I'll try to give a real answer...lol.

1) What would be your ideal state of politics? I'm not talking about what ideology you would want to be dominant, but simply in what form your "perfect" politics would be
I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean presidential vs parliamentary systems? Consensus-orientated or polarised?

I prefer a tangible system of checks and ballances, meaning that if it's a parliamentary system there should be a clear distinction between the assembly and the government. The "government parties" in the assembly would support the administraton, of course, but they should be able to act independently from the ministers. Meaning, at the very least, that being a minister rules out membership of parliament.

I also prefer a great variety of parliament. With many small parties that are often opposed to eachother, it can at times be difficult to form an effective government. However if there are only a few big ones there's going to be strife just the same, but it will be within the parties itself and that can hardly be considered "healthy".

2) Why do you think that people have not tried to change the current system? Why do you think such attempts have failed?
Assuming that you're referring to the US' system, it has never been in the interest of either party to significantly change the way congressmen or presidents are elected. I think that if the founding fathers had foreseen how dominant and encompassing institutional parties would become, at least some of them would have paused to reconsider what they were doing.

3) How many people think that if repeated lying was grounds for the death penalty, politicians would be the first to be executed?
I think that in the case of politicians, the condition is usually pathological and that they'd be released after pleading insanity