Random Politics Thread

[Lark]

I think candidates for office should be required to know this stuff. The guy doesn’t even have an eighth grade level understanding of civics, let alone US history. A hospital wouldn’t hire a doctor or nurse demonstrating a lack of knowledge in their field; a mechanic shop wouldn’t hire someone with no knowledge of how car engines work. There needs to be a vetting process to disqualify people from running who can’t show a basic understanding of the government in which they seek to work.

The thing is that public officials are appointed by the public, at least in theory, the public should care about these things and vote accordingly, they are the interview panel.

The very least that you can expect in a limited democracy with lower levels of public interest and participation is that candidates are representative.

When ones like this one are appointed it makes you wonder about what and who they are representing. I also think that in a basic sense activists, supporters or any kind of cause or political ideas are representatives too. If their personal lives look like shit and they are promise a better world you have to think twice about it.

 

[Lark]

I just looked at the guy running against him and there are two large issues.

One. The GOP is toxic in a lot of places after the last 4 years. I would say CA is one since GOP attacked the people of the state endlessly and the Trump administration withheld PPE, vaccines, federal aid etc from the people there.

Two. If all he is running on is recalling Gavin Newsome and conspiracy theories like QAnon, pedophile Dems and deprogramming white supremacists then, why would anyone vote for him? Not a single policy, nothing at all rooted in sanity. Errol Webber's Twitter feed looks like someone that needs inpatient care.

That's the thing though, I think politicians would like to steer politics in the direction of all that craziness because they themselves dont have to have policies, they dont have to have a clue, vision, competency, anything at all, all they need to qualify for office and others support is to "be themselves".

This is the kind of thing that the "sectarian headcount" in NI created, an invincible political class. Come what way they will have their office. Very recently there was a very good example of how a politician in my constituency could act in a very corrupt fashion without a hope of accountability. The electorate would not even vote to recall them. The politician in question would have won a snap election but their constituency would not even allow that as a kind of "teachable moment".

The battles over whether the US is a "republic" or a "democracy" in US conservative/capitalist circles are a sort of pretext. A dichotomy of "responsible" and "representative". I'm pretty sure that no one, no matter how big a fan of purely "representative" politicians they are, would think of it as involving "impunity" and "privilege".

Especially in the US where they definitely thought they were doing something new and different to the dynastic rule and aristocracies of the "old world" and GB.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

That's the thing though, I think politicians would like to steer politics in the direction of all that craziness because they themselves dont have to have policies, they dont have to have a clue, vision, competency, anything at all, all they need to qualify for office and others support is to "be themselves".

This is the kind of thing that the "sectarian headcount" in NI created, an invincible political class. Come what way they will have their office. Very recently there was a very good example of how a politician in my constituency could act in a very corrupt fashion without a hope of accountability. The electorate would not even vote to recall them. The politician in question would have won a snap election but their constituency would not even allow that as a kind of "teachable moment".

By sectarian headcount, do you mean people voting for people solely based on whether they are a Unionist or a Republican?

In the U.S., there's the concept of politics as culture, and it seems to have intensified during the decades which the debate about actual policies got narrower and narrower (i.e. all the decades I've been alive for). So.... wearing masks has become an aspect of cultural affiliation, whether someone wants to be counted among the "don't be a pussy" crowd or the "don't be an asshole" crowd.

It is extremely tiresome.

 

[Lark]

I don’t like this kind of favoritism that neo liberals show to big business, but I don’t know if it is grounds for a recall. But then I don’t live there, so I’m not as knowledgeable about California politics

Its just me but I would not consider supporting one or another sort of business' revenue as the main criteria for managing in a pandemic.

How many people died?

Things have been out and out Malthusian here in the UK, with a touch of social darwinism too by virtue of the muddle of public messaging by the government. Its been so bad that the government is attempting to spin the travel corridor bans most of the rest of the world are instituting as victories. The ROI has the worst infection rate in Europe now, they had almost gotten to being infection free and largely its because they permitted travel from the UK (more specifically England).

 

[Totenkindly]

I think candidates for office should be required to know this stuff. The guy doesn’t even have an eighth grade level understanding of civics, let alone US history. A hospital wouldn’t hire a doctor or nurse demonstrating a lack of knowledge in their field; a mechanic shop wouldn’t hire someone with no knowledge of how car engines work. There needs to be a vetting process to disqualify people from running who can’t show a basic understanding of the government in which they seek to work.

Don't we require more from people simply applying for cutizenship? Jfc

128 Civics Questions and Answers with MP3 Audio (2020 version) | USCIS

 

[Jaguar]

If you don't think intuition has a role in scientific breakthroughs you're not that bright, Kamala.

 

[ceecee]

Nikki Haley crying about Bernie becoming the Budget Committee Chair on Twitter is absolutely delightful.

 

[The Cat]

Nikki Haley crying about Bernie becoming the Budget Committee Chair on Twitter is absolutely delightful.

I wish she was crying about him being president elect rn...

 

[ceecee]

I wish she was crying about him being president elect rn...

The right wing tears would fill the seas...

 

[The Cat]

The right wing tears would fill the seas...

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

The thing is that public officials are appointed by the public, at least in theory, the public should care about these things and vote accordingly, they are the interview panel.

The very least that you can expect in a limited democracy with lower levels of public interest and participation is that candidates are representative.

When ones like this one are appointed it makes you wonder about what and who they are representing. I also think that in a basic sense activists, supporters or any kind of cause or political ideas are representatives too. If their personal lives look like shit and they are promise a better world you have to think twice about it.

I agree, voters should vet candidates, but that’s not happening. I don’t think having a simple vetting process for candidates would be anti-democratic either. I’m not expecting them to know every single SCOTUS case or even to be able to name off every obscure piece of legislation, but they need to know the basic ins and outs of the system.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Don't we require more from people simply applying for cutizenship? Jfc

128 Civics Questions and Answers with MP3 Audio (2020 version) | USCIS

Exactly. I worked with some immigrants studying for the citizenship test and it was often the case they were more knowledgeable about US system of government than some natural born citizens I’ve spoken to. I don’t think it’s asking too much to screen candidates in the same criteria. Imagine some of the nuts we’d have avoided had this been standard practice all along

 

[ceecee]

I agree, voters should vet candidates, but that’s not happening. I don’t think having a simple vetting process for candidates would be anti-democratic either. I’m not expecting them to know every single SCOTUS case or even to be able to name off every obscure piece of legislation, but they need to know the basic ins and outs of the system.

I'm working on something to make this easier at the state level with the Dems. I mean, Republican's can read it too - the plan is for it to be mailed to everyone to cover all candidates.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I'm working on something to make this easier at the state level with the Dems. I mean, Republican's can read it too - the plan is for it to be mailed to everyone to cover all candidates.

Cool

 

[Virtual ghost]

I am just a messenger.

 

[Jaguar]

I was reading that Bernie becoming the Chair used to be Paul Ryan's worst nightmare.

 

[ceecee]

I am just a messenger.

Yep. I watched this video earlier today - I subscribe to this channel and City Beautiful.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I was reading that Bernie becoming the Chair used to be Paul Ryan's worst nightmare.

Good.

 

[Jaguar]

Trump's Republicans have dumped Lincoln – they're the Confederacy now

Nasty comment, but I agree with it.

 

[Totenkindly]

Well, yeah.