Anti Incumbent Party

[From article]
President Calvin Coolidge, with every prospect of being reelected in 1928, declared simply: "I do not choose to run." Later, in his memoirs, he explained how dangerous it is to have anyone remain too long in the White House, surrounded by flattery and insulated from reality. What a contrast that attitude is with the attitude of the current occupant of the White House!
[. . .]
The rise of the permanent political class in Washington came with the rise of a vast government apparatus with unprecedented amounts of money and power to control and corrupt individuals, institutions and the fabric of the whole society.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell102913.php3#.UnHJdd00jDo

Jewish World Review
Oct. 29, 2013/ 25 Mar-Cheshvan, 5774
Throw the Rascals Out?
By Thomas Sowell
* * *

[From article]
Campaign contributions are just one of the things that can be extorted. The number of spouses, children or other relatives or favorites of Congressional incumbents who get high-paying jobs in private businesses regulated by government can hardly be coincidental.
When Al Gore was Vice President during the Clinton administration, he simply phoned various special interests and told them how much he wanted them to contribute. He did not have to spell out the reasons why they should — or why they had better. They already knew from experience how the game is played.
[. . .]
If we paid every member of Congress a million dollars a year — for an entire century — that would add up to less than the cost of running the Department of Agriculture for one year.
Since politics attracts greedy candidates, what prevents the same kind of people from running for office and continuing to grant favors to special interests, and taking the higher salary too. The answer is  nothing. Why is there no mention of integrity and common sense? 

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell103013.php3#.UnHMxt00jDo

Jewish World Review
Oct. 30, 2013/ 26 Mar-Cheshvan, 5774
Throw the Rascals Out?: Part II
By Thomas Sowell

Incumbent and Conformist Parties Prevail in Cambridge


Students like persons with disabilities are not considered a diversity category. The Incumbent Party prevailed providing more evidence that Cambridge voters are intolerant and support Conformist Party principles.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=529980

Asian-American Elected to Council
Published On Friday, November 06, 2009 3:59 AM
By SARAH J. HOWLAND
Harvard Crimson Staff Writer

Incumbent Party Victory

Incumbent Party Victory
(November 7, 2007)

Celebrate! The Incumbent party wins again, demonstrating how happy the academic
elitist (or wannabe) voters are with a one-party system. Hurray! Still no
accountability -- "You KNOW what I like!" Political expert(?) Glen Koocher said,
"there was no clear mandate." Is he clueless or what? Voters made a clear
statement. "We like it the way it is with an unaccountable Manager who lives in
the past, running the city as a for profit business with nine spineless
bloviators paid $100,000 to have taxpayer funded catered meals each week.
What a city.

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM