it appears we agree on pretty much everything. . .
Your point about hitting rock bottom, to me, seems about the only way to effect the major changes required. A concon-- nope. Too much chance for it to go sideways for both parties; low likelihood happening.
it appears we agree on pretty much everything. . .
Your point about hitting rock bottom, to me, seems about the only way to effect the major changes required. A concon-- nope. Too much chance for it to go sideways for both parties; low likelihood happening.
Lots of people have reservations about a concon; but for a concon to form there needs to be an agreed upon script, an agreed upon agenda. A concon cannot go beyond that agreed upon agenda - it cannot go "sideways.
it appears we agree on pretty much everything. . .
Your point about hitting rock bottom, to me, seems about the only way to effect the major changes required. A concon-- nope. Too much chance for it to go sideways for both parties; low likelihood happening.
p-rog:
Lots of people have reservations about a concon; but for a concon to form there needs to be an agreed upon script, an agreed upon agenda. A concon cannot go beyond that agreed upon agenda - it cannot go "sideways.
"https://conventionofstates.com/news/a-convention-of-states-can-be-limited" should answer your concerns