PDA

View Full Version : NYT Op Ed: Time To Cancel Midterm Elections




AuH20
11-03-2014, 10:42 AM
We're not moving fast enough to totalitarianism for their liking.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/03/nyt-op-ed-its-time-to-cancel-midterm-elections/


The main impact of the midterm election in the modern era has been to weaken the president, the only government official (other than the powerless vice president) elected by the entire nation. Since the end of World War II, the president’s party has on average lost 25 seats in the House and about 4 in the Senate as a result of the midterms. This is a bipartisan phenomenon — Democratic presidents have lost an average of 31 House seats and between 4 to 5 Senate seats in midterms; Republican presidents have lost 20 and 3 seats, respectively…

These effects are compounded by our grotesque campaign finance system…

Another quirk is that, during midterm elections, the electorate has been whiter, wealthier, older and more educated than during presidential elections. Biennial elections require our representatives to take this into account, appealing to one set of voters for two years, then a very different electorate two years later…

There’s an obvious, simple fix, though. The government should, through a constitutional amendment, extend the term of House members to four years and adjust the term of senators to either four or eight years, so that all elected federal officials would be chosen during presidential election years. Doing so would relieve some (though, of course, not all) of the systemic gridlock afflicting the federal government and provide members of Congress with the ability to focus more time and energy on governance instead of electioneering.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 10:45 AM
Wait, they want us to vote less hard?

I'm...I'm...so confused.

William Tell
11-03-2014, 10:53 AM
Wait, they want us to vote less hard?

I'm...I'm...so confused.

That's what some of us have been trying to say, believe it or not, the Elite do not want Ron Paul Republicans to hold positions of power:rolleyes:

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 10:53 AM
Oh, wait, I see...


Another quirk is that, during midterm elections, the electorate has been whiter, wealthier, older and more educated than during presidential elections. Biennial elections require our representatives to take this into account, appealing to one set of voters for two years, then a very different electorate two years later.

Mid-term elections are racist.

Got it.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 10:54 AM
That's what some of us have been trying to say, believe it or not, the Elite do not want Ron Paul Republicans to hold positions of power:rolleyes:

No, you're just a racist...

Pericles
11-03-2014, 10:58 AM
I keep saying that it is like voting to join the EU. You keep voting until you get it right, and then you don't need to vote anymore.

Brian4Liberty
11-03-2014, 10:59 AM
Twitter, ubiquitous video cameras, 24-hour cable news and a host of other technologies provide a level of hyper-accountability the framers could not possibly have imagined. In the modern age, we do not need an election every two years to communicate voters’ desires to their elected officials.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/opinion/cancel-the-midterms.html

LOL! Seriously? Government monitoring and government propaganda outlets provide hyper-accountability? Surely they jest.

Lucille
11-03-2014, 11:00 AM
These effects are compounded by our grotesque campaign finance system…

That slimeball Reid doesn't think it's grotesque (http://time.com/3553907/senate-majority-pac-campaign-finance-citizens-united/) (no matter how often he screams KOCH BROTHERS (http://blog.independent.org/2014/10/30/election-on-tuesday-whos-running/)).

They don't seem to appreciate "more educated" voters either. Gee, I wonder why... LOL

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:04 AM
I think we should just get it over with already and anoint a "High Chancellor Supreme Pooh-Bah Ruler and Glorious Leader For Life".

Then we wouldn't have to bother with such things anymore.

Ronin Truth
11-03-2014, 11:04 AM
The NYT would change their tune quick enough if the POTUS was GOP.

thoughtomator
11-03-2014, 11:05 AM
One could be forgiven for thinking there's an agenda being pursued to eliminate white people, or at the very least the influence thereof.

Nobody but white people would ever be so directly attacked in a NYT op-ed. Nobody. There's a genocidal streak at that paper that needs to be called out.

luctor-et-emergo
11-03-2014, 11:08 AM
I keep saying that it is like voting to join the EU. You keep voting until you get it right, and then you don't need to vote anymore.
We only voted once here, 65% NO (on the constitution thing). Govt: "silly people, they got it all wrong, lets piss on them."

^^history.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:11 AM
They don't seem to appreciate "more educated" voters either. Gee, I wonder why... LOL

Amazing how every time you turn around, it's VOTE VOTE VOTE!!

Vote HARDER!

Unless of course you are "whiter, wealthier, older and more educated".

