The size of the US House of Representatives should be increased to about 600, and members of the House should be elected on a proportional basis from multi-member districts which are based on media markets.  This eliminates the opportunity and incentive for gerrymandering and allows minor parties to form and win some power

 

The President should be selected for a single six-year term by a joint session of the Senate and the House, where each member gets one vote, and a series of secret ballots take place until one person wins a majority.  The President would not be eligible for re-election.  This would eliminate the yearlong circus our political scene goes through every four years.

 

Those are my radical ideas.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The size of the US House of Representatives should be increased to about 600, and members of the House should be elected on a proportional basis from multi-member districts which are based on media markets.  This eliminates the opportunity and incentive for gerrymandering and allows minor parties to form and win some power

 

The President should be selected for a single six-year term by a joint session of the Senate and the House, where each member gets one vote, and a series of secret ballots take place until one person wins a majority.  The President would not be eligible for re-election.  This would eliminate the yearlong circus our political scene goes through every four years.

 

Those are my radical ideas.

I think we should break the union up.

 

We no longer have proper representation per citizen.

Less than 1,000 "elected" officials deciding what is best for hundreds of millions of people.

---

I think we should break the union up.

 

We no longer have proper representation per citizen.

Less than 1,000 "elected" officials deciding what is best for hundreds of millions of people.

 

Let each state run as if it is it's own little country and have the Fed step in for defense and mediating state vs state issues.

---

Looking at the draft trade value board, our 2nd and 3rd could get us back into the 1st (around the 20s). If Spence were there, I would seriously contemplate it.

 

Sign Weddle and Olivier Vernon, then draft Ramsey/Jack and Spence in the 1st, and hopefully get a healthy Fowler and Marks back. That's a good defense.

 

For a trade like you're suggesting, would you rather give up a Second and Third in this draft which is reportedly deep in Defensive Players, or give up the 2017 First Round pick? The reason I ask this is because it seems as if Spence is a First Round level of talent so if you traded the 2017 First Round Selection in order to get him, then all you're really doing is getting your 2017 pick a year early.

 

...provided everything works out for you.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

Oh yes they are.

 

Were you hiding under a rock when Shad Khan said Gus Bradley is staying in Jacksonville?

---

Were you hiding under a rock when Shad Khan said Gus Bradley is staying in Jacksonville?

 

Are you aware that time continues beyond today or even the coming season?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Are you aware that time continues beyond today or even the coming season?

 

What matters right now is what we already know happened. That was Shad Khan saying he will not fire Gus Bradley.

---

heck no

---

Let each state run as if it is it's own little country and have the Fed step in for defense and mediating state vs state issues.

I like the way you think sir!

---

If you let each state run like its own country, that's how the European Union works and we can see that even what we have now works better than that.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

If you let each state run like its own country, that's how the European Union works and we can see that even what we have now works better than that.

The EU is socialist, we'd be laissez-faire.

---

If you let each state run like its own country, that's how the European Union works and we can see that even what we have now works better than that.

The difference being that they are actually countries in the EU not states.

---

What matters right now is what we already know happened. That was Shad Khan saying he will not fire Gus Bradley.

You really do have a thing for neutered cats, don'tcha.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Some individual European states do have more generous welfare than we do, and some of them do have state-owned banking, energy, telecom, hospitals, etc., but the *union* is not socialist because there is very little redistribution of money between the states. The union spends almost nothing compared to what the individual states spend. Isn't that what you said you wanted for us? It's not working for them. It would not work for us, unless you're also going to free American states up to set their own import export policy and print their own currency.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Could this be the first thread to moved from the Jags forum to the college forum to the political forum? 

 

:teehee:

 

By the way - I don't like any of these radical ideas. Especially the one that involves the Jags defense.  Harumph. 

---