Thread: Divisive Politics is killing the United States.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

You mean the people of New York should have elected a long-term New York resident who actually cared about the state instead of a some carpet baggin' ho who sought only a stepping stone back into the White House?

Exactly, what I mean. Hillary should have ran for senator of arkansas. Oh thats right people in arkansas knew all about what she was really like my bad. Well at any rate thats my thoughts on real representation. Long term resident with a actual stake in what happens in their community and know that they need solid representation.

Originally Posted by 2lane

I'm hesitant to lay all the blame on that on the elected reps. These issues requires people to pay attention, learn a little about thier government, how it works and whats going on. That's a lot of details. We the people, or too many of us anyway, like their beliefs to fit on a bumper sticker.

This is true, which is why I think we could have more success coming from a purpose that is easily understood. Efficiency and efficacy in government. Two easily definable terms that are easy to measure and can be applied to every issue of domestic politics. It also removes the debate from ideology such as, should we or should we not have Welfare. Being that we do have Welfare, the question would be restructured to say, are our welfare programs efficient and efficacious.

Efficient meaning, "performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort; having and using requisite knowledge, skill, and industry; competent; capable".

Efficacious meaning, "capable of having the desired result or effect".

This would require politicians to then define what the desired result and effect of each program would be and how much it should cost to achieve those results. And then the American people as the stockholders in the company of the American Government, with their lives and liberty invested in its success or failure, can try to hold their politicians to the highest standards of efficiency and efficaciousness.

Originally Posted by deepthought

Exactly, what I mean. Hillary should have ran for senator of arkansas. Oh thats right people in arkansas knew all about what she was really like my bad. Well at any rate thats my thoughts on real representation. Long term resident with a actual stake in what happens in their community and know that they need solid representation.

The Clintons are still relatively popular in Arkansas. She would have still gotten elected. She ran in New York for the political influence that comes with being a Senator from New York.