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.


Kid Rock Being Discussed as Potential Senate Candidate - Idiocracy has arrived

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:40 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:44 PM

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: enlightenedservant

i agree.

Its how America is intended to be. Law is meant to be accesible to the common man, as are offices of leadership.

I, personally, believe that the election commision should provide the only funding allowed. The only way to return it to the people and remove it from the elite is to remove the one major advantage the elite have: financial backing. If you remove the cash, and pit people against each other based on their intellect and views, maybe we can remove the career politicians (i.e., nobility and lords) and let the people govern themselves once again.

I think you all have me wrong. I'm all for what you've just said. HOWEVER, there is a reason why having demonstrably proven leadership skills and displaying a modicum of class has worked so well for over 200 years....detail to me those things in anyone and I will be the first to rally for them....until then, you're simply bucking the system to implement a potentially worse system with greater consequences than it would have been 200+ years ago.

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:47 PM

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe

But he cannot be any worse that a lot of the denizens of the US Congress...

He cannot?

I think what you mean to say is he may not, because he most assuredly can be worse.

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 05:10 PM
Well, he can try to run.

Nothing wrong with that.

These dopes in office now had a past before.

Like BFFT said, it's open to all citizens to run if they want, like the founders wanted.

Not restricted to bloodlines or class.

New blood, not political inbred mofo's.

GO ROCK! Rock/Nugent 2024! lol.

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 05:48 PM

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I don't need anything more current...a persons character doesn't change with the passing of time.

Yes it does. As a person gets older they tend to become more family oriented and conservative. I used to party like a rock star because I had a very well paying job and could afford it. I am now 44 and I have a family and I rarely ever drink a beer and the thought of doing drugs is just plain stupid. As You get older You will understand because the things that matter when You are young don't matter as You age because You realize how foolish they were.

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 08:12 PM
a reply to: alphabetaone

Leadership skills aren't really necessary to be a Senator. In fact, he'd increase his success and likelihood of being re-elected if he simply follows the will of his constituents, donors, and sponsors. Campaigning, fundraising, and getting feedback from the ones they serve are some of their most important jobs, which I think seasoned entertainers are well equipped for doing.

Plus, a new Senator from a State is generally seen as the "Junior Senator" for that State and is expected to have fewer responsibilities than the "Senior Senator" (aka the Senator with more seniority). This is even more prevalent when it comes to party politics, with the new Representatives and Senators from each party having less seniority and power than the more experienced ones (as well as being placed on less important subcommittees).

In other words, the newbs don't have nearly the same power nor responsibilities as the more established members of Congress, which actually gives them more time to grow into their role. So I still don't see the problem in an entertainer running for Congress. As long as he/she is accepted by voters, there shouldn't be a problem.

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 08:28 PM
I've spent some time with Kid Rock.
He is not what you would think he is if you only see the persona.

The world would be a better place with more like him.

posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 01:38 AM

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: alphabetaone

Seriously. What has Michigan done to earn such a massive improvement over typical candidates? Does anyone actually believe the typical Republican or Democrat candidate is any better than Kid Rock?

Actually they are probably worse because for the most part they rely on donations from business' and political action committees to fund their campaigns.
Kid Rock can afford to cover the expenses without owing any favors to donors.
Like Trump he would be free to do the job without anyone saying "I put you in this position now it is time to pay that back by voting in a way that helps my interests."

posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 07:48 AM
Anyone has the right to stand up and follow the voting process to become an elected official. There are some celebrities who throw their hat in the ring and the people decide whether or not that person will honestly execute the responsibilities they proclaim to stand for. Any person who is willing to put themselves out there will either be ridiculed by the voters or accepted by the voters, based on what the voters want. If he finds himself successful and he votes in accordance to what his constituents want, I would think his constituents will reelect him. However if he turns on his constituents as typical politicians have I suspect he will be voted out in the following election cycle. My personal belief is that all incumbents should be replaced. I think that all politicians not just the president should be limited to 2 terms this would keep the political world in check so to speak. Knowing that they have to return to "regular life" , I believe that they will be forced to do what is best for the people because they will once again be living among those people they used to represent.

posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 08:53 AM
a reply to: jkm1864

Yep. Things change when there is a mini-me in the back seat.

If you're doing it right, a lot of what your life is goes toward building for that little person's future. It's not a bad thing because you love that little person and want the best for him or her and you know he or she is going to be around a lot longer than you will, so you do what you can to launch them off as grandly as possible.

Doesn't mean you don't have your fun, but it does mean you are more careful about it because it's not just you. And it means you get far more careful about your resources. They aren't just yours.

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in