I wonder what the NYT reaction would be to an OP-ED that opined that presidential elections should be canceled because too much attention was being paid to getting the "blacker, poorer, younger and more stupid" vote?

Brian4Liberty
11-03-2014, 11:12 AM
529320156523028480

AuH20
11-03-2014, 11:15 AM
Amazing how every time you turn around, it's VOTE VOTE VOTE!!

Vote HARDER!

Unless of course you are "whiter, wealthier, older and more educated".

I wonder what the NYT reaction would be to an OP-ED that opined that presidential elections should be canceled because too much attention was being paid to getting the "blacker, poorer, younger and more stupid" vote?

Soon there will be IQ cutoffs for voting (not there is much in the way of choice). ROFL

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:18 AM
One could be forgiven for thinking there's an agenda being pursued to eliminate white people, or at the very least the influence thereof.

Nobody but white people would ever be so directly attacked in a NYT op-ed. Nobody. There's a genocidal streak at that paper that needs to be called out.

White people have a self genocidal streak.

They have been shamed into buying a bill of goods that tells them they are, basically, unfit to exist.

AuH20
11-03-2014, 11:20 AM
White people have a self genocidal streak.

They have been shamed into buying a bill of goods that tells them they are, basically, unfit to exist.

Just go in the shower and scrub the whiteness off!!

enhanced_deficit
11-03-2014, 11:22 AM
Wait, they want us to vote less hard?

I'm...I'm...so confused.

If it is not for throwing off skeptics , it could be a result of exhaustion from political horse trading. Why not make new buys of politicians less often and have more time to find/groom sure bet puppets... trying to think like a puppet master in the profitable democracy business.

Brian4Liberty
11-03-2014, 11:27 AM
Much of this money is sought from either highly partisan wealthy individuals or entities with vested interests before Congress. Eliminating midterms would double the amount of time House members could focus on governing and make them less dependent on their donor base.

The only time that politicians pay lip-service to the electorate is when they are campaigning. Less elections mean they could dedicate more energy to their crony benefactors and masters.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:28 AM
If it is not for throwing off skeptics , it could be a result of exhaustion from political horse trading. Why not make new buys of politicians less often and have more time to find/groom sure bet puppets... trying to think like a puppet master in the profitable democracy business.

Well, there's something to be said for that.

Theye have arranged it in such a way as to not have had a one term president in well over twenty years.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:29 AM
Just go in the shower and scrub the whiteness off!!

I hate my white privilege.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:38 AM
Wonder where the Times was in 2006?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2006

ETA: (like I had to guess)

More Power to Them: Democrats Win Beyond Congress

By Thomas F. Schaller

November 10, 2006 9:37 pmNovember 10, 2006 9:37 pm

http://midtermmadness.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/10/more-power-to-them-democrats-win-beyond-congress/?module=BlogPost-ReadMore&version=Blog%20Main&action=Click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body#more-43

Brian4Liberty
11-03-2014, 11:44 AM
The NYT would change their tune quick enough if the POTUS was GOP.


Wonder where the Times was in 2006?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2006

Good question.


The ‘cancel the midterms’ malfunction
By Tom Jackson - November 3, 2014

Mere hours before the electorate is expected to deliver a repudiation of President Obama — related reading on that here — and coming on the heels of William Galston’s lament about midterm elections gumming up the work of government, The New York Times also has weighed in and found the Framers’ wisdom wanting.

Like Galston, Duke Prof. David Schanzer and his student protege, Jay Sullivan, apparently would prefer a quasi-parliamentary arrangement to the current system of checks-and-balances. They, too, endorse four-year terms for members of the House of Representatives, with their elections scheduled at the same time as the president’s.
...
This plea on behalf of efficient (although “expedient” is the superior term) governing is nothing more than our presumed betters telling us to sit down and shut up. It’s also an endorsement of lawmakers maximizing the presidential coattails on which they road to Washington.

The Right Stuff’s opinion about this — what a bunch of cringing, anti-democratic chuckleheads — has not changed from last week.
...
A proper progressive can’t very well sit still when their voters are opting out of an election cycle, allowing the other guys to scatter their carefully arranged blocks, right? Therefore, having accomplished a thorough act of profiling, they recommend amending the Constitution to mute, if not eliminate, the politically energized.

