[loveisdead]

Originally Posted by perceptrons

Well this is silly, go back 4 years.

Hmmm. Say Obama is elected and implements better healthcare. Was progress made?

I'm acknowledging Obamacare as progress. My question is if a President is elected that repeals it so that health care operates before Obamacare, what progress would have been made? In simpler terms, do term limits ensure progress? Or can leaders be regressive?

[perceptrons]

Originally Posted by loveisdead

I'm acknowledging Obamacare as progress. My question is if a President is elected that repeals it so that health care operates before Obamacare, what progress would have been made? In simpler terms, do term limits ensure progress? Or can leaders be regressive?

I know you are. I'm just saying that just because we get bad presidents, doesn't mean term limits are bad or that we don't progress. We might not immediately progress in some specific way, but over time, it ensures progress.

In the long term, maybe repealing Obamacare would be better if it got us a better solution faster. The "What if?" game is silly though.

[loveisdead]

Originally Posted by perceptrons

I know you are. I'm just saying that just because we get bad presidents, doesn't mean term limits are bad or that we don't progress. We might not immediately progress in some specific way, but over time, it ensures progress.

In the long term, maybe repealing Obamacare would be better if it got us a better solution faster. The "What if?" game is silly though.

Yeah that's fair.

[J.C.]

Originally Posted by loveisdead

Hmmm. Say Romney was elected and repealed Obamacare. What progress was made?

And what if Reagan had been President for 20 years? It's a big picture argument. The fact Obama won on an accomplishment that had been considered politically toxic for decades is itself a signifier of that progress. What's to debate is whether, over the longer course of time, we're more likely to get where we need to be with potentially prolonged power or with limits on that power. It's my feeling that power is perpetual by nature. The longer it is sustained, the more freedom it is given, the more entrenched the status quo becomes and the harder it is to ultimately affect anything. By checking that power, you not only keep the public more attune and less complacent, you force the parties to have to adapt on issues and not be reliant on a singular individual/personality to carry them for a generation. Democracy has to be reflective of an ever-changing society, not of a particular leader's abilities.

[suicidesaints]

Originally Posted by Wutz

The worst thing that ever happened to American politics is career politicians. Lobby groups love 'em.

In my opinion, there should be short terms enforced on all members of Congress - 6 years max.

People would be less likely to fuck their constituents if, after a few years, they have to go back and live with 'em in the same communities without the money and gifts they receive from long-term support of lobby groups.

Pretty much this.

[loveisdead]

Originally Posted by J.C.

And what if Reagan had been President for 20 years? It's a big picture argument. The fact Obama won on an accomplishment that had been considered politically toxic for decades is itself a signifier of that progress. What's to debate is whether, over the longer course of time, we're more likely to get where we need to be with potentially prolonged power or with limits on that power. It's my feeling that power is perpetual by nature. The longer it is sustained, the more freedom it is given, the more entrenched the status quo becomes and the harder it is to ultimately affect anything. By checking that power, you not only keep the public more attune and less complacent, you force the parties to have to adapt on issues and not be reliant on a singular individual/personality to carry them for a generation. Democracy has to be reflective of an ever-changing society, not of a particular leader's abilities.

I agree with you. I was more curious as to your thoughts on it.

[NewAgeofHorus]

Originally Posted by caveBEAR

Not all politicians are comic-book villains, you know.

I didn't know only comic book villains, strive for and like to retain power.

If only I read comic books

[knash9]

I really don't have a problem with the repeal. I'm fine if a capable candidate wants to run and can get a majority of the vote, then why stop America from picking who they want to lead the nation.

[suicidesaints]

Originally Posted by knash9

I really don't have a problem with the repeal. I'm fine if a capable candidate wants to run and can get a majority of the vote, then why stop America from picking who they want to lead the nation.

In a perfect Democracy you'd be right, but our electoral process isn't exactly the best

[knash9]

Originally Posted by suicidesaints

In a perfect Democracy you'd be right, but our electoral process isn't exactly the best

Frankly, the presidential election is probably the only election that faces significant scrutiny before voting so I'm comfortable with people being allowed to run until they don't want to.

[suicidesaints]

Originally Posted by knash9

Frankly, the presidential election is probably the only election that faces significant scrutiny before voting so I'm comfortable with people being allowed to run until they don't want to.

the article was about the presidency so...

[knash9]

Originally Posted by suicidesaints

the article was about the presidency so...

I am aware of that so that's why I was talking about the presidency.

[Dustin Harkins]

Originally Posted by suicidesaints

In a perfect Democracy you'd be right, but our electoral process isn't exactly the best

I agree with this, which one of the two things that bothers me about the idea of the repeal.

[suicidesaints]

Originally Posted by knash9

I am aware of that so that's why I was talking about the presidency.

Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you were saying the presidency is the only office that faces serious scrutiny regarding the electoral process... I think you were trying to say the presidency is the election in which most people will actually know anything about the politicians running for office

[suicidesaints]

Originally Posted by Dustin Harkins

I agree with this, which one of the two things that bothers me about the idea of the repeal.

what's the other thing?