u/pinprick58

So, I see many of the Republicans running for office received 100% of the vote. Why? Because the IRC "controls" the candidate access and doesn't allow anyone they haven't handpicked to run for the office if they like the present office holder.

Many of those who ran received 100% of the vote, just like Putin and Xi also do.

If we truly want to affect meaningful change, we must be willing to hold those in power accountable starting with voting against them if they are currently in office. Too often, incumbency breeds complacency, and real progress is sidelined in favor of political comfort. This is not about party loyalty; it is about principle. We need to send a clear message that doing what is right matters more than party affiliation, and that voters are paying attention. By voting all incumbents out of office, we can reset expectations, restore accountability, and demonstrate that public service is a responsibility—not a guarantee.

Why do most all of the Idaho Republican lawmakers appear to show such disregard for the public’s constitutional authority? The Idaho Constitution clearly states that “the people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and enact the same at the polls independent of the Legislature,” yet measures like Rep. Bruce Skaug’s HJR 4 seek to remove that power specifically on issues like marijuana and other substances. By restricting citizens’ ability to use the initiative process in this area, it raises a fair question about whether elected officials are upholding the spirit of voter sovereignty or selectively limiting it when outcomes might conflict with their policy preferences. By the way this bill had unanimous Republican support.

Why do most all of the Idaho Republican lawmakers appear to show such disregard for the public’s constitutional authority? The Idaho Constitution clearly states that “the people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and enact the same at the polls independent of the Legislature,” yet measures like Rep. Bruce Skaug’s HJR 4 seek to remove that power specifically on issues like marijuana and other substances. By restricting citizens’ ability to use the initiative process in this area, it raises a fair question about whether elected officials are upholding the spirit of voter sovereignty or selectively limiting it when outcomes might conflict with their policy preferences. By the way this bill had unanimous Republican support.