Makes you wonder where they were hiding their angst in 2006.
...
More:
http://tbo.com/news/blogs/the-right-stuff/the-cancel-the-midterms-malfunction-20141103/

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:52 AM
This plea on behalf of efficient (although “expedient” is the superior term) governing is nothing more than our presumed betters telling us to sit down and shut up.

Makes sense when looked at that way.

They do that to us all day long anyway.

Why go through the charade of voting?

AuH20
11-03-2014, 11:53 AM
Makes sense when looked at that way.

They do that to us all day long anyway.

Why go through the charade of voting?

It legitimizes the fraud.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:59 AM
It legitimizes the fraud.

Well, I'm not going to let all these nattering nabobs of negativism get me down.

I'm gonna really concentrate and vote hard tomorrow.

specsaregood
11-03-2014, 12:05 PM
Wonder where the Times was in 2006?


Maybe they hadn't gotten around to reading the CFR's book "Reforming American Government; The Bicentennial Papers of the Committee on the Constitutional System."
http://www.amazon.com/Reforming-American-Government-Bicentennial-Constitutional/dp/0813370590



The CCS is proposing drastic changes in the Constitution, These were outlined in the 1985 book Reforming American Government;
The Bicentennial Papers of the Committee on the Constitutional System.

Ensuing are some of them:

• One proposal would have us emulate the European parliamentary system; American voters would be unable to cast ballots for individual candidates, restricted instead to choosing a party slate across the board. This would eliminate independent candidates (which would suit the Establishment very well).

• The Congress would be expanded. The party whose nominee became President would designate one-sixth of all representatives in the House and one-third of all senators. This would dimmish the elective power of the voters and the balance between the executive and legislative spheres,

• The requirement for Senate ratification of treaties would be lowered.

• The CCS has also advocated extending representatives' terms from two to four years and senators' from six to eight, and allowing congressmen to serve in the executive branch while still holding their seats in Congress.

--Shadows of power pg. 200

osan
11-03-2014, 12:17 PM
Oh, wait, I see...



Mid-term elections are racist.

Got it.

Check yo' whaat'prillage at d'do'

euphemia
11-03-2014, 12:18 PM
I don't know how they would get around mid term elections, seeing that Congressional terms are only two years.

specsaregood
11-03-2014, 12:22 PM
I don't know how they would get around mid term elections, seeing that Congressional terms are only two years.

The answer to that is right in the OP.

euphemia
11-03-2014, 12:29 PM
I get that. Do they have a clue how the Constitution is amended? Probably not. It is very hard to amend the Constitution, by design. They can't just vote on it in Congress. It needs to also be ratified by the states. I don't see that happening.

The Balance of Power is in the Constituion for a reason.

r3volution 3.0
11-03-2014, 12:33 PM
Want to make voters show ID?

....You racist fascist Koch brother stooge hillbilly!

Want to cancel elections because you don't like who's voting in them?

...Welcome to the NY Times Sir, over there's the employee lounge, have a muffin, they're scrumptious.

euphemia
11-03-2014, 12:54 PM
What the NYT wants is a more ignorant voter. Voting for a president is easy. Voting for congress and state races/constitutional issues is harder and requires something of the voter.

It's easy to get people to the polls to vote for a president and convince the to vote a party ticket all the way down. The NYT wants coattail elections so it can get out of its job of reporting news.

euphemia
11-03-2014, 01:28 PM
I also think they are just out of ideas how to defend the current administration.

r3volution 3.0
11-03-2014, 01:29 PM
Well lookie here (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-tries-to-downplay-likely-losses-in-midterms/article/2555633)...


The White House on Monday argued that even a Republican takeover of the Senate in the 2014 midterms would not send as clear a message as the electoral outcome in a presidential year. “It would not be wise to draw as broad a conclusion about the outcome of this election as you would from a national presidential election, simply by virtue of the map and the states where this contest is taking place,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters, trying to minimize the fallout from elections expected to be unkind to President Obama’s party.

Sound familiar?

Methinks somebody got a memo from the DNC this morning.

Watch MSNBC et al follow suit over the next few days.

euphemia
11-03-2014, 01:37 PM
It was the Republican takeover in 1994 that got things done in Congress under Clinton. Reagan had a Democratic Senate. They got things done.

