Updated - - -



I didn't.

Semantics and rationalizing are those things utilized by those whom would attempt to confuse and negotiate to their advantage, for example, in 45s case that advantage is selfish and self-serving and not for the people but is blatantly self-serving in every way imagineable. He is one thing however, consistent, he has stuck to his play book the art of the deal to the letter.
 

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
Semantics and rationalizing are those things utilized by those whom would attempt to confuse and negotiate to their advantage, for example, in 45s case that advantage is selfish and self-serving and not for the people but is blatantly self-serving in every way imagineable. He is one thing however, consistent, he has stuck to his play book the art of the deal to the letter.

what?