It's time for a conservative party

[spencer rifle]

Nothing appears to arrest the inexorable leftward creep except a massive reset - financial, political, societal and/or military. Sometimes my only consolation is "pretty soon all this nonsense will be swept away." Still not looking forward to it, though.

 

[Dddrees]

Other than full disclosure of where the money comes from, I see no reason for wholesale reform.

Limit the money, reduce the chances for corruption. Reduce the need for our representative spending so much time on campaign fund raises. Reduce the influence of those with money. What else did I miss?

 

[spencer rifle]

Limit the money, reduce the chances for corruption. Reduce the need for our representative spending so much time on campaign fund raises. Reduce the influence of those with money. What else did I miss?

You missed "Take away the rights of those who want to contribute to the candidates they support."

 

[hoosierdoc]

So, we now need some new rules to keep us from re-electing the same people over and over?

George Washington thought we did. Clearly we do.

 

[ATM]

George Washington thought we did. Clearly we do.

It might have even made sense for that society in his day.

 

[Dddrees]

You missed "Take away the rights of those who want to contribute to the candidates they support."

Disagree, just because you reform it doesn't mean you have take away their rights but you could do it in a way that it levels the field and reduces the need for such excessive amounts that are just completely ridiculous.

 

[churchmouse]

Why does anyone still want to be ruled by parties?

Because it has become the norm. Brainwashed into a system that is working to control us.

I hate them all.

 

[jamil]

Too bad Trump lets his personality get in the way of governing, at least in my opinion. Precious time is being wasted over silly noise, much self induced. I'd love to ask him why the White House doesn't close ranks like the libs do. Why, at age 70, he can't control his instincts. He makes it very easy for the media and libs to criticize him, and make many of us shake our heads.

If only he would ignore the noise and concentrate on being a leader which is what we elected him for. After having eight years of a marxist trying to destroy what and who we are, Trump was a breath of fresh air. Right now, the best thing I can say about him is he is not Hillary.

This is exactly my position on Trump. Pretty much the whole thing.

 

[jamil]

How can you be so right about this but so wrong about Salma Hayek?????

What? How could this be?

I agree with limiting terms.

I also wonder how different things would be if rules were changed to restrict incumbents from campaigning while in office. My hope is that it would keep currently-employed politicians focused on government business their whole term. Once their term expires they are free to campaign as much as they want for the next available elected opening...including a limit on total non-consecutive terms served.

Isn't high time that campaign finance reform is enacted as well?

I think the thing that makes cronies work together is that there's power and money to be had. If government didn't have as much power to be sought by cronies campaigning while in office wouldn't matter so much and neither would campaign finance reform. What if the government couldn't give special interests anything because they don't have that power?

It might have even made sense for that society in his day.

I'm not convinced term limits would change the power structures and what really fuels Washington.

 

[Dddrees]

What? How could this be?





I think the thing that makes cronies work together is that there's power and money to be had. If government didn't have as much power to be sought by cronies campaigning while in office wouldn't matter so much and neither would campaign finance reform. What if the government couldn't give special interests anything because they don't have that power?



I'm not convinced term limits would change the power structures and what really fuels Washington.

I not to recently saw an interesting proposal made. Shanghai supposedly pays their representatives more appropriately given their responsibilities. The fact that they do so seems to attract better talent and promotes less corruption.

 

[hoosierdoc]

How about a pension that declines with each time you're re-elected? After your third term it goes to zero.

 

[churchmouse]

I not to recently saw an interesting proposal made. Shanghai supposedly pays their representatives more appropriately given their responsibilities. The fact that they do so seems to attract better talent and promotes less corruption.

With the runaway lobbying we have on the hill the money is right in your face 24/7. That will not stop anytime soon. If ever.

 

[HoughMade]

You missed "Take away the rights of those who want to contribute to the candidates they support."

That darned First Amendment is such a pesky thing.

 

[ATM]

Tarring and feathering the corrupt might promote less corruption.

 

[sheepdog697]

I had hoped the election of Trump would solidify Republicans into a concerted effort to undo years of liberal creep on our policies. I had hoped controlling all three branches of government would give them the power they claimed they needed to do all the stuff they ran for.

It's clear that Trump is more conservative than the national republican party, and that the GOP cannot be trusted. I think it's time for a conservative party to emerge, independent from Republican party, and start to make inroads. Honestly what does it matter if repubs have house and senate if they refuse to do what we elected them to do? Conservative party members of congress can caucus with dems to help control committee chairmanships.

I've had enough of the republican party and want a non-libertarian alternative. The election of trump has merely exposed the republicans for who they are. Big-government liberals. Enough.

Yea its absolutely ridiculous. We have everything, and should be passing all of the things they promised. Instead we have 3 different groups that all oppose each other. It's a joke, i guess the only positive thing is queen CU** is not in the white house.

 

[Dddrees]

How about a pension that declines with each time you're re-elected? After your third term it goes to zero.

Great thought, but if the corruption continues it's extremely possible the money they lose is less of an incentive than the other moneys and positions awaiting them from other sources.

 

[jamil]

How about a pension that declines with each time you're re-elected? After your third term it goes to zero.

With the runaway lobbying we have on the hill the money is right in your face 24/7. That will not stop anytime soon. If ever.

Great thought, but if the corruption continues it's extremely possible the money they lose is less of an incentive than the other moneys and positions awaiting them from other sources.

Many congress critters get into congress and actually have to rely on their salaries at first because they're not rich. Yet they leave office years later rich. Pensions to them, at that point, are pocket change. And sometimes that's because their prominent position makes them interesting enough to make money writing books or give paid speeches, or whatnot. And of course there are others that probably make money through crony deals (Harry Reid comes to mind).

I still think the only way to fix congress is to limit their power such that it's not worth buying. Okay. So maybe congress and the government won't be powerful enough to legislate your favorite ideology. Maybe you don't get to impose tree bark and alfalfa for school lunches. Maybe you don't get free birth control. Maybe you don't get to ban gay weddings. But then the government won't be so powerful that every rich person wants to buy a piece of that power.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Tarring and feathering the corrupt might promote less corruption.

Yes, but depending on who you ask, either everybody's corrupt, or nobody's corrupt.

 

[churchmouse]

Many congress critters get into congress and actually have to rely on their salaries at first because they're not rich. Yet they leave office years later rich. Pensions to them, at that point, are pocket change. And sometimes that's because their prominent position makes them interesting enough to make money writing books or give paid speeches, or whatnot. And of course there are others that probably make money through crony deals (Harry Reid comes to mind).

I still think the only way to fix congress is to limit their power such that it's not worth buying. Okay. So maybe congress and the government won't be powerful enough to legislate your favorite ideology. Maybe you don't get to impose tree bark and alfalfa for school lunches. Maybe you don't get free birth control. Maybe you don't get to ban gay weddings. But then the government won't be so powerful that every rich person wants to buy a piece of that power.

Campaign war chest donations. Those that sit in the seats of power wish to keep them. That costs huge money. The pander and coddle those that feed their campaigns.

 

[oldpink]

What a surprise that "campaign finance reform" aka the government regulating whom you support and how much you're willing to do so, the left's favorite hobby horse, would get repeated mention?