Why?

Interesting choice of words. So you admit that in our current political system, candidates "need" to play ball with the rich and powerful, or else they can't accomplish anything, even if they theoretically have the support of the masses?

Donald Trump will never be president. This is simply the way that things work in the real world.

I know you are, but what am I?

I have 3 questions for you. Stay focused.

Disclaimer: My use of the word different does not infer any of the following - Better than, more mature than, older than, more experienced than, more superior than, more lofty than, more intelligent than,.... you catch my drift. Hopefully.

1. Do you agree that a person who is married and has children might have a different perspective on things (including politics) than a person who is not married and doesn't have kids?

2. Do you agree that a person who owns a home might have a different perspective on things (including politics) than a person who isn't paying a mortgage and property taxes?

3. Do you agree that a person who is inching up on 60 might have a different perspective on things (including politics) than a person in their mid 20s?

To repeat, in case you are not focused:

My use of the word different does not infer any of the following - Better than, more mature than, older than, more experienced than, more superior than, more lofty than, more intelligent than,....

Any two people can have a different perspective on things.

Any two people can have a different perspective on things.

Any two people can have a different perspective on things.

Look up the word infer, dumbass. When you use that as a basis to invalidate our stances, you are IMPLYING superiority.

I'm sorry, Chula. I haven't yet unlocked the [Old Fart] skill tree, so your political genius is indecipherable to me.

Got 'em! I don't know why I love this **** so much.

Foxes guarding the henhouse. Plain and simple. 250 years ago the founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing when they set up the system that's, for the most part, still in place today.

Of course. I'm not stupid. Reference the aforementioned foxes guarding the henhouses. I don't like it. But it is what it is and it ain't changing no matter how much groups like this think it can.

https://pix-media.priceonomics-media...68661117_n.jpg

http://cdn.history.com/sites/2/2015/...n_dewey-E.jpeg

Frowny and Ori ignoring the substance and simply resorting to "old" cliches. Typical. Time to play guitar.

And Washington would be right alongside me as I give the two-party system the finger. Can you point to the part of the Constitution that limits us to two parties? I thought so.

So you agree with me that the rich and the powerful control our current political system, and refuse to let it move away from bipartisanship, regardless of what the people want?