Reply to Oligarchy

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Oligarchy"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Whatever political leanings OP has, I agree with the general point. It does seem that between the Bushes and the Clintons, we have had a political dynasty for most of the last 30+ years.

Bushes and Clintons (and Kennedys and Romneys to a degree) have had a place in every government level, and it just seems icky and un-American to concentrate power in the same few names over and over again.
[/quote]

The sky is not falling.  The voters have the opportunity to select the person the feel is most qualified.  Service as a Governor or US Senator is practically a prerequisite to serving as President and being in a position to accomplish anything of import.  I don't view having been twice-elected as a US Senator and serving for eight years and then serving as Secretary of State for four years as a disqualifying factor simply because her spouse served as President more than a decade and a half in the past.  Moreover, Hillary not free to pushes her own policies at Stare and one just 1 percent of the collective vote in the Senate.  She will be elected, or not, as the case may be, on her own merits, as was Dubya, for better or worse.  Just take a look at Jeb!, who was arguably the heir apparent to what you consider the Bush dynasty.  [/quote]

I think you are deliberately skewing my point here. I didn't say the sky was falling or that HRC's service wasn't necessary for being qualified. I did say, though, that it was "icky" to keep seeing the same names over and over again.

And if you really  believe this [b]"The voters have the opportunity to select the person the feel is most qualified"[/b], you're a little delusional. Voters have the opportunity to vote of rate candidate with the brand recognition, the oodles of money, and the super pacs, and FTMP, those are the same people who have been running the show for three decades.

AS you said, Bush the heir apparent was discarded because, in part, people have had enough. I believe HRC would have been rejected whole heartedly, as she was in 2008, if it weren't for the juggernaut of Trump and everyone's fear that he will win. Plus, she has the money and super delegates to run that BS does not.

I don't see how you can sit back and believe this continuation of politics as usual is good for the country. That is how we end up with nightmares like Trump.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics