login
Election 2016 (Page 41)
-
No new posts
|
 2016-10-19 9:58 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro  9391     Omaha, NE |  Subject: RE: Election 2016Wonder if every major news outlet is going to run this story for 30 minutes tonight...
|
| 2016-10-19 10:22 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by tuwood Wonder if every major news outlet is going to run this story for 30 minutes tonight...
Well that just does it! Breitbart is rigging this election! |
| 2016-10-19 11:12 AM in reply to: Bob Loblaw |
| Deep in the Heart of Texas | Subject: RE: Election 2016 More evidence that the Democrats are full of chIt - "We were unaware of any possible violations..." ~ DNC |
| 2016-10-19 11:31 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Expert 4926 Middle River, Maryland Silver member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Rogillio Trump calls for congressional term limits! That does it, he just won my vote!! ... and First: I am going to institute a 5-year ban on all executive branch officials lobbying the government after they leave government service. Second: I am going to ask Congress to institute its own 5-year ban on lobbying by former members of Congress and their staffs. Third: I am going to expand the definition of lobbyist so we close all the loopholes that former government officials use by labeling themselves consultants and advisors when we all know they are lobbyists. Fourth: I am going to issue a lifetime ban against senior executive branch officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government. Fifth: I am going to ask Congress to pass a campaign finance reform that prevents registered foreign lobbyists from raising money in American elections. Let's say for the sake of argument that Trump means what he says here and that he would try to follow through if elected. How exactly would this work? Does he have the authority (I mean, I know he can just sign executive orders but even they can be overridden by 2/3 majority or challenged in the courts). I can't imagine our current electorate would just say, "OK, what a great idea. I'm in!" This would be fought tooth and nail. Long time lurker here, by the way. Good arguments from both sides. This announcement this morning really piqued my interest given its comprehensive effects. |
| 2016-10-19 11:47 AM in reply to: jmhpsu93 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Rogillio Trump calls for congressional term limits! That does it, he just won my vote!! ... and First: I am going to institute a 5-year ban on all executive branch officials lobbying the government after they leave government service. Second: I am going to ask Congress to institute its own 5-year ban on lobbying by former members of Congress and their staffs. Third: I am going to expand the definition of lobbyist so we close all the loopholes that former government officials use by labeling themselves consultants and advisors when we all know they are lobbyists. Fourth: I am going to issue a lifetime ban against senior executive branch officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government. Fifth: I am going to ask Congress to pass a campaign finance reform that prevents registered foreign lobbyists from raising money in American elections. Let's say for the sake of argument that Trump means what he says here and that he would try to follow through if elected. How exactly would this work? Does he have the authority (I mean, I know he can just sign executive orders but even they can be overridden by 2/3 majority or challenged in the courts). I can't imagine our current electorate would just say, "OK, what a great idea. I'm in!" This would be fought tooth and nail. Long time lurker here, by the way. Good arguments from both sides. This announcement this morning really piqued my interest given its comprehensive effects. Good question and I wish people would ask this about all the agenda items. The dems want free college tuition. How does that work? How do you implement that? If tuition is now free then why would I go to Podunk State when I can go to Georgetown? Public colleges and universities are funded by the state not the federal government. The POTUS cannot sit on the thrown and tell the states, "Hear ye, hear ye, Henceforth and forevermore states will not charge people money to attend their colleges and universities. In state, out of state and international tuition is no more. I am spoken, let it be so!" Same argument can be made for term limits.....that one is even tougher because it requires a constitutional amendment. The amendments have to be approved by 2/3rds of the Senate and House. This is where the Bully Pullpit comes in. Take a strawpoll of both houses and see who is in favor and who opposes. Hold a press conference and go into people's living rooms and say, "This is who is for term limits and these guys are against it" Let the ones who oppose the amendment will receive no GOP/DNC funding for re-election during the mid-terms. If you get the people of the US on your side, and I think this is a bi-partisan issue, then you use that support to get congress to approve. |
| 2016-10-19 11:51 AM in reply to: #5202333 |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Constitutional amendments are actually much harder to approve than that as they need approval of 3/4 of the state legislatures. |
| 2016-10-19 12:03 PM in reply to: ejshowers |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Constitutional amendments are actually much harder to approve than that as they need approval of 3/4 of the state legislatures. Or 2/3rds at a constitutional convention. But I'm thinking the state vote would be easier to get than getting the congressmen (who will be loosing a job) on board. And again, the POTUS can call in the various governors and get them behind it. |
| 2016-10-19 12:13 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio "In recent days Trump has added to a list of proposed ethics reforms, including prohibiting executive branch officials and members of Congress and their staffs from lobbying the government for five years after they leave office. He has also proposed expanding the definition of lobbyist and banning senior executive branch officials from lobbying on behalf of foreign governments at any time in their lives." Trump needs to spend the next 3 weeks hammering this and term limits. This is exactly what the country needs and both democrats and republican alike know it. The problem most POTUS candidates won't buck the establishment career congressmen by pressing these sorts of reforms. Too little, too late. He needed to do this 6 months ago... He should have stuck with proposals like the above and his populist message, but he has proven unable to stay on message and is easily goaded and distracted. |
| 2016-10-19 12:16 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
| Master 5557 , California | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by ejshowers Constitutional amendments are actually much harder to approve than that as they need approval of 3/4 of the state legislatures. Or 2/3rds at a constitutional convention. But I'm thinking the state vote would be easier to get than getting the congressmen (who will be loosing a job) on board. And again, the POTUS can call in the various governors and get them behind it. Yeah the states would be the only realistic way to get that done. But even then, they are still controlled by the same two major parties, so it would be a hard sell. I do remember when the 27th amendment (limits how Congress can give itself a raise) was finally ratified back in the 90s. Of course Congress swiftly reclassified their pay adjustments as "cost of living" adjustments to get around the wording of that amendment. |
| 2016-10-19 12:24 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by ejshowers Constitutional amendments are actually much harder to approve than that as they need approval of 3/4 of the state legislatures. Or 2/3rds at a constitutional convention. But I'm thinking the state vote would be easier to get than getting the congressmen (who will be loosing a job) on board. And again, the POTUS can call in the various governors and get them behind it. Sorry to nit pick, but still a bit off. Think 2/3 to propose and 3/4 to ratify. To propose an Amendment, it takes either 2/3 of both houses of Congress or 2/3 of states to call a convention for proposing amendments. It then takes 3/4 of state legislatures or state ratifying conventions to ratify the proposed Amendment to actually get it into the Constitution. |
| 2016-10-19 1:28 PM in reply to: ejshowers |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by ejshowers Constitutional amendments are actually much harder to approve than that as they need approval of 3/4 of the state legislatures. Or 2/3rds at a constitutional convention. But I'm thinking the state vote would be easier to get than getting the congressmen (who will be loosing a job) on board. And again, the POTUS can call in the various governors and get them behind it. Sorry to nit pick, but still a bit off. Think 2/3 to propose and 3/4 to ratify. To propose an Amendment, it takes either 2/3 of both houses of Congress or 2/3 of states to call a convention for proposing amendments. It then takes 3/4 of state legislatures or state ratifying conventions to ratify the proposed Amendment to actually get it into the Constitution. No problem with nitpicking...especially if posted erroneous info. You are right, I went back and read some more. 3/4ths to ratify. This is one of those issues that I think most American agree on. The idea of someone holding a seat in congress for 30 or 40 years is a recipe for corruption. A US senator makes $174k a year.....the AVERAGE net worth a democrat senator in 2012 was $13,566,333 the average net worth of a republican senator in 2012) was $6,956,438. Conclusion? Democrats are 2x better at stealing money than republicans! :-) But seriously, how the hell do you make $174k a year and are worth $13 million dollars without being on the take....using insider trading.....etc Granted a lot of senators were rich before they came to congress....e.g. John Kerry who make money the old fashioned way, he married the heir to the Heinz fortune. |
| 2016-10-19 1:39 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 I do believe that term limits are something that the people could likely get behind in a bipartisan fashion. Sadly though, the people in power will likely oppose it in an equal bipartisan fashion. That being said, I'm glad we're at least talking about it. |
