Chump for President

[Wschnitz]

https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf

[BraveUlysses]

Im interested to see if Pres. Trump manages to squeeze in any of the numerous promises he made in the last 4 days we have of his 100 day plan.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/04/25/president-trumps-100-days-historic-accomplishments

lol, literally a list of "i signed more stuff than anyone else"

[BraveUlysses]

Koch Industries and Other Corporations Lobbied for Donald Trump’s Cabinet Picks, Filings Show

Many of Donald Trump’s cabinet nominations faced vocal opposition from constituents and public interest groups. But well-connected corporate lobbyists stalked the halls of Congress to make sure Trump’s team was confirmed by the Senate, new filings show.

Koch Industries, a fossil fuel conglomerate that owns a variety of business interests that have clashed with environmental regulators, directly lobbied to help confirm Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency.

The firm’s latest disclosure form reports that its in-house corporate lobbying team spent $3.1 million to influence lawmakers over the first three months of the year on a variety of issues affecting its bottom line, including the EPA’s Clean Power Rule on carbon emissions, carbon pricing, the Clean Air Act and “nominations for various positions at the Department of Energy.”

[z31maniac]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/mar/17/obamas-lobbyist-rules-promise-broken/

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/barack-obama-revolving-door-lobbying-217042

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-administration-packed-with-lobbyists-he-vowed-not-to-hire/article/2533397

http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-lobbyists-inside-the-obamas-administration

Wow Brave, it's OK when you're guy does it but not the other side? This has always and will always continue to be the case.

Have anything groundbreaking for us?

[BraveUlysses]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...romise-broken/

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/barack-obama-revolving-door-lobbying-217042

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-administration-packed-with-lobbyists-he-vowed-not-to-hire/article/2533397

http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-lobbyists-inside-the-obamas-administration

Wow Brave, it's OK when you're guy does it but not the other side? This has always and will always continue to be the case.

Have anything groundbreaking for us?

My guy? I never voted for Obama and I'm well aware that he is a hypocrite on many issues.

Is it a good thing that Pruitt is running the EPA? Is it a good thing that trump and pruitt want roll back efforts to clean up dirty coal? Coal is a terrible fuel source and we have much, much better options.

[z31maniac]

My guy? I never voted for Obama and I'm well aware that he is a hypocrite on many issues.

Is it a good thing that Pruitt is running the EPA? Is it a good thing that trump and pruitt want roll back efforts to clean up dirty coal? Coal is a terrible fuel source and we have much, much better options.

I don't see the point in your post:

"Hey look at the seemingly unethical things this guy is doing."

"Yeah, every politician ever has done that."


Anyone in this forum that doesn't realize that politicians continually lie to the public to get votes and rarely keep campaign promises in effort to placate the donors...........I don't know what to say.

Obviously no one gives a shit because they keep electing the same people.

[marshallnoise]

Its the concentration of power that is the issue. Too many people getting paid, too lucrative of a job.

The solution is to return to the 1 representative to 30,000 people rule that was in place until the nineteen-teens. Then we would go from 435 representatives to 11,000. No company could pay them off.

[LowR3V'in]

You're 100% right. Lizards and shit. What are you going to do about it?

[marshallnoise]

Wtf?

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[mbonder]

11,000 representatives would be a bit cumbersome I think, but that's an interesting point. I'm also in favor of term limits for representatives. Two terms in the Senate, three terms in the House, then you're done. In my district we've had the same House Rep for the last 40 years or so and it's impossible to dethrone him, he'll die in office before he leaves.

[estoguy]

11,000 representatives would be a bit cumbersome i think, but that's an interesting point. I'm also in favor of term limits for representatives. Two terms in the senate, three terms in the house, then you're done. In my district we've had the same house rep for the last 40 years or so and it's impossible to dethrone him, he'll die in office before he leaves.

this!

[marshallnoise]

Bonder, it might be cumbersome but it does illustrate the point of how political power has been concentrated in the select few. According to our founders, they believed that 1 in 30,000 was far to great of a ratio but they settled on it to move the process along. They would have preferred 1 in 15,000 to represent them in congress. They would have no doubt increased the number of senators too had they known the population would explode to this level. And, my guess, they would have drastically diluted the power of the judicial and executive branches.

The Anti-Federalists were right; we exchanged one tyrant for a legislature of tyrants.

EDIT: The only problem with term limits is that you will just have a revolving door of staffers running for the same congressional positions holding the same views and passing the same laws.

Another issue is that the way the system works in the legislature is that each member of congress is ranked as to their ability to raise money for the party. If you want a high-ranking position on a committee, you have to guarantee a certain amount of fund raising proceeds. Quid, pro, quo. It exists in every aspect of our government and our lives. Its the human condition and it fucking sucks.

[mbonder]

Not disagreeing with you, I don't know how it's possible to divorce money from politics, unfortunately. From what I've read, the founders definitely wanted the Legislative Branch to be the strongest of the three, however the connection between private industry (special interests, lobbyists) and the legislature has definitely taken the average person out of the equation.

The decision to allow corporations to donate to campaigns has definitely blown the doors open, allowing a few to influence policy far and wide.

[mrsleeve]

They would have no doubt increased the number of senators too had they known the population would explode to this level. .

While not in total disagreement with this line of thought you are forgetting the original intent of the senate that was to be to voice of the states in Washington. Again part of the centralization of power that was the dramatic during the Wilson admin when the 17th amendment was passed

[marshallnoise]

While not in total disagreement with this line of thought you are forgetting the original intent of the senate that was to be to voice of the states in Washington. Again part of the centralization of power that was the dramatic during the Wilson admin when the 17th amendment was passed

You are right. I still think they would have chosen dilution and they certainly would have abhorred the 17th amendment. It should be repealed. It won't though.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk