Herschel weighs in on current events

Thelordjohnson

https://forum.dawgnation.com/discussion/comment/436221#Comment_436221

Didnt say it was good. Just said it was more effective in this current situation (and a few past ones as well)...

Yes it has to. Dont think anything wouldve come about in the three high profile cases. Something has to change.

GrayDawg

https://forum.dawgnation.com/discussion/comment/436194#Comment_436194

On the contrary, pointing out your white race further divides. Claiming to know the position of the majority of all white people is both presumptuous and ignorant. Believing there is a simple answer to this complex situation is naive.

Acting like these people isn't the answer:

https://twitter.com/RutgervdNoort/status/1268410859350564866?s=20

BamaDawg

https://forum.dawgnation.com/discussion/comment/436230#Comment_436230

Stunned ... just stunned.. I dont want to comment further

ziggyholiday

Wow

CaliforniaDawg

https://forum.dawgnation.com/discussion/comment/436131#Comment_436131

tlynch, I understand your desire for term limits. If I may, term limits have merit because our democracy doesn't work. It is very hard to dislodge an incumbent.

I ran for state senate in Georgia in district where there is no competitive general and so it is only the primary for the party that dominates that area that matters. I was a newcomer challenge a 14 year incumbent who was dirty and corrupt.

To make a long story short, I lost.

I am writing because there are a few key things I learned about that all of us, no matter what side of the political aisle we are on, can agree on and I hope fellow dawgs advocate for these things as they would be easier to achieve and they would make an impact:

1. the (i) on the ballot for incumbents. This adds about a 3% boost to the incumbent in 1 vs 1 elections and 5% if there are more than 2 candidates. Think about this - in addition to overcoming all the advantages an incumbent has, you basically need to win 53/47 to win as a challenger because of the 3% boost the (i) written by the incumbents name on the ballot gives them. There is absolutely no need for democracy to be distorted to the advantage of those in office. This is the biggest incumbent protection mechanism that no one seems to know or care about.
2. PACs - most PACS in Georgia actually have it written in their bylaws that they will not give money to a challenger if the incumbent is running for relection. Whoa! Can you believe that? Newcomers have to spend a fair bit of money increasing their name ID and the incumbent usually has a money advantage. Money is part of the insider game. I think solutions to this differ by one's politics, but right now there is a lot more money available to incumbents and I think all of us agree this stacks the deck against a challenger.
3. Parties should be neutral in primaries. In Georgia, both parties have incumbency protection plans to protect their members. Both parties send out the political mail on behalf of the incumbent even though the challenger is of the same party in a primary. Both parties give the incumbent access to a big database of voters and not to the challenger (well, they get the data, but not access to the system to use it, challengers have to build their own voter management process). In other words, both parties stack the deck against challengers in the primary to protect incumbents. What this means is that in districts that are heavily Republican or Democratic, there is virtually no democracy until the incumbent retires and in these cases, the incumbent (again in both parties), pulls some shananigans like letting their chose successor know to file and announce they are retiring at the end of the day on the deadline to file. So, if you really want to examine the fairness of democracy, don't look at Democract vs Republican elections, look at Republican vs Republican primaries and Democract vs Democract primaries - this is where the corruption and dirty politics is the worst. We should all demand that incumbents aren't given advantages in the primary. Understandably both parties will try to help their candidate in the general, but they need to not interfere with democracy in the primary.

If we addressed these three things, we would have much fairer elections and you wouldn't need term limits to get incumbents out. But with all these above advantages, incumbents have to f$%& up pretty bad in order to lose and none of us, on any side of the political spectrum, think this is the way it should be.

I hope this post gives folks insight into what really drives incumbents always winning.

tlynch1968

CaliforniaDawg i did not realize these things and appreciate the info. I agree we need to address these issues.

I also thing we need to remove the party reference to the ballot entirely, vote for the person not the party!

MacDawg15

Much respect for all y'all but please make a different thread

MacDawg15

MacDawg15

Once we go into politics it ruins the cruitin chatter

Bigcalidawg

💯

christopherules

I just really like, and admire Herschel, and I think he’s a really, really good guy who speaks thoughtfully, and straight from the heart. He’s always a DGD forever to me. That was my desire in this posting this thread.