So modify it. If trump voters were able to amend the constitution to give trump unlimited terms, you wouldn’t mind that at all and you see nothing wrong with that.

There would be a big difference between a president unconstitutionally granting themselves power and voters democratically changing the laws that govern them, so... Shit example. Also, having precedent doesn't make it any less undemocratic.

-Replacing politicians more often makes them easier for private interests to purchase. This effect will be compounded in 8 years when the majority of elected positions in the city all turn over at the same time.

-It is anti-democratic. Voters should decide when terms are up, not artifical limits. Voters should also get to decide that they like who's representing them now and want them to continue.

-It doesn't matter who's advocating for this or whether there's precedent for it. That doesn't impact whether it's right for Baltimore.

-It does not solve any problem. It's a lazy alternative to actually campaigning and voting bad incumbents out. The voters whose choices you disapprove of aren't gonna suddenly change when there's term limits.

Yeah you say that, but I guarantee if trump had said “term limits are anti-democratic, I’m gonna change the law so I can run for a third term” you wouldn’t be singing the same tune. It’s preposterous to state that limiting politicians from holding positions of power indefinitely is “anti-democratic”

I voted democrat, you seem like a lovely person, though.

"This is extremely dangerous to our democracy."

Faux news and the faux channels seem to hate anything democrat .

[deleted]

You can run for a different office, but you can't hold the same position more than two terms.

I don't hate anyone, I just don't see the logic behind not requiring an ID to vote when every other basic function of society already requires one.

Not sure if you're just being edgy and pessimistic or if you really don't understand the functioning of the government and the importance of experience.

So you exactly agree that you're only against it because Sinclair is for it. You seem to be an incredible critical thinker who can assess issues for what they are without being steered by what other people think.

[deleted]

It's irrelevant if it's conservative, what's important is that it's anti democratic. Voters should decide when someone's term is up, not term limits. This just makes it easier to buy politicians, especially when they get the chance to buy them all at once in 8 years.

>it would essentially force there to be an all new city council, new council president and new mayor at the same time which would be terrible for institutional memory

This sounds like the best possible thing that could befall Baltimore.

Voting is the way to do that, not term limits. Few people vote in Baltimore, so it's easier than average to do.

I feel like I've been witnessing a huge misinformation campaign around Question K. Who in their right mind looks at Baltimore city politicians and thinks "yeah, they're mostly doing a great job, let's keep em!?"

It's more than that. If this passes, most current elected positions will be up at the 8 year mark. They aren't just looking to buy politicians, they get a chance to buy a set of politicians.

No, that just creates holistically harmful policies that pander to a base at opportune times. Since everyone here seems to be part of that base, I'm not at all surprised at the state of the city.

Knowledge in government, good one. It will be such a dark day to lose all the wonderful knowledge around grifting taxpayers, redistributing wealth to criminals, making laws unenforceable, and ignoring infrastructure.

Thank you, kind internet stranger.

Edit: Perhaps the op, is strictly wanting restaurant work only, which is fine. I thought that since someone suggested BARCS, I could suggest Amazon. If the op is truly desperate for a job he/she might take anything.

Your premise is wrong; they don't live in the city.

Thank you. I really don’t understand why suddenly everybody is acting like opposing unlimited stints in power is conservative, even if Sinclair supports it. I’m sure Sinclair is also against kicking puppies, that doesn’t mean we can’t agree on some basic issues.

Maybe they care about their city and putting policies in place that will eventually lead to attracting businesses and taxpayers. Getting rid of the entirely corrupt leadership sounds like a great start.

Yes, might want to ask to sit in the back room, or at the far end away from the bar.