Saw this on the news earlier.. Congress approval rating is 14% according to them. They gave out a few other numbers for approval on other things (I don't remember what, I'm pretty high), and they were all below 10% approval. Right now, according to them, it's estimated 65% will lose their job next year. But I guess that can get higher if approval remains low. It seems that congress just doesn't give a fuck what people want them to do.. And I'm not sure that a portion of them losing their job will matter because they'll be replaced with somebody exactly fucking like them. But with public pressure it may be possible for them to at least change a few things for the better? The numbers surprised me and I thought they were pretty cool/interesting. I haven't seen a thread on this so, what do you all think about it? How high do you expect the % of congress to lose their job to get? Does it even make a difference? edit- Oh, and 42% find the government corrupt
don't hold your breath sam.. it'll be either a bunch of democrats or a bunch or republicans replacing the democrats and republicans..
Doesn't have to be that way. It's really up to you and your peers. Tea Party was a false start, and not necessarily in the right direction. Shows what is possible though.
i understand that it doesn't have to be that way.. but my peers watch the news and take what they say as the gospel truth.. so they will vote for who the news says to vote for. i blame the media for a lot of the problems we have here. and yes, the tea party was a good idea when it started up, but then FOX news and the neo cons (michelle bachman, etc) got a hold of it.. so it's just a bunch of republicans now..
I have actually thought for a long time that it was the medias fault that everything is the way it is. The media decides who the president is. Its sad, but see, thats why the control of the spread of information is a bad thing. The internet, which represents the freedom of constant and unlimited access to information is starting to beat the media at its little game. How many people of my generation (aged 21) get there information from the news channel than the internet? Its a gap that was wider than the generation previous and the generation that succeeds it will be even wider than this. If only Ron were 10 years younger LOL.
yeah.. it bothers me when our media describes other countries media as "the state media" yet our media is basically a mouthpiece for the white house and pentagon. They basically take these press releases and broadcast them without any questions or research..
Top 10 Tea Party Crashers | The Northwest Report 1. Sarah Palin 2. Rush Limbaugh 3. Glenn Beck 4. Paul Ryan 5. Rick Perry 6. Marco Rubio 7. Richard Keith “Dick†Armey 8. Allen West 9. Chris Christie 10. Michele Bachmann Sean Hannity should definitely be on that list. That motherfucker is so annoying when he claims to be "conservative" or "tea party" etc. It's one thing to use the rhetoric, it's another thing to actually have the RECORD (see sig).
Totally. "Sources in the White House" - "Speaking of condition of anonymity" Hell, the White House probably writes the stories and then the media is just used to spread the propaganda. And of course this doesn't help: Who Owns the Media? | Free Press
The problem is Lobbying and special interest campaign donations. Probably 80% of our politicians are bought and paid for and the legit 20% are negated by the corrupt. Only after we ban all lobbying and 'campaign contributions' will we actually start to see legit government with our best interests in mind.
I would be surprised to see any more than 15% lose their jobs in the next election. People can bitch an complain about the government all they want, but when it comes time to actually do something about it, they just vote for whoever has their favorite letter next to their name- R or D. A lot of people think the special interest groups control politicians and tell them what to do- That may be the case with a couple of the really huge ones, but I think generally it's kind of the other way around- a lot of politicians choose their political positions and make speeches, give interviews etc knowing that certain talking points and stances on certain issues will likely win them contributions from interest groups. So it's not that the interest group is telling them what to do, it's that they're creating their political "beliefs" based on what will make them the most money. It's still corrupt and counterproductive, just not in the way a lot of people think.
Don't forget gerrymandering. Politicians are smart when it comes to making sure they keep their jobs, despite their shitty performance, and preventing viable 3rd party options.
this thread is all win...makes me optimistic about the future. stoopid optimism! back in the hole with your friends "morality" and "self-control"