Things that we all agree on.

[gergroy]

killerzX said:

gergroy said:
I think that the majority of us would agree that the two party system sucks, we need viable third parties.

maybe, but this can easily be solved with the voter.

I also think the majority of us would agree that the electoral college system is crap and needs to be changed to popular vote.

helllllll, NOOO!!! this protects us from mob rule, it also insulates us, and sometimes protects us from large concentrated population, like cities, from dictated the policies of the rest of the country. see: Chicogo ruining the state of illinois

something that I am not sure we all agree on, but I think we might is that all these senators and house reps need to have term limits.

as much i this may seem like a good idea, there are legitamately good congressmen who deserve to stay in office. and ultimataly its up to the voter again, we have no one else to blaim than ourselfs. voters get what they deserve when they keep re-electing dianne fienstein, nancy polosi, barnie frank, charlie rangle, lindsey Grahanm. etc

1. The voter cant really solve this if no politician will take up the cause.  As it is, most states have rules that make it very hard for third parties to get on the ballot.  The system is designed to keep the established parties in power.  The system needs to be revamped and the qualifications to get into the national debates needs to be lessened.

2. The electoral college system supresses voter turnout for the majority of the country.  People in the state of utah, for example, already know that their state is going to romney, so why vote?  The fact of the matter is that the electoral college is great for the 7 or 8 states that are close and benefit from all the spending and attention.  Politicians tend to mostly care about only about issues important in those states as well.  Funny enough, your example of chicago ruining the state of illinois is a perfect example of why the elctoral college system doesnt work.  Illinois will go democrat because of chicago, so all those republicans voting in that state will have votes that dont matter.  If we got rid of the electoral college than voter turnout would increase and every state would benefit from policians paying more attention to the needs of the nation instead of the needs of a handful of states.

3. True, some politicians are good, but is that really a good argument against term limits?  Why do we have term limits on the president then?  With the two party system, there are usually only two viable canidates and if a state or district is heavily biased towards one party then there really isnt an option.  Look at orrin hatch in utah.  36 years ago he ran a campaign against an incumbent that had been in office for 18 years.  His message was that 18 years was too long and they should send him home.  Hatch has now been in office twice as long, he is incredibly entrenched with special interest groups and wont lose an election because he is the republican on the ticket in utah.  The idea of imposing term limits isnt to keep good politicians out, but instead keep politicians focused on the job they were elected to do, not the next election they have to win.  That is why washington deadlocks, because some votes would look bad the next time they are up for election, even though they are the right thing to do.