| 2016-10-19 1:57 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Expert 4926 Middle River, Maryland Silver member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by tuwood I do believe that term limits are something that the people could likely get behind in a bipartisan fashion. Sadly though, the people in power will likely oppose it in an equal bipartisan fashion. That being said, I'm glad we're at least talking about it. There was an joint resolution proposed in the Senate almost two years ago - nothing on it since. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/1/text
|
| 2016-10-19 2:17 PM in reply to: jmhpsu93 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Originally posted by tuwood I do believe that term limits are something that the people could likely get behind in a bipartisan fashion. Sadly though, the people in power will likely oppose it in an equal bipartisan fashion. That being said, I'm glad we're at least talking about it. There was an joint resolution proposed in the Senate almost two years ago - nothing on it since. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/1/text
Good job finding that! Co-sponsored by 14 republican senators. Sen. Johnson, Ron [R-WI]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Toomey, Pat [R-PA]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Fischer, Deb [R-NE]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Sasse, Ben [R-NE]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Perdue, David [R-GA]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]* 01/06/2015 Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA] 01/07/2015 Sen. Tillis, Thom [R-NC] 02/04/2015 Sen. Paul, Rand [R-KY] 03/02/2015 Sen. Scott, Tim [R-SC] 08/06/2015 Sen. Ayotte, Kelly [R-NH] 11/17/2015 Companions bill in the House sponsored by 17 republicans Rep. Rice, Tom [R-SC-7]* 01/09/2015 Rep. Blum, Rod [R-IA-1]* 01/09/2015 Rep. Gibson, Christopher P. [R-NY-19]* 01/09/2015 Rep. DeSantis, Ron [R-FL-6]* 01/09/2015 Rep. Schweikert, David [R-AZ-6] 01/13/2015 Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-8] 01/20/2015 Rep. Allen, Rick W. [R-GA-12] 01/20/2015 Rep. Sanford, Mark [R-SC-1] 02/04/2015 Rep. Ratcliffe, John [R-TX-4] 03/25/2015 Rep. Brat, Dave [R-VA-7] 07/08/2015 Rep. Palmer, Gary J. [R-AL-6] 07/23/2015 Rep. Mulvaney, Mick [R-SC-5] 09/08/2015 Rep. Zeldin, Lee M. [R-NY-1] 09/22/2015 Rep. Pompeo, Mike [R-KS-4] 10/27/2015 Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4] 10/27/2015 Rep. Wagner, Ann [R-MO-2] 02/25/2016 Rep. Fleming, John [R-LA-4] 04/12/2016 |
| 2016-10-19 3:22 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Should be a good fight tonight! Gonna pick up some chips and dip on the way home.......pass the wine and cut the cheese! I'm sure the media is already writing the spin. He Clinton doesn't pass out, she won. If she does pass out it will be because Trump was stalking her and bullying her. BTW, anyone read where Hillary has to have a podium? She can't walk around the room. That is why in the last debate you see Trump walking around a little and she is glued to her podium. Media claims he was 'stalking' her...which, IMO, devalues the term stalking for woman who have been stalked. |
| 2016-10-19 3:22 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 I am not a big fan of term limits. I'd hate to lose a great Senator or Rep just because their term was up. I'd rather see initiatives to bring the cost down to run for office and the drawing of sensible representative boundaries (like they must be rectangles or something to help prevent rampant gerrymandering) to make it easier to replace a crappy congressperson. Reform the rules on who can give and how much. Get rid of Citizens United and make it much tougher and a bigger risk to coordinate between outside groups and the candidate. Like jail time or forcing the candidate to quit if caught. Not perfect, but just my thoughts. |
| 2016-10-19 3:31 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Should be a good fight tonight! Gonna pick up some chips and dip on the way home.......pass the wine and cut the cheese! I'm sure the media is already writing the spin. He Clinton doesn't pass out, she won. If she does pass out it will be because Trump was stalking her and bullying her. BTW, anyone read where Hillary has to have a podium? She can't walk around the room. That is why in the last debate you see Trump walking around a little and she is glued to her podium. Media claims he was 'stalking' her...which, IMO, devalues the term stalking for woman who have been stalked. Glued??? I guess you didn't watch the last (2nd) debate very closely. Hillary walked around a bit and toward to the town hall person speaking often. We will probably watch. She will likely play it safe and try to be positive and Presidential and inclusive and avoid a ton of confrontation while he will throw the kitchen sink at her in desperation. I am guessing it will be a draw, and like most 3rd debates, will be less watched (many people have already made up their minds or have early voted) and move things very little. |
