Post User Polls

How do you feel about political seniority?

Voters are upending the once-inviolable notion that seniority is always to be treasured. How do you feel about political seniority? Does it make you more or less likely to vote for a politician?

By Andrea Caumont  |  October 15, 2010; 9:00 AM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Foreclosures in Florida: What do you think the judges should do? | Next: Are you ready to give up your desk chair?

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



How many freshmen Senators and Congressmen have accomplished anything different in this session? And if control of Congress changes hands, the same senior leaders will merely go on with their obstructionist policies with new job titles. "Throw the bums out" only works in Jimmy Stewart movies.

Posted by: greyK | October 15, 2010 10:22 AM

I'm in California and this election I will not vote for any incumbents. Political life is not a career. It is a portion of a person's work life. Those individuals who have made it a career are also those responsible for the absolute chaos in America.
The citizens of this country need to clean out Congress and start anew. Term limits should be "enforced" and no one should be able to make this their lifelong job. I see too much corruption in our federal, state and local governments. No wonder we are the laughingstock of the world. Look who snuck into the White House...and it's not the Salahi's (sp?)
Wake up America and clean house! And Senate!

Posted by: kodonivan | October 15, 2010 10:40 AM

Incumbent politicians are like the bed bug invasion. They preferentially feed on humans and in recent years, these parasites have grown resistant to common pesticides.

The only way to save America is give the House and Senate a good cleaning and get rid of these pests and blood sucking parasites.

Posted by: alance | October 15, 2010 12:07 PM

Vote out the incumbents until we can set a 1 term limit .....

Problem solved.

Posted by: Over-n-Out | October 15, 2010 12:08 PM

Longevity of politicians is a concern, but people seem to conveniently forget all of that when it comes to the individual politician using their seniority to get their state the lion's share of Fed funds.

Posted by: SpecTP | October 15, 2010 12:18 PM

Unfortunetly, the longer a politician stays in office , the more he loses sight of the things that his constituints sent him to do.

After two terms , he or she is no longer your representitive, he or she has become part of the problem.

No more carrier politicians , two terms and out.

Posted by: rlkidd58 | October 15, 2010 1:00 PM

Unfortunetly, the longer a politician stays in office , the more he loses sight of the things that his constituints sent him to do.

After two terms , he or she is no longer your representitive, he or she has become part of the problem.

No more carrier politicians , two terms and out.

Posted by: rlkidd58 | October 15, 2010 1:01 PM

Only two lousy choices? With a computer you'd think that you should have more choices, such as: C. it depends on the political affiliation of their opponant; D. it depends on if they are getting the job done and voted the way I want them to; E. I wouldn't vote for them if I found out that they were a bi-sexual Moslem with a love child from an Argentine; F. I'd only vote them back in if I found out that they were a bi-sexual Moslem with a love child from an Argentine; G. the more years they should get on their prison terms...

Posted by: glenglish | October 15, 2010 1:19 PM

When you consider the current choices between the Teabaggers and the democrats, I'd go with the democrats every time.


Posted by: demtse | October 15, 2010 1:25 PM

Just like this poll, we don't have good choices. The real answer is not on the agenda. Obama or Hillary. Neither one is it exactly and neither one, once elected are what they said they would be. I could have voted for McCain and gotten a hundred year war and banker bailouts and health care reform that results in higher premiums and less coverage at the end of my day. We need a hero, a people's choice. Not Glen Beck or Al Sharpton.

Posted by: SarahBB | October 15, 2010 1:27 PM

The concept of "seniority", like "tenure", was well-meant, but too often becomes a cover for burnouts that can no longer carry their load. Some folks are better at keeping a job than they are a doing it.

This is nowhere more apparent in elected officials, largely due to the fact that too many voters give little thought to their choices. Honest, folks, your representative's name is not INCUMBENT.

