138
That gum that nobody liked is gonna come back in style . . . (thelemmy.club)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/politics@hexbear.net
73 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.today/post/47029629

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.today/post/47029625

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 42 points 8 months ago (14 children)

I think you should get multiple attempts, but you need to be able to establish that you are more qualified than the last time you applied, and Kamala has basically done the opposite by blaming everyone but herself for her failure, which negates the possibility of improvement and itself is another serious detriment to her qualification.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I see little reason why you should get multiple attempts. When your pool of potential candidates is 100 million people, there’s very little “improvement” that could be done that would bring you up like, more than a standard deviation in ability. And if there is, you should do that improvement before becoming the major party nominee for president.

    Kamala is honestly the most extreme example, she shouldn’t just not be running for president, she should be in prison, both for the numerous war crimes she’s complicit in and for her failure to abide by the 25th amendment and remove an ailing president.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    I think you should get killed if you lose an election.

    Would self select out a lot of these fucks

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    I personally think that that would not be a good policy. Punitive killing isn't a good way of running basically anything.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    I think there's some way to stop people grabbing power out of a self serving motivation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    The chief thing to do is make it not represent power. Modest pay, anti-corruption laws, recall elections, the ability to actually be held liable for crimes . . .

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    I don't think that works.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    I promise you that it's a much better means of keeping political representatives under control than literally executing people who try and fail to be elected.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)

    I genuinely don't know. Real talk instead of being glib.

    How do you design a political power that does not attract those who seek power selfishly?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    As I said, the point is for the people to have political power and for representatives to be reduced to administrators. The various measures that I mentioned are meant in part to take power away from representatives, because hoping for good kings instead of bad kings is useless. You must head off vectors of corruption, take away abilities that are only suitable for misuse, and make it so people aren't stuck with a conmen in office and can instead vote to remove them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent