Thread: Presidential Dynasty

POLITICAL FUTURES
“The population of the United States now exceeds 300 million, and the talent pool of the world’s only superpower is deep and rich. How is it that the country is on the verge of filling its highest office for the sixth consecutive term from one of two families? That every President from 1989 to 2017 may be a Bush or a Clinton is a national disgrace. What has happened to the American Republic? How does it differ from a banana republic—where a couple of dominant families often run everything for generations? Have we driven the vast majority of the potentially best Presidents out of the contest because of the high personal and professional costs of running for office? Are we the voters responsible because we are too lazy to go beyond the simplistic attractions of familiarity and high name identification? Or, most disturbing of all, has our political system become ossified, so that we are too fearful of change to seek out the most outstanding leaders among us for the toughest job in the world? We don’t pretend to have the answers. But we are shocked and dismayed that more people aren’t even bothering to ask the questions.â€

I think politics has sunk so low and attracts people who are so sleazy, and such filthy liers that no decent person wants to be affiliated with them.

I think its like gofer said - those with money and name recognition will get the most votes because the average voter doesn't care. That's why voter turnout is so low. That's why we've had so many years of terrible leaders. They've got the money and they've got the backing because of their names'. Why isn't Tancredo getting more publicity? Because 99% of the population hasn't heard of him. Why won't they hear about him? Because they haven't already.

There are probably more and more nuances that could get thrown in there - maybe something like the fact that families have to work more and more to keep up a standard of living that is set for us by the rich, while they take more and more of the money - when do the masses have time to devote to following politics closely? They catch what they can on the news, which is featuring the top canditates who have nothing to offer, but have a stance set up to not offend anyone. Then they (the candidate) toe the line through the primaries and we've got two more worthless people to choose from - the "lesser of two evils." Either that or the voter is just so disgusted with the politicians altogether they refuse to vote, deciding not to back either of the "lesser of two evils."

Just some ideas...

Originally Posted by gofer

Have we driven the vast majority of the potentially best Presidents out of the contest because of the high personal and professional costs of running for office?

Yes. Pat Buchanan and Richard Lamb to name a couple. Hope we don't have to add Tancredo, Hunter and Paul to the list.......

The fact is, we vote for these people and then go back to sleep. The number of people who actually participate in the political process is pathetically low. Personally, I vote in every election...city, county, state and federal. Most people couldn't care less, because we live such an affluent life in America these days. No one is in "pain" or worried about their future.

I was amazed (and proud) to see so many people stand up against this Amnesty bill. But, will the American people follow through and fight for our sovereignty, culture, language and etc.?


That still remains to be seen? God help us.

If we go: Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton...............

The rest of the world is going to think we are insane.
That is half the problem with our country. Are we crazy or what??
This has got to stop!!

NO MORE BUSHES AND NO MORE CLINTONS!!

DONE, OVER, FINISHED! IT IS TIME FOR AMERICA TO MOVE ON!!

NO MORE DYNASTIES. IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL FOR RELATIVES OF FORMER PRESIDENTS TO RUN FOR OFFICE. SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED AT ALL. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH FRESH AIR TO KEEP DEMOCRACY ALIVE. NEXT THING YA KNOW CHELSEA WILL BE PRESIDENT. DONT VOTE FOR ANYMORE RELATIVES, WIVES, SONS OR CLOSE ASSOCIATES FOR THAT MATTER. WE NEED A DIFFERENT PRESIDENT EACH TIME. THAT IS THE WHOLE IDEA OF LIMITING THE TERM OF PRESIDENT. NO MORE CHAIN PRESIDENTS.

thedude said

maybe something like the fact that families have to work more and more to keep up a standard of living that is set for us by the rich, while they take more and more of the money - when do the masses have time to devote to following politics closely?

It's even more than that--families have to work more and more to keep food on the table and a roof overhead! I WISH I was keeping up a standard of living set by the rich!! But the thought is correct, few have the time and/or energy to follow politics closely, or they are so put off by all of the garbage that goes on that they don't CARE who wins!

Either that or the voter is just so disgusted with the politicians altogether they refuse to vote, deciding not to back either of the "lesser of two evils."

Sometimes I can't blame them--The lesser of two evils is still evil!