+- Music Discussion (https://www.music-discussion.com)
+-- Forum: Community (https://www.music-discussion.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Off Topic Chat (https://www.music-discussion.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Politics (/showthread.php?tid=9418)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
Politics - Oceansoul - 04-10-2016
Jerome Wrote:I am not suggesting your vote be taken away. Not at all. In fact the opposite would be true. You would be choosing between candidates that have a proven track record of leadership. When I say that they should come from business I mean that those are the sort of people who like to achieve. They are driven. And they understand economics. And if they have dodgy tax declarations and any history of bankruptcy or criminal behaviour they are automatically excluded. That means that idiots like Trump would not be eligible. Or Clinton for that matter. There would be very few candidates to choose from but at least you know they are the real McCoy.
The more I think about this the more I realise it's your Constitution that needs a reboot. In any event something needs to change. Your current electoral process is starting to look like a circus. The lunatics are indeed running the asylum.
Ah, I see what you mean. So there would need to be a screening process, past evaluation, and a thorough background check before someone could run for President. I do think there needs to be strong leadership and someone who knows how to run a healthy economy, but I'm not sure about placing too many limitations on who can run for office like mainly choosing business owners.
Btw, the Constitution does place limits on the powers that be. Ex: If the President commits a crime, he/she can be held accountable usually through impeachment and possibly imprisonment if they did something deserving of it.
Politics - Jerome - 04-10-2016
Like I said - I don't have the answer but I just think something needs to change. Not just for change's sake but in order to provide a country with a viable candidate. Yes, a screening process is required. If you apply for a job as a CEO of a company you can bet they would have checked all the facts very carefully before putting you in a position to spend their money. The same should apply for a presidential job. The word 'integrity' comes to mind. If people have to prove they have integrity there would be very few candidates indeed. They are as rare as rocking-horse sh*t! And party politics should be booted out the ballpark. It's old-school nonsense that needs to be neutered.
Politics - Jerome - 04-10-2016
Anyway that's my jaundiced view - back to the studio to have some fun for the day - enough politicking for now. Adios!
Politics - Oceansoul - 04-10-2016
Jerome Wrote:Anyway that's my jaundiced view - back to the studio to have some fun for the day - enough politicking for now. Adios!
Eh, I'm just considering your point of view. Haha, have fun then.
Politics - Music Head - 04-10-2016
the answer Jerome is looking for
knowing it's not possible
is an intelligence test before you vote
currently we have idiots deciding which idiot will run our country
Politics - Oceansoul - 04-10-2016
Music Head Wrote:the answer Jerome is looking for
knowing it's not possible
is an intelligence test before you vote
currently we have idiots deciding which idiot will run our country
Ah, sweet cynicism :tongue: But who gets to decide who is intelligent enough to vote and who is not? Someone does and that measure could change.
Politics - Music Head - 04-10-2016
Oceansoul Wrote:Ah, sweet cynicism :tongue: But who gets to decide who is intelligent enough to vote and who is not? Someone does and that measure could change.I will perform the task until I die
then you can take over
after you take my test
Politics - Oceansoul - 04-10-2016
Music Head Wrote:I will perform the task until I die
then you can take over
after you take my test
Oh, thou great arbiter of intelligence, teach me thy smart ways so that I know how to vote wisely. Hahaha.
Politics - Music Head - 04-10-2016
Oceansoul Wrote:Oh, thou great arbiter of intelligence, teach me thy smart ways so that I know how to vote wisely. Hahaha.hold on while I look up arbiter
Politics - CRAZY-HORSE - 04-10-2016
from Wiki:
An arbiter or arbitrator is a person by whose decision the parties to a dispute agree to be bound in arbitration.