Politics Again BUT With A Twist…What Are Some Ideas To Improve Our Broken Political System?

Lots of things could help but here’s one I’m particularly fond of.

Many jobs have up to a 90 day probation.

Do that for public office. A president (and others) get elected based on their campaign promises.

If you break your word and in 90 days you don’t carry out your pledges to the people, bye bye, you’re gone.

They all flip flop on their campaign promises the minute they get into office.

It’s real simple, do what you promised, or you’re gone.

But…. It’ll never happen
 
Lots of things could help but here’s one I’m particularly fond of.

Many jobs have up to a 90 day probation.

Do that for public office. A president (and others) get elected based on their campaign promises.

If you break your word and in 90 days you don’t carry out your pledges to the people, bye bye, you’re gone.

They all flip flop on their campaign promises the minute they get into office.

It’s real simple, do what you promised, or you’re gone.

But…. It’ll never happen

The "impression" from the outside is that it is already like everything planned,
and directed by an outside "director" (that "everything" inspires but honesty)
composed of a small number of individuals with very little interest in the real common good
of which much information can be found around,
apart from the now constant unacceptable evidence & immorality of the facts ,

one thing among many that could be done
would be the psychological test of honesty
(broadcast live on television)
a test that really exists and that would make a strong contribution
the person who intends to be a politician must overcome it completely otherwise he cannot,

there is a document to which a person named Franklin Delano Roosevelt considered very important,
the charter of human rights that includes the right to live in dignity,

too often ignored and reviled
which instead should be put before any other interest,

it should be posted in large enough font to be visually "impaired-proof "
in all public and private places where first and foremost its content must be respected,

it must be said, however, that unfortunately not all individuals share such wholesome principles-foundations,
preferring avidity (in voluntary form, perhaps more often of genetic origin...)
who too often has control even of individuals in decision-making roles that affect other people's lives,

could it be said that greed is one of the pricipal causes ?

Is that therefore it should be regarded as a very dangerous mental disease ,
for which scientific research should find a solution ?

.... with the understanding that poverty and hunger are among the major triggers....
that causes the psychosis of possessing more than others at any cost too ?

... just 2 cents about.
 
Last edited:
Two years of universal national service of some type, mandatory, upon leaving high school or quitting high school. No exceptions except for the severely handicapped. This way we will be forced to work with one another whether we like it or not and we might learn something.
 
That was suggested in the UK, a while back (late 70s - I think) and the people 100% against it were the forces themselves. Only recently we've had one of the fly on the wall documentaries following British recruits. The corporals are their friend, mopping their brows - suggesting they might like to remake their beds, and discipline was terrible. One NCO or Junior Officer phoning their mum to ask if they would be coming back when they went AWOL! One got yelled at during one of the crawl through the mud training sessions, had a tantrum and threw the rifle into the mud - walking off. The forces simply wouldn't want conscriptees - impossible to discipline, and their human rights would be severley impacted. In short, the armed forces do not want these people - they don't fit the mould.
 
That was suggested in the UK, a while back (late 70s - I think) and the people 100% against it were the forces themselves. Only recently we've had one of the fly on the wall documentaries following British recruits. The corporals are their friend, mopping their brows - suggesting they might like to remake their beds, and discipline was terrible. One NCO or Junior Officer phoning their mum to ask if they would be coming back when they went AWOL! One got yelled at during one of the crawl through the mud training sessions, had a tantrum and threw the rifle into the mud - walking off. The forces simply wouldn't want conscriptees - impossible to discipline, and their human rights would be severley impacted. In short, the armed forces do not want these people - they don't fit the mould.
National Service doesn't have to be military.
 
Another that will never get passed:

Term limits.
I have mixed feelings on term limits. In an honest system term limits thwart the will of the people. In the current system they would serve to negate the influence of entrenched, money-covered, bought representatives. When a politician can outspend one's opponent by 10:1 it severely curtails messaging. So right now, today I am in favor. Given campaign finance reform, not so much.
 
Term limits and mandatory military service wouldn't be necessary if the federal government was truly accountable and subordinate to the states, and the states were subordinate to their populations.
If everyone understood the founding fathers original constitutional intentions, then everyone would understand how much their vote truly matters.

"By the people for the people..."
What's best for the people is what's best for their government.
What's best for government is never what's best for the people...
 
We don't usually have people as the draw, like the US, but it seems certain that our Prime Minister will have to call an election soon, but we face a negative battle. Unlike the US where everyone seems to like one candidate, no matter what, we do the reverse, everyone dislikes both the main party leaders, so you vote for the one you hate the least, which is very odd. Each main party has a few who look like they might jump ship, and create a new party - which has never worked before, but could this time actually be an answer. The old left and right, being replaced by a new centre? Possible? Nobody knows. The most hated Mayor, who has made London a no go zone for many people, based on tax for going there, got in - nobody seems to know anyone who voted for him, but he has backing from a small percentage of the population, but they went out and voted and the rest did not. I live 100 miles from the M25 motorway which circles London, but I cannot drive within it as my diesel van gets two charges - one for being unclean, and the other being a congestion charge - so I no longer take work in London when offered, don't go to real meetings and if it's vital I go, I use the train. There are lots of auctions of audio and video equipment, but driving down to collect gear, pay the charges makes it uneconomic.
 
so you vote for the one you hate the least, which is very odd.
That's the case no matter how you describe your form of government lol...
Assuming you're allowed to vote ;)

The real power of government is in its assumed authority to limit the subjugated to only two choices...
 
Last edited:
First No Tag Alongs on Bills - if a Bill is about Financing The Various Wars - there is no Immigration Bill Attached
No more Pacs -Lobbyist - or the like - and any meeting between a Senator/Congressman is public with Cameras.
Presidents can have multi Terms - up to 4 - no more of this get used to someone and then change everything 4 or 8 years later.
No more State and Federal Legislators - just have one branch serving everyone - with the Senators being the Top Dog.
No more parties - no democrats - no republicans - you run as independent - and aren’t aligned to a political party or idealogy.
And For the Supreme court, Senate, Congress, and Presidential no more ‘Gifts/Awards/Donations’ of any kind - you
don’t get to profit from your office - we’ll see how many stay in office after that.
 
Just like NASCAR has logos of their sponsors on the cars……..

Every politician should have the names and logos of their donors on their clothing at all times. Bigger the donor bigger the donor patch.

Same thing for campaign advertising.


Let the people see exactly who they are working for.
 
As a representative constitutional republic, the language of the constitution needs to be updated to specifically delineate our founders original intent, and include historical precedence to the same. The constitution cannot be open to interpretation.
Really? Updating language is not a form of interpretation?
 
Term limits (2 terms for every elected office)
No stock trading or investing while serving and for 2 years thereafter.
You can't be a lobbyist until 5 years after leaving office.
Most importantly -----> VOTE for TRUMP 2024 !!
 
Really? Updating language is not a form of interpretation?
"...to specifically delineate our founders original intent, and include historical precedence to the same."

There is much about the reasons why the authors of the US Constitution wrote what they did, the way they did, when they did, that is lost on this generation; And that ignorance tends to breed cause for rebellion against antiquated ideology.

I propose that the Constitution should site historical evidence of tyranny as the catalyst for its necessary commission. The reader should be reminded that the tendency for government to overreach is an historically proven certainty.
 
So you’re advocating some one else to interpret and re write the constitution?
 
Back
Top