2 ms·
Yes, each party has their sponsors that they need to keep happy. Hence the differences. The sponsors are... not you and I. OK, sometimes they pander to voters r
by jazzyk 9y ago
Yes, each party has their sponsors that they need to keep happy. Hence the differences.
The sponsors are... not you and I. OK, sometimes they pander to voters regarding their pet issues (transgender bathrooms, etc)
Neither party ever even tried to do anything about:
- term limits, limits on money in politics
- getting rid of lobbyists (their own sponsors)
- punishing Wall Street criminals
- reforming business law to give shareholders more control over executive compensation
- stopping the runaway train of national debt
- etc.
Both parties were/are mostly:
- anti-privacy (anti-Snowden, anti-Wikileaks, etc)
- pro-war, the military budget is untouchable, whether it is McCain or Hillary
- ever-increasing spending (despite Reps rhetoric)
- happy (Dems) or uninterested (Reps) in lowering healthcare costs
- corrupt, with "foundations" and "speaking fees" flowing freely
There is much more, but this thread is off-topic, so I will stop here.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> Neither party ever even tried to do anything about: > - term limits Term limits are a horrible non-solution, but Republicans did push a Constitutional Amendment for them them on Congress in 1995, securing a majority but not the supermajority required for a Constitutional Amendment. > limits on money in politics Bipartisan finance reform has passed several times, only for the most significant measures to be struck down by the courts. A number of your other points are similarly ill-informed.