We have had de-facto Term Limits since the beginning, called "the ballot box". The sad truth is that so long as voters don't pay attention, imposing de-jure Term Limits will only paste new faces on old problems, while depriving constituents of those (far too rare) individuals who serve honorably and ably.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | October 15, 2010 2:20 PM

Well said OldUncleTom!!!

Posted by: Raiche58 | October 15, 2010 2:24 PM

The intersts of the few with the money as our representatives now seem inclined to support are rarely in agreement with many of the electorate. Makes you wonder how we go about getting the interests of the middle class heard and supported. The influence of corporations, labor unions and moneyed people now override anything that the middle class may want or need. At some point this problem will become so unbearable that a solution will have to be found. The needs and wishes of a whole community now seem to take a backseat to what is good for ME. If it is not exactly what I want then it is not acceptable. Gone is the notion that we should all be able to get part of what we want to move our community forward. We all have a common enemy that should unite us, but it seems our parochial interests prevent that. If we can't even get along with our neighbors at home how do we expect to get along with the rest of the world? As long as we insist that it is our way or the highway, then we fail to make things better. If everybody would just pay their portion of the national debt based on their receipt of services from the government, then we could get rid of the debt and start over. Wouldn't that be a novel idea?

Posted by: jburk11 | October 15, 2010 3:10 PM

Some of these complainers on this blog aren't realizing as to who pays Congress/Senate/Presidents salary? Taxpayers. But, who pays the Taxpayer salary to pay for Senate/Congress/
Presidents salaries? Big huge Corporations that have been in existence before (USA) America was born and after America (USA) been born.
We have quite a few foreign nationals that are our Business leaders that taxpayers in the USA gets their salary from. These foreign nationals have Movie rights, TV rights, Most of our Electronics, and plethora of more.

The new Rich is controlling this country! The Rich have always controlled this country. They give taxpayers the luxuary to have free speech (But, you can't threaten one person that serves in Congress/Senate/nor the President of USA), you can own a business, a home, a car, nice clothes, etc...whereas if you go anywhere else outside of America. You don't have free speech! Without losing your job or going to prison.

What, I'm trying to say is that our Congress/Senate/and President of the USA have to answer and listen to the "Filthy Rich families of America that pays their salaries and the taxpayers salaries. Anytime Forbes Magazine lists newly rich people in their magazine. Believe me they are controlling this country!

With Gay Marriages, anytime a Judge can tell the Pentagon over the President of the USA,Congress and the House of Senate to dropped the "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" immediately! Which means we have several filthy rich families that are advocates for the same sex marriages.

President Obama said in his Primary Campaign that "Change We Can"! He has made good on his word of reforming Healthcare, Education, same sex marriages, not all states of the usa has it because, that depends on the "filthy rich families that have controlled of those USA States!

So, you good Americans, what you want and don't like about Senority of Politicians or any kind of change in this country we all love. I have two suggestions, 1. Move with the new change and put a smile on your face. 2. If you don't like it move out of United States of America, that YOU think is better for your living standards.

Posted by: aidap11 | October 17, 2010 10:42 AM

Anyone in Congress/Senate seat that are 65 and over need to "QUIT" the job of being a lawmarker for Americans. I'm 55 years of age and I know those old men/women in those seats are just plain "closed minded". They have become to complascent in their jobs that it would be to hard not to risk some kind of fraudulent acts while in office.

There should be a capped on how long a person can stay in office. Republicans put us in this mess everytime they are in office. Republicans believe in saving Americans from there woos of financial crisis is to cut everything and start Wars with other nations. Democrats have to pick up the crap that Republicans leave behind.
This is exactly what our other Nations like to see how "Americans" can't get along with there own lawmarkers and President of the USA"! France, U.K., and all European Nations can't wait for Americans to unfold so that they can move back in and take over America again. Than we will end up having another American Revolution. Probably will lose this one. Americans need to stick together in these trying times. But, we won't because we have free speech and they don't want "Change unless it suits them"!

Posted by: aidap11 | October 17, 2010 11:10 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company