Why Can't the Major Parties Produce Good Candidates? Why Can't We Elect Good Candidates?

[GMCGeneral]

When I go to a doctor I want a doctor with a lot of experience. When I vote for a politician I want a politician with a lot of experience.

I see no value in term limits at all. I want to get the power of money out of politics.

That will never happen unless we go back to what the founders envisioned. You're just making excuses for the DC deadwood.

 

[rightwinger]

The Founders never intended for "professional" politicians to be in office for 4, 5, or even 6 DECADES!!!! The idea, and Trump was correct on this, was, is, and should be ordinary citizens coming from a variety of backgrounds to serve for a limited time in government, then leave when their term is up.

The founders intent was documented in the Constitution
They understood the meaning of words. If they thought there should be limits on how long you can serve in Congress, they would have put them in.

Your claim that our founders were ordinary citizens from a variety of backgrounds is laughable. Our founders were aristocrats and wealthy landowners. Hardly representative of the common man

Trump is a perfect example of the dangers of putting an inexperienced man in a position of authority.

 

[rightwinger]

Mandatory term limits you dumb shit.

You and those who believe like you are welcome to invoke mandatory term limits.

When a candidate has served two terms, just stop voting for them

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I know most people are here for the two-party food fight, so this thread likely won't get much traction, but it seems we have a real problem with our election system. Neither party seems capable of, or interested in, nominating someone who will be a good leader for the country as a whole. And voters can't seem to break out of the habit of voting for Ds or Rs no matter how bad the candidates are. Why is that? And how can we fix it?

In my view, strategic voting (lesser-of-two-evils) is the biggest culprit. It tells us that we need to vote for bad candidates because the "other guy" is even worse. Fear is an easy sell, so the parties lean heavily on this strategy, spending most of their time demonizing the opponent rather than holding up the virtues of their candidate (which are virtually non-existent). Ranked choice would eliminate lesser-of-two-evils voting and finally allow voters to vote "against" candidates they find unacceptable (by ranking them last). This would discourage divisive partisan fear mongering and make it more likely that consensus seeking candidates are elected.

There other problems, of course, and I'm curious what you all think they are. Although, to be clear, I'm not talking about corruption or "stolen" elections. I'm talking about the systemic problems with the way we're doing elections that make it seemingly impossible for good leaders to get elected.

There are good candidates but the media only pimp the ones they want to see so Americans only see them.
With the media landscape slowly changing I believe this problem will too.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

When I go to a doctor I want a doctor with a lot of experience. When I vote for a politician I want a politician with a lot of experience.

I see no value in term limits at all. I want to get the power of money out of politics.

The money is a result of the power. You have it backwards.

 

[Burgermeister]

What are you talking about? Trump was a great president and is a fantastic candidate.

 

[Hector12]

The money is a result of the power. You have it backwards.Term limits

Term limits would make politicians more dependent on big contributions by rich people and corporations. They would make politicians more dependent on favors by lobbyists.

Term limits are nothing more than a nihilist expression of hostility for politicians.

 

[Hector12]

That will never happen unless we go back to what the founders envisioned. You're just making excuses for the DC deadwood.

I do not care what the "founders envisioned." The greatly over rated "Founding Fathers" were rich men who had plantations and businesses to retire to.

 

[22lcidw]

You and those who believe like you are welcome to invoke mandatory term limits.

When a candidate has served two terms, just stop voting for them

It is so easy. A multi trillion dollar legislation passed with some improvements to the state a politician represents. Only there is a cut to be taken from the corrupted who push it before it gets there. And it gets there.

 

[rightwinger]

I do not care what the "founders envisioned." The greatly over rated "Founding Fathers" were rich men who had plantations and businesses to retire to.

The founders did not trust the common man.
They envisioned a country run by wealthy land owners and aristocrats

The idea of common field hands, craftsmen and trades people voting was discouraged

 

[GMCGeneral]

I do not care what the "founders envisioned." The greatly over rated "Founding Fathers" were rich men who had plantations and businesses to retire to.

So? Doesn't matter.

 

[GMCGeneral]

The founders did not trust the common man.
They envisioned a country run by wealthy land owners and aristocrats

The idea of common field hands, craftsmen and trades people voting was discouraged

As it should be.

 

[candycorn]

Ahh the plush lifestyle of the professional politician must be agonizing. All that dirty money filtering their offshore bank accounts. Yeah real challenging.

You think your representative has offshore bank accounts?

I think you probably find walking and chewing gum challenging.

 

[GMCGeneral]

You think your representative has offshore bank accounts?

I think you probably find walking and chewing gum challenging.

Oh come on. Career politicians, especially Democrats, reek of corruption and quid pro quo.

 

[candycorn]

Oh come on. Career politicians, especially Democrats, reek of corruption and quid pro quo.

So are you going to vote for your representative again next November even if you think they're doing something shady?

 

[j-mac]

I know most people are here for the two-party food fight, so this thread likely won't get much traction, but it seems we have a real problem with our election system. Neither party seems capable of, or interested in, nominating someone who will be a good leader for the country as a whole. And voters can't seem to break out of the habit of voting for Ds or Rs no matter how bad the candidates are. Why is that? And how can we fix it?

In my view, strategic voting (lesser-of-two-evils) is the biggest culprit. It tells us that we need to vote for bad candidates because the "other guy" is even worse. Fear is an easy sell, so the parties lean heavily on this strategy, spending most of their time demonizing the opponent rather than holding up the virtues of their candidate (which are virtually non-existent). Ranked choice would eliminate lesser-of-two-evils voting and finally allow voters to vote "against" candidates they find unacceptable (by ranking them last). This would discourage divisive partisan fear mongering and make it more likely that consensus seeking candidates are elected.

There other problems, of course, and I'm curious what you all think they are. Although, to be clear, I'm not talking about corruption or "stolen" elections. I'm talking about the systemic problems with the way we're doing elections that make it seemingly impossible for good leaders to get elected.

Who with any sense would even run today? People like you have taken it to this point…oh, and it’s rich considering an overt partisan hack like yourself opining why we can’t get honest people to run, knowing what a Biden bootlcker you are….laughable

 

[j-mac]

So are you going to vote for your representative again next November even if you think they're doing something shady?

You going to vote for Biden I presume…

 

[j-mac]

It seems for the most part nobody worth voting for will even run for national office, especially POTUS, due to not being willing to put themselves and the families though the forth coming attacks.

No matter which party you belong to, if you run you will automatically have 1/3 or more of the country instantly hate you and attack everything you do. Your family will be fair game and any mistake you made in your life will be brought to the light of day for the whole world to know about.

So, you going to vote?

 

[candycorn]

You going to vote for Biden I presume…

Yep. Happily.

 

[kaz]

And of course that problem points to the first. As long as people are stuck on voting for Ds and Rs regardless, there's not much point in anyone running third party.

The problem isn't necessarily that fact that there are two dominant parties. It's the lesser-of-two-evils dynamic that convinces people to vote for bad candidates on purpose. That can't possibly produce good results. The sooner we get off that treadmill, the better.

The problem frankly isn't the voters. It's that the system is set up as two party where no one else has a chance. While I recognize voting Libertarian Party was throwing my vote away in that I wouldn't be voting for the party I agree with 20% of the time over the one I never agree with, I had to do it. But a system where Libertarians could ally with Republicans on certain economic issues we agree on and not on the majority of issues we don't for example would make a lot more sense. We need to go to a parliamentary system. The founders considered banning parties. Sadly they didn't and it's too late to do now because the battle lines are drawn