exactly. what an amateur!
1 Like
That is certainly a fair way of looking at it too.
I guess the big thing is how fungible you consider congress critters to be. At one point, you hired the person you wanted for the job, because you valued their outlook and their willingness to adhere to certain beliefs and negotiate on others.
Now, it is almost just “the R person will vote R; the D person will vote D; and the winner is determined three years in advance by an election to send R votes or D votes to congress”.
Which sucks, and it makes for bad government. If a congressperson comes from a district that voted 55%R 45%D, they should vote R 55% of the time and D 45% of the time - they should represent their district, not their party.
By having a congressman (or PM, in this case) leave office over a relatively minor, stupid thing, it means that the people who voted for them won’t be represented by someone they choose until the next election. Of course, if they are sending a stupid R voting machine to office who won’t consider anything other than party affiliation, I suppose it doesn’t matter. (And ironically, in that case, it doesn’t matter that he’s an immoral ass. I could make a joke here about any Republican being proven to be one by virtue of getting elected, but I won’t.)
Edit to add: feel free to swap the Rs to Ds above; other people would make that argument as well.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
