Part 2. In your opinion, are most people in elected office incompetent and dishonest?

[Skidmore]

How do you perceive the integrity and honesty of those who are elected to office?

[brooklynite]

1. No

Were you looking for a more substantive answer?

[Skidmore]

2. Feel free to add whatever you would like to expand on your answer.

[MichiganVote]

3. In Michigan, absolutely. In the Senate, partially. In the US House, yes.

That said, there a many who are NOT elected but appointed who I find equally incompetent and dishonest.

[leftstreet]

4. What's your point? n/t

[Stargazer99]

5. Most of them gutless as I see it-afraid to challenge money and power

Protecting their own hides instead of doing things to make this nation truly something to admire
gutless and immoral. Certainly not Christian values, what a farce this nation has become

[mahina]

6. They don't start off that way, but the $y$tem gets them there pretty quick.

[aquart]

7. No.

But they are politicians.

When I was a volunteer on the second John Lindsay mayoral campaign, long ago, we all knew subway fares would go up right after the election. We all kept the secret.

It's good to strive for a perfect world. It's ridiculous to withdraw and suck your thumb because achieving it is 100% unlikely.

[HappyMe]

8. No.

Just like any other job on earth - there are those that do the job well, and those that are no damn good at it.

[lumpy]

15. There. You got it. Well expressed. Our history proves that for the most part

our politicians try to do and have done the right thing. We know who the exceptions have been and who they are. The voter should be vigilant and know who the hell they are voting for. That is not always the case unfortunatly.

[struggle4progress]

9. I think folk who stereotype others are stupid and lazy

[Egalitarian Thug]

10. Some, but most are competent. Yes, almost universally dishonest. n/t

[xchrom]

11. yes. nt

[Aerows]

12. Yes n/t

[Marrah_G]

13. I think most are dishonest

Even if they have the intention of having honesty and integrity when they go in.

[ZombieHorde]

20. I agree. nt

[Buzz Clik]

14. Yes.

[sibelian]

16. The proportion of incompetence and dishonesty to competence and honesty

is never truly going to be measurable and any response to that question is never going be any more than supposition.

The proportion of competence + honesty to incompetence + dishonesty is itself of secondary importance to the confluence of such incompentence + dishonesty and an unusually high potential for destructive consequences that positions of power permit. Whether or not "most" or a "few" politicians are corrupt or dishonest isn't as significant as the potential range of influence of the supposed incompetence + dishonesty.

In damage limitation of political influence, increasing the potential range of such influence is much worse than increasing or decreasing a constructed perception of the supposed incompetence or dishonesty.

It would presumably take thousands of ordinary people with poor impulse control rioting for an extended period to destroy a city.

It takes ONE incompetent and/or dishonest politican (supported by a personnel structure that supplies him or her with the means to do so) to acheive the same result.

Risk is the likelihood of something bad happening. Hazard is what you stand to lose if the bad things happen.

The risk of corruption being brought about by an individual politician or group of politicians is neither increased nor decreased by increasing or decreasing the hazard associated with their being corrupt.

Thousands more people have car accidents than plane accidents. Nobody stands in front of your car every morning performing a crash protocol lecture, and that's not because the risk is less but because the hazard is less.

Edit - had to remove some square brackets.

[1-Old-Man]

17. No one who gets them-self elected is incompetent, but dishonesty comes by degrees

To some it takes a conviction on bribery charges to be called dishonest but to others ignoring campaign promises is dishonesty enough. One may be a crime and the other the result of a character flaw but none the less it is still a matter of degree and voter tolerance.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. "History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians.

"History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians. Now, to go and stick one at the very head of government couldn't be wise." Mark Twain

[Major Hogwash]

19. Senator Barbara Boxer is one of the most honest Senators we have in Congress today.

She is the best shining example of just how much of a difference one person can make in this world.

I think she is very competent, and as a woman, she is the grand national champion for women's rights.

[Fumesucker]

21. Combine the Peter Principle with Failing Upwards and I suspect there's a lot of incompetence

And anyone who strictly told the truth all the time would never be elected in the first place.

[RedCappedBandit]

22. Incompetent, maybe. Dishonest? Absolutely.

[Apophis]

23. Most are dishonest.

But not incompetent. They know damn well they're screwing the 99%.