Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/opin ... cians.html

The number of Democrats aiming to unseat Republican incumbents in the midterm elections in November is rewriting the record books. According to the Campaign Finance Institute, by last fall the Democrats were fielding about twice the number of challengers as Republicans managed in 2009, the height of the Tea Party insurgency. In Wisconsin, 17 Democrats have filed papers to challenge Gov. Scott Walker; eight are running in Iowa’s open governor’s race.

Another aspect of this flood of candidates, however, is reason for concern. In a recent study for the Brookings Institution, we took a close look at the post-Trump mobilization and found it to be a potentially transformative step toward the amateurization of American politics — a trend that should trouble people who worry about political polarization and government dysfunction.

I think there are good points here, but I also think there's a difference between running an Oprah Winfrey and running a Bradley Manning (at least Oprah has leadership chops). I don't think having state legislatures and congress made up of all career politicians is any healthier than having too many amateurs.

Pwns wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/opin ... cians.html

The number of Democrats aiming to unseat Republican incumbents in the midterm elections in November is rewriting the record books. According to the Campaign Finance Institute, by last fall the Democrats were fielding about twice the number of challengers as Republicans managed in 2009, the height of the Tea Party insurgency. In Wisconsin, 17 Democrats have filed papers to challenge Gov. Scott Walker; eight are running in Iowa’s open governor’s race.

Another aspect of this flood of candidates, however, is reason for concern. In a recent study for the Brookings Institution, we took a close look at the post-Trump mobilization and found it to be a potentially transformative step toward the amateurization of American politics — a trend that should trouble people who worry about political polarization and government dysfunction.

I think there are good points here, but I also think there's a difference between running an Oprah Winfrey and running a Bradley Manning (at least Oprah has leadership chops). I don't think having state legislatures and congress made up of all career politicians is any healthier than having too many amateurs.

But isn't that what everything distills down to as it settles towards the bottom is "Open mic" night..?
Look at science and the study of scientific endeavors... vs. the Open mic night of Intelligent Design

Ultimately if every idiot gets an equal say
you end up having fan favorite personalities arguing thinly disguised Gospel
with Scientists over Evolution and various other "mostly settled" Science



Why should Economics / Politics / Medical vaccinations / Pick a thing... anything
Why should it be any different

Expertise is now in serious jeopardy vs. Youtube dunces

Chizzang wrote:

Pwns wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/opin ... cians.html



I think there are good points here, but I also think there's a difference between running an Oprah Winfrey and running a Bradley Manning (at least Oprah has leadership chops). I don't think having state legislatures and congress made up of all career politicians is any healthier than having too many amateurs.

But isn't that what everything distills down to as it settles towards the bottom is "Open mic" night..?
Look at science and the study of scientific endeavors... vs. the Open mic night of Intelligent Design

Ultimately if every idiot gets an equal say
you end up having fan favorite personalities arguing thinly disguised Gospel
with Scientists over Evolution and various other "mostly settled" Science



Why should Economics / Politics / Medical vaccinations / Pick a thing... anything
Why should it be any different

Expertise is now in serious jeopardy vs. Youtube dunces

It's cute to pretend like congress is full of erudite scholars that are going to be knowledgeable on whatever they are making laws about. Look at the professional backgrounds of a lot of congress. It has more lawyers than you can shake a stick at, just a few doctors, and probably no scientists or engineers.

The ability to take the opinions of experts into consideration is independent of whether you went to an Ivy League school or whether you've run a successful business or if you are seasoned at winning elections. If anything you could argue having more skilled politicians in office makes for worse politics.

BTW, have you researched the concept of citizen juries? It's a pretty interesting thing. Apparently South Korea's president had plans to discontinue construction of nuclear plants but eventually agreed to honor the decision of a citizens jury, which listened to experts from both sides and voted 60-40 to allow the construction. They made a (correct) call that a lot of democratic governments wouldn't make.

http://environmentalprogress.org/big-ne ... everywhere

Pwns wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
But isn't that what everything distills down to as it settles towards the bottom is "Open mic" night..?
Look at science and the study of scientific endeavors... vs. the Open mic night of Intelligent Design

Ultimately if every idiot gets an equal say
you end up having fan favorite personalities arguing thinly disguised Gospel
with Scientists over Evolution and various other "mostly settled" Science



Why should Economics / Politics / Medical vaccinations / Pick a thing... anything
Why should it be any different

Expertise is now in serious jeopardy vs. Youtube dunces

It's cute to pretend like congress is full of erudite scholars that are going to be knowledgeable on whatever they are making laws about. Look at the professional backgrounds of a lot of congress. It has more lawyers than you can shake a stick at, just a few doctors, and probably no scientists or engineers.

The ability to take the opinions of experts into consideration is independent of whether you went to an Ivy League school or whether you've run a successful business or if you are seasoned at winning elections. If anything you could argue having more skilled politicians in office makes for worse politics.

BTW, have you researched the concept of citizen juries? It's a pretty interesting thing. Apparently South Korea's president had plans to discontinue construction of nuclear plants but eventually agreed to honor the decision of a citizens jury, which listened to experts from both sides and voted 60-40 to allow the construction. They made a (correct) call that a lot of democratic governments wouldn't make.

http://environmentalprogress.org/big-ne ... everywhere

Oh, don't get me wrong..
I firmly believe the American System was built by Lawyers - for Lawyers
And now we have a President who has personally engaged in no less than 3,500 Lawsuits
Hilariously "fulfilling the prophecy"

So... Yeah,
Wasn't it you that said "we get the government we deserve"
and apparently we get the science we deserve and so on and so on...

Introducing a new round of "non-Lawyer" regular Joe's into the political arena
will only hasten the decline that was initiated by the Career Politicians clamoring to hang on to seats

And honestly, who cares...
I can arrange deck chairs on the Titanic as well as anybody

Chizzang wrote:

Pwns wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/opin ... cians.html



I think there are good points here, but I also think there's a difference between running an Oprah Winfrey and running a Bradley Manning (at least Oprah has leadership chops). I don't think having state legislatures and congress made up of all career politicians is any healthier than having too many amateurs.

But isn't that what everything distills down to as it settles towards the bottom is "Open mic" night..?
Look at science and the study of scientific endeavors... vs. the Open mic night of Intelligent Design

Ultimately if every idiot gets an equal say
you end up having fan favorite personalities arguing thinly disguised Gospel
with Scientists over Evolution and various other "mostly settled" Science



Why should Economics / Politics / Medical vaccinations / Pick a thing... anything
Why should it be any different

Expertise is now in serious jeopardy vs. Youtube dunces

Expertise is often times over-rated.

Politics is an art. Technical understanding isn’t nearly as important as it is with economics or vaccinations, etc.

All I can think of in this article is how the cheerleaders on the left snickered at the wide open free for all by the GOP leading up to the primaries

And then they lost, because Hillary

The article is right though, and therefore consistent.... there are those on the left that will argue that the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are not mirror images of each other... but they are, and the next election is going to hammer it home- full on capital S Socialism, intersectionality, celebrity, and a host of other hot topics are are going to get equal time with political maturity and moderation. Actually, that isn’t right. Maturity and moderation are going to get back burnered.

The only reason it didn’t happen with the Dems as it did to the GOP is because it was delayed due to “HER TIME”. But in spite of the DNC working furiously to make it so, Bernie still made significant noise