jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (14 posts)

NBC/WSJ poll: Majority would vote out every member of Congress

  1. Stacie L profile image86
    Stacie Lposted 5 years ago

    NBC/WSJ poll: Majority would vote out every member of Congress
    By NBC's Domenico Montanaro


    In a country sharply divided on almost every issue, most Americans agree on one thing: they don't like Congress, and they would vote to replace every single member -- even their own -- if they had the option.

    Fifty-six percent of registered voters say they would vote out every member of Congress if there were a place on the ballot to do so. Thats the highest response in favor of the question since it was first asked in March 2010.

    And they say so across the ideological spectrum  with 55 percent of liberals, 55 percent of moderates, and 58 percent of conservatives all feeling the same way.
    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20 … f-congress
    Congress has a 13% approval rating...so why are they still there? how do we fix this broken system?

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
      Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I would keep maybe 3 or 4: RON PAUL, Rand, Kucinich isn't SO bad, and maybe one other that I can't think of.

      The question becomes "why are people furious with the congress system?" The answer is "because they have to deal with Ohioans legislating on California governance".

      Everyday, some jerk from California has a major influence in my life. Jerk #1 voted for Jerk #2-10. #2-10 vote regularly to tell ME what I can do in Ohio.

      Screw that.

      I want to maximize my influence on my elected officials, and I want Ohioans voting for Ohioans.

  2. knolyourself profile image59
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    National Voter Turnout in Federal Elections:
    2010 Turnout of voting-age population (percent) 37.8%
    Most people don't vote because there is nobody to vote for.

    1. Stacie L profile image86
      Stacie Lposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      term limits...

    2. Evan G Rogers profile image83
      Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No excuses this time: Ron Paul

  3. knolyourself profile image59
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    The problem with term limits is just when an elected official starts to learn the job they are tossed out.
    The problem it is two party system period controlled by money.

    1. Moderndayslave profile image60
      Moderndayslaveposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      As soon as they learn the job they seem to learn how to work the system. Two terms and Get Out. it is supposed to be a simple job,vote as you feel your Constituents would like. Not what would line your or you family members pockets. You are right about the two party money thing.

      1. Quilligrapher profile image91
        Quilligrapherposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Hi there, MDS. It has been a while since our last exchange.

        We agree in spirit but your definition of “constituents” may differ from our congressional representative’s. We are living in a highly mobile society. Regional roots are no longer important to a candidate. Consider the fact that John McCain, thinking Barry Goldwater was about to retire, moved to Arizona to run for his Senate seat. Both Bobby Kennedy and Hilary Clinton are pretend New Yorkers recruited for their Senate runs by the state’s Democratic Party machine. This political trend may very well be the reason why members of Congress display more allegiance to the movers and shakers then to the voters on Main Street.
        Just a thought, my friend. Hope you have a pleasant evening.

      2. profile image68
        logic,commonsenseposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You are 100% correct on this matter!

  4. Hugh Williamson profile image87
    Hugh Williamsonposted 5 years ago

    "Fifty-six percent of registered voters say they would vote out every member of Congress if there were a place on the ballot to do so."

    This is the most hopeful news I've heard lately.

    Unless someone runs unopposed, there always is a way to get rid of them. Voting out all sitting officeholders would send a far stronger message than re-electing someone who now says they'll keep promises that they didn't deliver on last time.

    The message sent by voter revolt will be more important and powerful than party loyalty.

    Fire them all. Show that we mean business -- vote out everyone up for reelection, regardless of party.

    1. profile image68
      logic,commonsenseposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I've been an advocate of that for several years now.  The biggest problem is that most think it is someone else's congressman or senator that is the bad one and that their representative is okay.

      1. Hugh Williamson profile image87
        Hugh Williamsonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        That's very true but maybe we can finally see that congress agrees on nothing but wasting money on bridges to nowhere and enriching themselves.

        The bacon that they bring home to their constituents is paid for by those same constituents and maybe voters are becoming more aware of that fact.

        I sure hope so.

  5. Shanna11 profile image92
    Shanna11posted 5 years ago

    Hasn't it always been this like? In my poli sci class, we discussed why and ultimately it boils down to the institution-not necessarily the people (although they help too!). Most people are happy with their specific elected representative because of pork barrel money and constituent service. A representative HAS to fight for the specific needs of their constituents in order to keep their job, which means a lot of conflicting interests. Also, everyone constantly says they want to see compromise, but often times the constituents see this as caving, so prisoners dilemma's and games of chicken are common-- the representative who tries to compromise ultimately can't have everything he wants, so he's seen as caving, and his constituents kick him out.

    It's just the nature of Congress-- it's too big and runs inefficiently. But if it's too small, our founders feared tyranny.

    1. Hugh Williamson profile image87
      Hugh Williamsonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      All true. I expect our founders would spin in their graves if they knew that the freedoms they fought so hard for, like free elections are often ignored by some of our citizens (non-voters).

      It's time to send a message --  this time around that's much more important than who we vote for. The message:  anyone wanting a career in politics had better fear the voters more than big money, and work for our interests.

      Toss out every pol who's up for re-election.

 
working