{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/5/2013 10:40:22 PM
5
I have a personal and not-widely-shared dislike for incumbents.
Since both parties suck, unless the incumbent has done something properly during their current term, I vote for the other guy and try to "fire them" for not doing their job.
Personally, I believe if more people voted that way, all politicians (regardless of party) would be more motivated to work once elected than to plan on their re-election campaign.
English
-
The implication that both parties suck is just outdated at this point. One party is objectively more obstructionist than the other.
-
Bullshit. They're both playing a game of jump rope and they are the spinners. They don't want anything other than to keep themselves (BOTH of themselves) in a situation where they can claim "these other guys are preventing us from getting anything done". The fact is there is common middle ground, but NEITHER party is willing to collaboratively stand there with the other side because it will "offend and alienate my base", both bases being manipulated into thinking they are obligated to be polar opposites.
-
I'm sorry, but you are simply not observing reality at the moment. The Democrats have been much more likely to cave on issues than Republicans. In fact, when the Democrats had a super-majority in Congress pre-2010, they conceded key provisions in Obamacare (e.g., the public option). Further, President Obama has been calling on the "bipartisan spirit" to get things done in Washington. While I personally believe that by doing so President Obama is alienating the voters that got him into office, I cannot reject the objective reality that this President, and the party he leads, is centrist. The Republicans have shifted drastically to the right over the past several decades. Cap and Trade used to be a Republican idea; as was the Affordable Care Act. Nixon, a Republican, was president during the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency, a federal agency that is continuously demonized by the right-wing today. If you STILL believe that the Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans, I'll give you one more example: for the first time in this country's history, a presidential nomination has been FILIBUSTERED, despite the fact that the nominee is a REPUBLICAN. I have huge issues with President Obama and the Democrats, rest assured. But to claim that both parties are equal to blame is the biggest pile of bullshit since Sarah Palin's nomination for the Vice Presidency.
-
Is this at all elections? Would the party of the presidential incumbent affect your vote in a congressional election?
-
Each person is running for a particular office. If the president is seated and not up for election, then the people who are running for the House (for example) are not involved in my opinion of the job that the person in the White House is doing. My concern is whether or not the person who is currently in the office that is being voted on, whether or not they did their job. If they did not, then they should lose their job and someone else, anyone else, should get a chance to see if they can do better.
