Gov. Beverly Perdue (D-NC): We should cancel the elections

Werbung:
GenSeneca said:
Fine, we pick the candidates at random, as I've suggested, and only those people are allowed to run for the office. Acceptable? :)
Click to expand...

No..anyone is already allowed to run for office, and we have a process to narrow it down...called the primary. ;)
 
PLC1 said:
Nope, no pensions. Maybe, no salaries either, just a reimbursement of expenses. We need people who have been successful in the private sector and don't need pensions and such.
Click to expand...

No pensions. . .totally agree. However, I would give them salaries. . .or we would ONLY get wealthy people who can afford to take two to four years without income from work, OR people willing to be bought by lobbyists and big corp.

No, I don't think "ability to pay your own way for the time you are in office" should be a criteria for election. . .and it would be if there was no compensation for holding that office.
 
Openmind said:
No pensions. . .totally agree. However, I would give them salaries. . .or we would ONLY get wealthy people who can afford to take two to four years without income from work, OR people willing to be bought by lobbyists and big corp.

No, I don't think "ability to pay your own way for the time you are in office" should be a criteria for election. . .and it would be if there was no compensation for holding that office.
Click to expand...
Jurors are paid a stipend for their time and they're not allowed to be fired for missing work as a result of performing their civic duties. I think it's a fine model for public office.
 
GenSeneca said:
Jurors are paid a stipend for their time and they're not allowed to be fired for missing work as a result of performing their civic duties. I think it's a fine model for public office.
Click to expand...

I wish I could agree. . .but the inadequacy of those stipends are one of the reason so many citizens will do almost ANYTHING to avoid jury duty. . . If anything, they should be paid the same rate as what they are earning in their regular job (with limits, obviously. . .A CEO making $3,000 a day wouldn't be pay at that rate!)
 
GenSeneca said:
Why would you be against it? Surely a "career" juror couldn't be corrupted any more than say, a "career" politician could be corrupted.... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No, people will always be "corrupted." The point is that there is a system in place to remove corruption if need be. That exists in the jury system, same as it exists in the political system. If people don't take advantage of that removal system, it is hardly the fault of the system, but rather the fault of the people.

Personally, I think if you want a better crop of politicians, we need to pay them more money.
 
Openmind said:
I wish I could agree. . .but the inadequacy of those stipends are one of the reason so many citizens will do almost ANYTHING to avoid jury duty. . . If anything, they should be paid the same rate as what they are earning in their regular job (with limits, obviously. . .A CEO making $3,000 a day wouldn't be pay at that rate!)
Click to expand...
I'm sure there could be a compromise between the meager stipend a juror gets and the 6 digit salary the average congressman pulls down.
 
BigRob said:
Personally, I think if you want a better crop of politicians, we need to pay them more money.
Click to expand...
I'd rather we just eliminate party affiliation from voter ballots... That way people can't just for R's and D's, you'd actually have to learn something about the candidate in order to know who to vote for... and since many Americans are too lazy to do that, we'd certainly have more interesting elections!
 
GenSeneca said:
I'd rather we just eliminate party affiliation from voter ballots... That way people can't just for R's and D's, you'd actually have to learn something about the candidate in order to know who to vote for... and since many Americans are too lazy to do that, we'd certainly have more interesting elections!
Click to expand...

Not really...for example the Mayor's race of Houston is "non-partisan" (ie party affiliation is not listed on the ballot) however campaigns still basically run with one party or the other, and Houston (being a D city) has not elected an R mayor in a very very long time (if ever).

People might be stupid, but they can figure out what party a "non affiliated" person is really with and vote that way, and still manage to ignore all the issues.
 
BigRob said:
Not really...for example the Mayor's race of Houston is "non-partisan" (ie party affiliation is not listed on the ballot) however campaigns still basically run with one party or the other, and Houston (being a D city) has not elected an R mayor in a very very long time (if ever).

People might be stupid, but they can figure out what party a "non affiliated" person is really with and vote that way, and still manage to ignore all the issues.
Click to expand...

Well, I think it would be nice to have a "blank party" ballot.

It might encourage people to vote ACROSS the aisle, instead of just straight down their "favorite" party.
 
Openmind said:
Well, I think it would be nice to have a "blank party" ballot.
Click to expand...
I think you're onto something there... Let's not even have names! :D

"In tonight's news, candidate number 4 has won the election, that candidates name will be released as soon as we find out who that is..."
 
Werbung:

Similar threads

dogtowner
Bev Perdue didn't strike me as a dingbat
Replies
0
Views
922
dogtowner
dogtowner
Little-Acorn
As Earl approaches, NC governor suspends citizens' gun rights
Replies
4
Views
1K
pocketfullofshells
pocketfullofshells
PLC1
Should elections be suspended?
Replies
13
Views
2K
dogtowner
dogtowner
M
Mark Robinson: 'I Absolutely Want To Go Back To The America Where Women Couldn’t Vote'
Replies
2
Views
80
MusicLover
M
GBFan
Dems Raise Taxes; Republicans Lower Them
9 10 11
Replies
151
Views
5K
pjmret
P
Back
Top