This president just does not know how to do any useful work. He needs a Congress that will do something instead of blaming the other party. It's just the president is lazy.

tangent4ronpaul
11-03-2014, 01:52 PM
Soon there will be IQ cutoffs for voting (not there is much in the way of choice). ROFL

OH!, I got it - make it like cop employment tests - if you are too smart, no votie for you!

sooo much easier to control the population that way! - BRILLIANT!

-t

DevilsAdvocate
11-03-2014, 01:57 PM
Whatever they suggest has a particular result in mind. They are hoping to change the rules of the elections to influence the outcome of those elections, rather than any legitimate systematic criticism.

tangent4ronpaul
11-03-2014, 02:21 PM
I've got it! A perfect new way to elect all our congress critters and prez!

We give each of them a choo-choo, a ton of coal, a boxcar and $5,000 to renovate said boxcar.

They will be voted on a 10 point scale in 3 categories divided by 3, so we get one final score.

First, they must demonstrate a knowledge of logistics by visiting the largest number of their constituents on the 1 ton of coal allowance and make it back to their starting point or be disqualified. This would be purely performance based. 4 Months max travel time. Maybe add distance traveled to the equation.

Second, they must get the best bang for their buck and create the sweetest looking crib out of that boxcar on a 5K budget. Public votes on conserving funds and coming up with something creative and aesthetically pleasing. (negative points if it leaks or falls apart. Critter must do 51% of the renovation personally)

Third, they will be judged by whatever BS comes out of their mouths at campaign stops.

Take these 3 scores and divide by 3 for a final score. Best candidate wins!

-t

DevilsAdvocate
11-03-2014, 03:22 PM
I've got it! A perfect new way to elect all our congress critters and prez!

We give each of them a choo-choo, a ton of coal, a boxcar and $5,000 to renovate said boxcar.

They will be voted on a 10 point scale in 3 categories divided by 3, so we get one final score.

First, they must demonstrate a knowledge of logistics by visiting the largest number of their constituents on the 1 ton of coal allowance and make it back to their starting point or be disqualified. This would be purely performance based. 4 Months max travel time. Maybe add distance traveled to the equation.

Second, they must get the best bang for their buck and create the sweetest looking crib out of that boxcar on a 5K budget. Public votes on conserving funds and coming up with something creative and aesthetically pleasing. (negative points if it leaks or falls apart. Critter must do 51% of the renovation personally)

Third, they will be judged by whatever BS comes out of their mouths at campaign stops.

Take these 3 scores and divide by 3 for a final score. Best candidate wins!

-t

I think they should fight to the death.

invisible
11-03-2014, 07:51 PM
It was the Republican takeover in 1994 that got things done in Congress under Clinton. Reagan had a Democratic Senate. They got things done.

This president just does not know how to do any useful work. He needs a Congress that will do something instead of blaming the other party. It's just the president is lazy.

But what does he need Congress for? He has a phone and a pen!

anaconda
11-03-2014, 08:15 PM
Not a problem. NYT just needs to spearhead a Constitutional Amendment.

Pericles
11-03-2014, 09:30 PM
Well, I'm not going to let all these nattering nabobs of negativism get me down.

I'm gonna really concentrate and vote hard tomorrow.

As am I, and then I'm going out to buy a case of 5.56mm ammunition.

Pericles
11-03-2014, 09:33 PM
Whatever they suggest has a particular result in mind. They are hoping to change the rules of the elections to influence the outcome of those elections, rather than any legitimate systematic criticism.

Just like every other 3rd world hellhole. Truly, role models for us all.

Chester Copperpot
11-03-2014, 09:56 PM
Oh, wait, I see...



Mid-term elections are racist.

Got it.

I thought you made that quote up as a joke.. holy shit.... the double speak is deafening now. so blatant

milgram
11-03-2014, 10:07 PM
Another take, from Peter Suderman:

http://reason.com/blog/2014/11/03/the-case-against-the-midterms-is-the-cas


Basically, their complaint is that the midterms reinforce the notion that the president’s agenda is not the only one that matters, allow the public a chance to express their opinion about that agenda by voting at the midpoint of a presidential term, and that Congress has significant power to shape, slow, or even block that agenda through the legislative process (and might even respond with an agenda or agendas of its own).

This strikes me as a better case for the midterms than one against it.

osan
11-03-2014, 10:36 PM
But what does he need Congress for? He has a phone and a pen!

