Gold Winger Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 I think that we ought to scrap the entire popular vote process for President and let the legislatures of the several states choose the electors. Think about the peace and quiet. No campaigning on TV. No rallies. No stupid bumper stickers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoutingagain Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Acutally I was thinking going to something like a combination of American Idol and Survivor with all the candidates of each major party starting out in their own tribes, third part candidates could be a separte tribe. Each week one tribe member is voted out by the viewing public until you get three major candidates left. Seems like some folks know more about the participants on American Idol than they do about the Presidential candidates. SA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GernBlansten Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 How about a national random drawing. Can't be worse than what we've had recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Winger Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 That wouldn't be Constitutional, my idea would be. I'd still like to see more parties than the Reds and the Blues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GernBlansten Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 GWB on the Constitution: 'It's just a !@#$@$%#$@ piece of paper' http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/091205pieceofpaper.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Winger Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 Well, GWB's predecessor said a number of interesting things as well such as "If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees." and "You know the one thing that's wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say." To borrow from Webster, "There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScout Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 I like GWs idea. That is how it originally was and how I believe the majority of the framers wished it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John-in-KC Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 Here's a scary thought someone in my office had... Hillary goes supportive or at least quiet. Election Day happens. You-Know-Who wins. Hillary's payoff: John Paul Stevens seat on the Supreme Court. I was listening to NPR the last couple days. Apparently there are more than a few Democratic women who have decided NWIH they'll give their vote to Obama. I guess the real question is how bad she wants the job and how willing she is to help the party implode. If Lisa's right, she'll be on the frontlines helping heal the party. If Lisa's not right, watch for the sucking noise from Denver... I still want Dr Rice for VP... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisabob Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 John, Rest easy - it isn't going to happen. She wouldn't make it through the Senate confirmation process even if she wanted the seat - which I rather doubt. While it is possible for a sitting Senator to become a supreme court justice, it is exceedingly rare in the modern era and Clinton does not have a typical job history for strong candidates to the court (ie, no prior experience as a judge and her experience as a lawyer is rather distant at this point). Of the current justices, 8 of the 9 were sitting justices in the federal appeals (Circuit) court system when nominated. The 9th was a state appellate court justice (Souter). The last US Supreme Court nominee who lacked prior judicial experience was Harriet Miers and you may recall that her own party wasn't supportive of that nomination, questioning her credentials. And since when has Obama become "You-Know-Who" anyway? Like the evil wizard in the Harry Potter Books, people fear to speak his name? Or did you maybe mean McCain, who seems, at times, to share Voldemort's temper and seeming immortality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Winger Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Speaking of Obama, a picture is worth a thousand words. http://www.truthorfiction.com/images/salute.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John-in-KC Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Lisa, ... Yes, YNW was to Obama, but it was in the pre-Harry Potter days vein... The thing I do not like about Obama is we're going to cut and run, and leave another nation high and dry for takeover. Mark my words... if we leave Iraq before the end of 2010 (and it will take most of that time to get out, unless we abandon our equipment in place), it will be part of greater Iran by 2015. Yes, as an old soldier I don't like how Bush has treated the force. We ride our Army and Marine Corps hard, put the divisions away wet, and call them out before the dawn. That's fixable, if the Administration wants to put resources against the problem. That said, I'm old school... if you decide to fight, you must decide to win! Have a great Memorial Day weekend all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilLup Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 I have at least a little sympathy for the Democrats in Florida. My memory is that the early primary was "forced" by the Republicans in the legislature over the opposition of the Democrats. But it is the Florida Democrats who have to pay for the action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokala Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 "My memory is that the early primary was "forced" by the Republicans in the legislature over the opposition of the Democrats. But it is the Florida Democrats who have to pay for the action." That is correct. Florida's legislature is about 2/3 Republican. The legisltaure set the date of the primary. Florida also has a closed primary. The DNC stripped FL of all of it's delegates and the RNC stripped FL of half of it's delegates. Personally, I think the primary system is outdated. It also sets up the fundraising to support only candidates that the lobbyists feel will win. With the technology available, they should be able to hold a general election and a runoff if needed. FL gets the blame for the 2000 election. OH gets the blame for the 2004 election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Winger Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 "FL gets the blame for the 2000 election" I thought that they got the thanks for the election, at least that's the way that this radical views it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwd-scouter Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 I have become hopelessly fascinated with this year's primaries. I have never spent this much time watching TV or paying attention to what is going on. I watch CSPAN a lot. I get a kick out of the call-in segments. I even watch CNN and some of the shows on Fox. Sometimes Sean Hannity gets on my nerves and can be downright mean and Alan Colmes needs to get a backbone. To me, CNN is obviously left-leaning - especially Cafferty. With tongue firmly planted in cheek I say that by watching both I figure I'm getting "fair and balanced" reporting. Today CSPAN will be airing the deliberations about what to do with Florida and Michigan. My day is planned. The suspense is killing me...I hope it never ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now