Why do citizens of the USA seem to want political dynasties?

LTC Stephen F. — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:38:25 -0400

Many of us remember President JFK and the camelot legend which was applied to his presidency. When his brother Bobby was killed while running for President it was horrible in its own right but seemed to devastate some who wanted to keep the Kennedy camelot flame alive. When President George W. Bush was elected there was discussions about the Bush family since his own father President George H.W. Bush was still alive and he had brothers. Now former Florida governor Jeb Bush is running for office while former Secretary of State and NY Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton seems to considers herself the heir apparent to the democratic party nomination to President to be the first spouse of a President who also became President. Some Americans are radically opposed to any kind of political dynasty while others are intrigued by the idea.
What are your thoughts? Request respectful answers for each other, POTUS, and the Clinton and Bush family members.
Update - here is a link to the political; dynasties in all 50m states.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2012/10/05/the-biggest-political-dynasty-in-all-50-states/

The biggest political dynasty in all 50 states

The Fix tells you which political name reigns supreme in each state.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Oct 23 at 2015 12:41 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:41:37 -0400

I think many American citizens are star struck and would love to have political family dynasties alive and well in this nation :-)
If somebody is highly qualified to be President I do not care about their last name or family heritage or lack thereof.

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Oct 23 at 2015 12:48 PM

CW4 Guy Butler — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:48:51 -0400

Like John Adams and John Quincy Adams? (Father and son)

William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison (grandson)?

James Madison and Zachary Taylor (second cousins)?

Add in George H. W. and George W. Bush, and it's slightly less than 20% of our presidents who were closely related.

(Theodore and FDR were 5th cousins, BTW)

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Oct 23 at 2015 12:49 PM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:49:41 -0400

I want competent, capable leadership

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Oct 23 at 2015 12:55 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:55:54 -0400

I think it's artificial construct caused by our current two party system and the near complete control of the two parties by monied interests. I recall recently reading that over 50% of the money raised by both parties for the coming election was donated by just 52 families.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Oct 23 at 2015 1:02 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:02:33 -0400

The office of the POTUS should not be based on familial ties, so no more Bushes, Clintons, or anyone else of the same name and family. If we want to go that route, do away with the government we have and invoke a monarch type which would be appropriate for those with the same names and blood lines. HRM and Bush both appear to their respective parties the heir apparent to the nominations of their parties. That needs to change.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 1:03 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:03:20 -0400

Power and money begets power and money. Political dynasty families go back to our founding. My Great x 2,3,4 grandfathers were all governors of SC, 2 were Representatives, 2 were senators.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 1:09 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:09:31 -0400

Since this is a discussion in humor. They're all envious of Saudi Arabia, hehe.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 1:17 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:17:28 -0400

People become enamored with the rich and famous. And they are the same people with political/national influence and the wealth to campaign at such levels. That's the only way I can explain it (to myself anyways).

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Oct 23 at 2015 3:25 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:25:04 -0400

They vote for the team, not the player.

Response by SPC Christopher Perrien made Oct 23 at 2015 6:15 PM

SPC Christopher Perrien — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 18:15:50 -0400

I would say most of our presidents have had ties to Big Oil in Texas, and OIL/ Gov. Contracting businesses in -Calif since Johnson.- Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton , Bush, Then you have some square pegs, Kennedy, Obama , Carter. 2 of which , Kennedy and Obama , relied on vote fraud in Illinois, and once Texas. Carter seems to be the last popular president since IKE.

As it is, the citizens have nothing to do with who is selected or elected. It would be of some relief to see Trump - running, but that is up the RHINO party, and they don't like him.

Keep in mind- there are not 2 parties in this country only one. They are sides of the same coin, neither likes America as it was. It is all ZOG now.

Response by SMSgt Tony Barnes made Oct 24 at 2015 12:16 PM

SMSgt Tony Barnes — Sat, 24 Oct 2015 12:16:35 -0400

I don't care what the last name is as long as it's the proper direction. Look at the Roosevelts...very different...same last moniker.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 24 at 2015 12:56 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 Oct 2015 12:56:23 -0400

I couldn't care less. I vote based on issues and what I think the candidate will do as president.

These days I only vote pro-choice and for a candidate who WON'T appoint social conservatives to the Supreme Court.

Response by 1LT Aaron Barr made Jan 15 at 2016 10:46 AM

1LT Aaron Barr — Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:46:53 -0500

Issues like this reveal the fundamental weakness of a democratic system of government; the quality of the politicians that get elected into office and the laws they write will NEVER be any better than what can be gotten over on the stupidest 51% of the electorate....