| 2016-10-19 3:45 PM in reply to: ejshowers |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio Should be a good fight tonight! Gonna pick up some chips and dip on the way home.......pass the wine and cut the cheese! I'm sure the media is already writing the spin. He Clinton doesn't pass out, she won. If she does pass out it will be because Trump was stalking her and bullying her. BTW, anyone read where Hillary has to have a podium? She can't walk around the room. That is why in the last debate you see Trump walking around a little and she is glued to her podium. Media claims he was 'stalking' her...which, IMO, devalues the term stalking for woman who have been stalked. Glued??? I guess you didn't watch the last (2nd) debate very closely. Hillary walked around a bit and toward to the town hall person speaking often. We will probably watch. She will likely play it safe and try to be positive and Presidential and inclusive and avoid a ton of confrontation while he will throw the kitchen sink at her in desperation. I am guessing it will be a draw, and like most 3rd debates, will be less watched (many people have already made up their minds or have early voted) and move things very little. You may be right in that people are sick of politics and won't tune in. Interesting that they chose Wednesday night....good Southern Baptists are in church on Wed night. :-) |
| 2016-10-19 4:04 PM in reply to: ejshowers |
Expert 4926 Middle River, Maryland Silver member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers I am not a big fan of term limits. I'd hate to lose a great Senator or Rep just because their term was up. I'd rather see initiatives to bring the cost down to run for office and the drawing of sensible representative boundaries (like they must be rectangles or something to help prevent rampant gerrymandering) to make it easier to replace a crappy congressperson. Reform the rules on who can give and how much. Get rid of Citizens United and make it much tougher and a bigger risk to coordinate between outside groups and the candidate. Like jail time or forcing the candidate to quit if caught. Not perfect, but just my thoughts. I think we could come up with term limits that are less draconian than the one being proposed, but I don't think anyone should be a career politician. Even discounting the potential for corruption, I don't think that's what the founding fathers had in mind. Be a private citizen, answer your call to service if that's your passion, serve your country well with that same passion for 8-12 years than go back to being a private citizen and get out of Washington. |
| 2016-10-19 5:00 PM in reply to: 0 |
| Master 5557 , California | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Glued??? I guess you didn't watch the last (2nd) debate very closely. Hillary walked around a bit and toward to the town hall person speaking often. Yep: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRlI2SQ0Ueg She does from the very beginning (1:34 for starters). And plenty of other times. Not sure what Rog watched. Oh wait, it's a conspiracy and I'm sure the recorded version was edited Edited by spudone 2016-10-19 5:00 PM |
| 2016-10-19 5:01 PM in reply to: jmhpsu93 |
| Master 5557 , California | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Originally posted by ejshowers I am not a big fan of term limits. I'd hate to lose a great Senator or Rep just because their term was up. I'd rather see initiatives to bring the cost down to run for office and the drawing of sensible representative boundaries (like they must be rectangles or something to help prevent rampant gerrymandering) to make it easier to replace a crappy congressperson. Reform the rules on who can give and how much. Get rid of Citizens United and make it much tougher and a bigger risk to coordinate between outside groups and the candidate. Like jail time or forcing the candidate to quit if caught. Not perfect, but just my thoughts. I think we could come up with term limits that are less draconian than the one being proposed, but I don't think anyone should be a career politician. Even discounting the potential for corruption, I don't think that's what the founding fathers had in mind. Be a private citizen, answer your call to service if that's your passion, serve your country well with that same passion for 8-12 years than go back to being a private citizen and get out of Washington. We should just have a Congressional draft where you have to serve there for a term instead of the military I mean, would it really be worse? heh. |
| 2016-10-19 6:32 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Elite 4547 | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Granted a lot of senators were rich before they came to congress....e.g. John Kerry who make money the old fashioned way, he married the heir to the Heinz fortune. Ya gotta say, when ya have that much Heinz money, it's hard for the other guys to ketch-up.  As for term limits, term limits wouldn't change a damn thing in my opinion. You'd just get a lot more politicians getting richer a lot faster. As much as they're worth in power, the potential earnings afterwards probably dwarf the earnings in power. |
| 2016-10-19 6:35 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Elite 4547 | Subject: RE: Election 2016 btw, as for the debate tonight, I am saying 2 to 1 odds that Trump will produce a certain blue dress live on stage! I'm picturing him flipping the light switch off, then turning on a black light to horrify the nation! Getcha popcorn ready!  |
| 2016-10-19 8:29 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 So far so good. He avoided taking the bait 5 or 6 times so far. |
| 2016-10-19 8:41 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 He is taking g notes! Yay. A debate coach finally go to him. This is fundamental debating. He finally got the message. |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| 2016 - WTF Pages: 1 2 | ||
| |||
| Election 2014 Pages: 1 2 3 | ||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK