OakWood Posted November 3, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted November 3, 2014 http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/opinion/cancel-the-midterms.html?_r=0 What they're really saying is 'Democrats are losing so let's not have a vote'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Teditis Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I think you're right in that... but I also find it all rather comical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/opinion/cancel-the-midterms.html?_r=0 What they're really saying is 'Democrats are losing so let's not have a vote'. Well it goes even deeper than that: There was a time when midterm elections made sense — at our nation’s founding, the Constitution represented a new form of republican government, and it was important for at least one body of Congress to be closely accountable to the people. But especially at a time when Americans’ confidence in the ability of their government to address pressing concerns is at a record low, two-year House terms no longer make any sense. We should get rid of federal midterm elections entirely. In order to get rid of federal midterms, we would have to change the Constitution. Liberals in the US hate the Constitution with a white hot passion. The president despises it. They see the Constitution as an expendable document. If it doesn't suit them, they want to get rid of it or at least part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qnts2 Posted November 3, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,875 Content Per Day: 0.71 Reputation: 1,336 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/13/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted November 3, 2014 Typically the mid-terms are a way to vote based on a person approval or disapproval of the Presidents actions. Without unseating the President, I view it as similar in expression as a Parliamentary democracy. While the congress, if it changes the majority parties does not elect a different president, the congress can block the presidents agenda after midterm elections, if the president has a low approval rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinM Posted November 3, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 144 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,512 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 625 Days Won: 10 Joined: 04/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/07/1979 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I wrote the following to the author of that OP-ED: Mr. Schanzer, What I believe you are suggesting is that after we elect our government officials to office we should give them 4 years to do whatever they want before they can be held accountable by the voters. This would protect the President and not the People, which is contrary to what the Framers intended when they wrote the US Constitution. You are advocating giving up more of your power as a citizen and handing it over to a government that you may or may not be able to trust. I believe that to be pretty stupid. Here's a brilliant idea: Why don't we cancel the Presidential elections too? We could just stop all 4 year elections altogether and have one every 8 years. Maybe if we do that, the US will elect a Bible-Thumping-Christian, Tea-bagging- Right-Wing-Extremist to office. Let me know how supportive of cancelling mid-term elections you will be then. Sincerely, A citizen that believes the entire US Constitution is relevant, not just the parts that you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted November 3, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Author Share Posted November 3, 2014 I wrote the following to the author of that OP-ED: Mr. Schanzer, What I believe you are suggesting is that after we elect our government officials to office we should give them 4 years to do whatever they want before they can be held accountable by the voters. This would protect the President and not the People, which is contrary to what the Framers intended when they wrote the US Constitution. You are advocating giving up more of your power as a citizen and handing it over to a government that you may or may not be able to trust. I believe that to be pretty stupid. Here's a brilliant idea: Why don't we cancel the Presidential elections too? We could just stop all 4 year elections altogether and have one every 8 years. Maybe if we do that, the US will elect a Bible-Thumping-Christian, Tea-bagging- Right-Wing-Extremist to office. Let me know how supportive of cancelling mid-term elections you will be then. Sincerely, A citizen that believes the entire US Constitution is relevant, not just the parts that you like. If you get a reply although I doubt that you will, I'd be interested in what he has to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted November 3, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 599 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,250 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,981 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted November 3, 2014 Typically the mid-terms are a way to vote based on a person approval or disapproval of the Presidents actions. Without unseating the President, I view it as similar in expression as a Parliamentary democracy. While the congress, if it changes the majority parties does not elect a different president, the congress can block the presidents agenda after midterm elections, if the president has a low approval rating. I agree, It's our way of saying oops, we messed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts