Politics & Gov Is Populism Supported By A 'representative' Democracy?

Discussion in 'Politics & Government' started by overrocked, Mar 24, 2005.

  1. overrocked

    overrocked Premium Member

    I would like to begin a discussion about what our 'representatives' really do.

    In Congress 98% of the members are incumbants- meaning they get a fairly good chance at job security- once elected.

    When 'I' vote for someone to represent me, I am not asking for the representative to cater to the most 'popular' group of the day- or to the whim of those who donate the most money to the congress, House of Reps members.

    What I do want from my 'representatives' is to vote intelligently on reasonable issues. The key word here is intelligently- not 'POPULAR'

    So- what do you think? Do you think the stupid masses get what they deserve- or that corporate $ should dictate the future of America?

    I hope that every member of Congress gets replaced- New blood may make the powerful, rich, and 'popular' special interests more wary of who to bribe in the future. IMHO:lol:
     
  2. mscbkc070904

    mscbkc070904 Premium Member

    I use to think that sometimes we should just fire all of Congress and start over with new blood in there, not politicians already in existence but actual people with actual minds, that are not coerced by political and personal views. But do whats right for the people. I mean there are some great reps in there, but many of them just dont cut it sometimes or their voice isnt strong enough. Need go-getters in there that wont back down when they are told they cant do something, but a collective of people that agree to fix internal problems and stick to it. I think they shouldnt get paid what they get paid, cause all they are is a voice, they get tons of benefits.

    Just my 2 cents. I dont want to get to wrapped into this, so I am keeping it simple.