this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
42 points (92.0% liked)

Denver Post Comment Section

315 readers
66 users here now

A place for ex-pats from the Denver Post comment section (closing down in July), as well as people that want to discuss Denver Post articles in general.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Brimos 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] FireTower 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Political office should not be a career.

[–] CharlesDarwin 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm not a big fan of Pelosi, but why not?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Also curious why not. Being in a career allows for the development of skills and relationships over time, and there's certainly an art to building relationships and getting deals done that could improve the more someone is in office.

[–] FireTower 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Building relationships and making deals is part of the problem funnily enough. Career politicians are more susceptible to ~~corruption~~ lobbying. IMO representatives should be every day Americans not the successor to a political dynasty or someone who spends most of their life in DC under the impression that they are representing the beliefs of people on the other side of the country.

No one man should have the power of someone with 50 years in office.

[–] CharlesDarwin 2 points 1 year ago

This is why I mentioned getting the money out of politics. That's the crux of the problem, not having people serve for their lives in government.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I agree with you in theory, but really, is that how it often plays out in reality? It doesn't seem to me that our most senior politicians are generally the most effective. In fact it seems the opposite, they usually tend to be the most corrupt (as measured by the suspiciously huge net worths they have), and the most entrenched in party lines, to the point that they're not any more effective than any rank and file politician who just does what the party whip says.

They do tend to be given more authority in committees and such, but I'd argue that doesn't have much to do with them actually being effective.

Our congress is filled with career politicians, and the whole thing is a circus

[–] CharlesDarwin 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I feel the same way about this. Why is it okay to have a career in virtually any other form of expertise, but we want a bunch of amateurs running government?

I just don't get this sentiment, at all. I understand the frustration with government and how flawed it is (because people are flawed), but I don't understand why the same people who don't seek "outsiders" and amateurs to, say, drill their teeth or do open heart surgery, will turn around and frown on expertise in government.

Why?

[–] FireTower 2 points 1 year ago

Check my comment to the other guy. Tldr no term limits benefits lobbiest plus I'd rather have 4 people with different beliefs representing my state over the span of 16 years than 1 person. This would better ensure political minority view points get represented to some degree.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She need more stock trading tips?

[–] CharlesDarwin 1 points 1 year ago

It'd be nice to see all of Congress prevented from doing insider trading. I'm sure there would be nearly 100% bipartisan agreement on that - at least among the constituents.

[–] billwashere 10 points 1 year ago

As a liberal and an old man can we just say ….

FFS , just retire you buncha old fucks.

[–] Bye 2 points 1 year ago

She looks like hell

Time to retire Nancy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

She too old. Was then and is now.