The primary problem today is not which party they belong to, although I have a great dislike bordering on hatred for socialists, but the fact that the career politicians are there to serve themselves and the big money that bought them the election.

The real problem in America is stupidity, special interest and/or laziness of the voter. How does a person who takes bribes on video, laughs about the ineptness of the FBI and puts $100K in a freezer get elected 8 times? And then the Senate leaders yell and scream about separation of powers. Yes they are right, it is about their power and even if it is against the law, you will not thwart their power.

You have career politicians running the government, not citizen legislators. Many accuse the career corporate CEO of only working for themselves, not the stockholders. Career politicians are NO different and they seem to think they are above the law and expect preferential treatment. If the only issue to remaining in power is to obtain cash, buy some votes with special interests and have the media spotlight, then the incumbent has it easy, all at your expense.

In the Senate there are:
44 Dems averaging 20.8 years in Congress
55 Reps averaging 16.1 years in Congress

these numbers begin to make it look like career politicians are in control, who have lost touch with you the citizen and are more entrenched in their own careers.

For the Senate, if you were to use two terms or 12 years in Congress as a term limit
25 Dems would need to leave and 25 Reps would need to leave.
Those Dems are averaging 27.1 years in Congress
Those Reps averaging 24.0 years.

Ben Franklin said of congress, "They are of the People, and return again to mix with the People, having no more durable preeminence than the different Grains of Sand in an Hourglass. Such an Assembly cannot easily become dangerous to Liberty. They are the Servants of the People, sent together to do the People’s Business, and promote the public Welfare; their Powers must be sufficient, or their Duties cannot be performed. They have no profitable Appointments, but a mere Payment of daily Wages, such as are scarcely equivalent to their Expences; so that, having no Chance for great Places, and enormous Salaries or Pensions, as in some Countries, there is no triguing or bribing for Elections"

If you like the current political system continue voting along partisan lines. If however you are tired of the corrupt ways of elections and would like to see Franklins words be true again, vote for change.

Our country is being run by career politicians who for the most part appear to have lost touch with what you want, and are focused on what they want.

You can change this NOW.
1. Quit your partisan sniping, it is childish and only serves to remove the focus from the real problem in America.
2. Enlist your friends and family in the fight and ask them, if they agree about Congress to do the same.
3. Vote against the person who has 12 or more combined years in Congress
4. This will require in many instances you having to vote for someone outside of your normal party, but you are a patriot and you can do what is right.

Show congress in this next election that we the people are running things in this country, not career politicians. And we are going to do what is right, no more partisan BS.

Your thoughts?

I agree in principle. I did not have to do that when I looked for a job. (If I had told my boss that I was looking, I probably would have been unemployed.) I could understand that they should stay in office if the process took a couple months but this is taking a year or more until the convention. They have a job to do, especially in this environment. Their concentration should be on the job or the campaign. You have to leave your assistants too much power. That is not why we elected them.

Sheeeez. Don’t you know anything?

"God bless America… No!… God Damn America…for killing innocent people…for treating her citizens as less than human"

One is just insane, the other is offensive. Which is worst? Would you rather vote for Wright or Zirkle, if those were your choices?
I know it makes no sense, Tim. I wasn’t trying to have it make sense, just help me decide which is worse. It’s a mental exercise, and luckily not an actual choice anyone will have to make. Whew.

Two nutcases, but the one running for public office should be of more concern.

I remember a news story about a small town, that had only two candidates on the ballot, and both of them failed to show up to vote for themself, neither one got even one vote, so both lost.

In most USA elections, just a small number of people make the decisions for the majority.

About 1/2 of the people eligible to vote actually register, and only 60% do vote. So, 60% of 50%, is about 30%.
About 1/3rd of the people make the decisions for 100 percent.

Your vote is important. And needed, for a democracy.
People in other third world nations vote in much higher percentages.

Government is the problem not the solution.

But actually, candidates without corporate backing usually do extremely poorly in American elections.

Americans STRONGLY prefer to elect people who have the support of corporations and lobbyists.

Why is this? Are Americans just huge hypocrites, or is there something else at work?

Why is corporate opposition usually a death sentence for a political candidacy?
Would term limits change anything? Wouldn’t the new candidates also need corporate backing to get elected?

Because those are the only choices that are offered to us. Both parties are ‘corporate owned’ and they control the elections making it almost impossible for a third party or independent candidate to run. Check the ‘committee on presidential debates’ which was created in 1988 as a response to Ross Perot’s bid for presidency. The idea that an individual who wasn’t owned by a party could run scared the crap out of the establishment so they sowed it up.

There will never be another independent who makes a real run for office. ‘committee on presidential debates’