Do you think he gave himself an eponymous phone?

osan
11-03-2014, 10:38 PM
Just like every other 3rd world hellhole. Truly, role models for us all.

It's like the feeding frenzy of a papal conclave... only it never ends.

Christian Liberty
11-03-2014, 10:39 PM
I think we should just get it over with already and anoint a "High Chancellor Supreme Pooh-Bah Ruler and Glorious Leader For Life".

Then we wouldn't have to bother with such things anymore.

Its Supreme Chancellor, to be changed to Emperor after the Clone Wars end;)

Seriously though, I'd love to see the entire government be up for election at the same time, but I can't imagine them ever allowing that. Imagine if you could replace all the incumbents at one time. Unfortunately that won't ever happen.

Anti Federalist
11-03-2014, 11:16 PM
I thought you made that quote up as a joke.. holy shit.... the double speak is deafening now. so blatant

I wrote this at another forum I'm on:


Another quirk is that, during presidential elections, the electorate has been blacker, poorer, younger and more stupid than during midterm elections. Biennial elections require our representatives to take this into account, appealing to one set of voters for two years, then a very different electorate two years later.

Guy wrote back:


That is one of the most racist posts I have ever read. You should really think that one over again!!

I replied:


Why is what I wrote racist, but this is not?


Another quirk is that, during midterm elections, the electorate has been whiter, wealthier, older and more educated than during presidential elections. Biennial elections require our representatives to take this into account, appealing to one set of voters for two years, then a very different electorate two years later.

All I did is change the descriptions.

If that is an accurate description of the midterm electorate, then, obviously, what I wrote must be true during a presidential election.

ETA - I'll cede the point that I could have wrote "less educated" instead of "more stupid", in order to be more accurate.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
11-03-2014, 11:41 PM
Time to cancel a certain "newspaper" subscription.

Christian Liberty
11-03-2014, 11:59 PM
I wrote this at another forum I'm on:



Guy wrote back:



I replied:

Ironically, "guy" showed himself to be in the "more stupid" group with that response:p

People are idiots.

Occam's Banana
11-04-2014, 12:52 AM
I wrote this at another forum I'm on:


Another quirk is that, during presidential elections, the electorate has been blacker, poorer, younger and more stupid than during midterm elections. Biennial elections require our representatives to take this into account, appealing to one set of voters for two years, then a very different electorate two years later.

Guy wrote back:


That is one of the most racist posts I have ever read. You should really think that one over again!!

I replied:


Why is what I wrote racist, but this is not?


Another quirk is that, during midterm elections, the electorate has been whiter, wealthier, older and more educated than during presidential elections. Biennial elections require our representatives to take this into account, appealing to one set of voters for two years, then a very different electorate two years later.


All I did is change the descriptions.

If that is an accurate description of the midterm electorate, then, obviously, what I wrote must be true during a presidential election.

ETA - I'll cede the point that I could have wrote "less educated" instead of "more stupid", in order to be more accurate.


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.

Well, dammit! I guess you're just gonna have to settle for some worshipful adoration instead ...

http://i.imgur.com/dEzlw.gif

Spikender
11-04-2014, 01:19 AM
It was the Republican takeover in 1994 that got things done in Congress under Clinton. Reagan had a Democratic Senate. They got things done.

This president just does not know how to do any useful work. He needs a Congress that will do something instead of blaming the other party. It's just the president is lazy.

Congress doing something scares me more than the President doing something.

specsaregood
11-04-2014, 08:33 AM
So here we have the progressives so upset that the apathetic and uninformed populace isn't voting these off-cycle years that they are willing to eliminate the elections and even sending threatening letters.

But in the meantime, we have the anarchists arguing that some of the most informed members of the populace shouldn't go vote...

Brian4Liberty
11-04-2014, 08:52 AM
I wrote this at another forum I'm on:

Guy wrote back:


Guy is a good doggy. Well conditioned.

AuH20
11-04-2014, 10:23 AM
So here we have the progressives so upset that the apathetic and uninformed populace isn't voting these off-cycle years that they are willing to eliminate the elections and even sending threatening letters.

But in the meantime, we have the anarchists arguing that some of the most informed members of the populace shouldn't go vote...

You basically have two meager options with our current 'representative' democracy:

(1) don't vote because change is not hardwired into the political system
(2) eagerly vote for gridlock that will slow down the wheels of corruption