It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

T Boone Pickens suggests bi-partisan panel to vet candidates for POTUS

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 09:53 PM
So, since they cannot buy the candidates it seems that they want to make sure that they, the establishment, chooses who will run and not you.

“My big idea for 2016 is to put together a bipartisan screening committee that vets presidential candidates like we do anyone else applying for a job and recommends the best candidates possible,” Pickens wrote in a recent LinkedIn post. “We have people running for president now who don’t even have experience running a lemonade stand.”
Pickens, who donated to Jeb Bush early on before flirting with Ben Carson, said the committee should factor in leadership experience, team-building skills and plans for prospective candidates’ administration.

Read more:

Cry babies. This is what is happening. He contributed to Jeb, and then Carson and now wants to try to buy this election another way.

the only stipulations for running for president include being a natural born citizen, a resident of 14 years and at least 35 years old

Read more:

“We now have a presidential election process that penalizes success and accomplishment and rewards those without battle scars from business or politics,” he said. “You don’t have a record of achievement? Well, then the media shies from tough scrutiny.”

Read more:

No, we have a process where anyone is allowed to run. ANYONE. Can we establishment be anymore blatant about how it wants to make sure it can control us. If anything, this should make ALL of us want to vote for any non-established political candidate.

A side note, where the hell was he in 08? Oh, that's right. He was friends with Obamas energy plan till he did not give him his natural gas rights.

posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 10:00 PM
How about eliminating the super pacs, getting a supreme court who realizes that Citizen's United is a bad thing, and that a corporation is not a voice of the people...

Let the candidates SPEAK to those who cast VOTES.... not hang out in HIGH dollar 25K+ per plate fundraisers...

TBoone get's ONE vote, like I do... isn't that how it should be?

posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 10:52 PM
a reply to: matafuchs

Part of the vetting process should be to ensure they pass a lie-detector test, that they can also explain what an "email" and "server" is and that they understand what "top secret" actually entails. They should also have "compassion" for their subordinates representing the US as ambassadors in other countries.

Also, ban lobbyists.

posted on Dec, 21 2015 @ 11:10 PM
the president should be picked like this.
a house of reps consisting of 1000 random citizens drawn out of a hat(with certain basic requirements). these citizens elect 10 of themselves to run in general election against each other.
x amount of money is set aside for each candidate. we vote for one of these 10.

the end.

just average joe and jane

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 04:58 AM
T. Boone and his billions...first he wanted all of the natural gas, then he wanted all of the groundwater, and now he wants to control politics as well. He doesn't like to share.

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 06:42 AM
a reply to: matafuchs

I wonder how his vetting committee would view candidates who were not born in America?

Or is that suddenly no longer an issue for the GOP?

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 07:13 AM
a reply to: jellyrev

Sounds like a good place to start.

I am jaded though... is it wrong of me to think some of the 10 would inevitably be easily bought, and the others would start passing away under mysterious circumstances?

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 07:28 AM
a reply to: matafuchs

The public should be deciding who has the credentials and strength to be president. We pay their salaries through our taxes so we're the ones who should be vetting the candidates! I think instead of news organizations deciding on the questions for the debates, the public should be supplying them.

They need to let the public vote on campaign finance reform instead of letting those that it directly affects decide on it. I'm sure if they put on the public ballots... "should super PACS be eliminated" it would be voted with a resounding YES! Why do we allow our representatives to vote on issues that are a definite conflict of interest? What company allows their workers to decide on their salaries, benefits, and how they spend money? That should be in the hands of the public, we are their boss!

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 07:33 AM
Im not sure what the outrage is about..

we have the RNC that has stated a third party will never put a president in the Whitehouse...

We have the DNC that is doing everything possible to make sure hillary wins the nomination...

Maybe a bipartisan panel is the way to go, im not saying his plan exactly is right, but the current process is horribly flawed, that cant be argued.

or maybe we need to return to if the Republicans win, the democrat that lost becomes the VP or vice versa..

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 07:52 AM
I can only imagine who would get to be in the group selecting candidates. I would bet a fat wallet would be one requirement.

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 07:54 AM
He does not want to vet, he wants the ability to approve. If a system like this was to be implemented it would remove the voter totally. At least now we get to think we are doing something even though it is the electoral college that makes the actual decision.

We all know how well that bi-partisan budget that was just passed will be for us....

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 07:55 AM
Until we get rid of GPAC and lobbyists, holding elections is really rather pointless. Everybody is already bought and paid for.

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 08:03 AM
I think we should outlaw the Democratic and Republican parties for two election cycles. That, or have a Super Primary which picks a democrat or republican candidate, and this candidate runs against an Independent for the Presidency.

Somehow or another we have to figure out how to smash the two party "establishment". It MUST go if this country is ever to right itself.

edit...we have to break the cycle of 'voting for the lesser of two evils'

edit on 12/22/2015 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 08:28 AM
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

5% of the vote for a third party in a presidential election puts them into the mix for the next election cycle..

It is very doable if people stop voting for the lesser of two evils.. and instead vote for someone they believe in.

There is no quick fix, to our govt.. .bernie cant fix it, trump cant fix it... we have to reduce the power of the big 2 that will take years of hard work.

In todays gimme gimme gimme now society I am not sure we have the heart to do the hard work needed.

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 09:11 AM
Shoot, where were these people 8 fricken years ago? We got a President with no real birth certificate, fake social security number, has several years of his childhood completely unaccounted for, and no college records whatsoever. And NOW they want to vet someone?

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 10:28 PM
Sorry TB, the panel is called the "Electoral College."

new topics


log in