democracy RIP

[Flip McWho]

Imran -

Irregardless of the apparant splits in the 3 tiers (congress, senate, president) you still only have 2 choices. Us or them. Republicans or democrats. No matter which way you look at you'll get a 2/3 majority for one party. Either in the congress and senate or the presidency and one of the others.

And concerning mavericks in parties, you get that in minority parties too. They never really do much except ***** though, sometimes they'll break away and form new parties who attempt to get into parliament, sometimes quite successfully.

Lastly, these massive coalitions are focused around certain principles they think are fundamental towards the party. I.e democrats are democrats because they believe in a,b and c. Republicans are republicans cause they believe in a,b or c. The various coalitions all lose their individuality and their own outlooks in becoming a part of the greater whole.

Which leads to this:

There are at least 20 parties that run a candidate for President. No one is stopping people from voting for them.

You never hear about them. They might exist but if you don't know they exist then they might as well not. As well as what ted striker said.

[chequita guevara]

I weep for my country.

[fed1943]

Political parties in England and States are very diferent.
English parties are strong, permanent, active organizations. In the States they are weak, just acting in the campaings. In England, before the official votation in Parliament each party decides his vote, in the States is usual representatives of same party vote diferent.
And about democracy and dictatorship: are you, and your family, in danger because you are tipping at your computer?
Best regards,

[chequita guevara]

A guy in the town just south of where I live spent 8 months in Federal holding cuz his name turned up on a suspected terrorism list. He was released when they finally realized that they had no idea why his name was on the lst in the first place. He lost two of his resteraunts because of this.

And go read the thread about the Clash albums.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
A guy in the town just south of where I live spent 8 months in Federal holding cuz his name turned up on a suspected terrorism list. He was released when they finally realized that they had no idea why his name was on the lst in the first place. He lost two of his resteraunts because of this.

And go read the thread about the Clash albums.

can he and will he sue?

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Sava

I was being facetious with my post, the main point was "if they don't then **** 'em, they get what they pay for." The problem isn't with the system, it's with the ignorant jackasses who can't see any problems, let alone act to solve them. They're just asking to be exploited, and it's their own damn fault.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Imran -

Irregardless of the apparant splits in the 3 tiers (congress, senate, president) you still only have 2 choices. Us or them. Republicans or democrats. No matter which way you look at you'll get a 2/3 majority for one party. Either in the congress and senate or the presidency and one of the others.

And concerning mavericks in parties, you get that in minority parties too. They never really do much except ***** though, sometimes they'll break away and form new parties who attempt to get into parliament, sometimes quite successfully.

Lastly, these massive coalitions are focused around certain principles they think are fundamental towards the party. I.e democrats are democrats because they believe in a,b and c. Republicans are republicans cause they believe in a,b or c. The various coalitions all lose their individuality and their own outlooks in becoming a part of the greater whole.

Which leads to this:


You never hear about them. They might exist but if you don't know they exist then they might as well not. As well as what ted striker said.

Sure it is 'one or the others', but you'd be very, very, very mistaken to think these grand coalitions don't change. Bill Clinton's Democratic Party was FAR different than Lyndon Johnson's Dems. Ronald Reagan's Republican Party was FAR different than Dwight Eisenhower's.

The 'principles' these parties are organized behind tend to change, while keeping the factions. Reagan's Republicans were about tax cuts, while Eisenhower's Republicans were about balanced budgets. Both may have wanted the government reduced in certain aspects (but not all, obviously), but they were very different in goals.

But the thing is that the entire party hasn't changed. The power of certain factions in the coaltion have. There are still Eisenhower Republicans in the Republican Party (mostly in the NE US), which is vaguely Reaganesque, but a bunch of Reaganites have blasted the current President. Though they don't have much power anymore in the current Republican coalition. It isn't some static thing.

Primary fights are usually between a representative of one faction vs. the representative of another faction, and THAT is where the factions of the coalitions fight amongst each other to gain power. Furthermore, most states have OPEN primaries, which means it doesn't matter what party you are registered with, you can vote in any primary.

As for mavericks. In the US system they most definately DO have an impact. John McCain, for example. Barry Goldwater was quite a maverick, even though he was nominated for President (as a sacrifical lamb) [this was a Republican who was for gays in the military back in the early 80s].

And there are some small parties that do make waves. They won't win, but sometimes they take the main parties with them. The Populist Party of the 1890s dragged the Democrats to their positions, and had great influence on Theodore Roosevelt, the man who'd become President. In that mode, Perot's party and Nader's Greens attempted to steer the discussion to their views.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Darius871


I was being facetious with my post, the main point was "if they don't then **** 'em, they get what they pay for." The problem isn't with the system, it's with the ignorant jackasses who can't see any problems, let alone act to solve them. They're just asking to be exploited, and it's their own damn fault.

It's both.

You can't just absolve America's politicians of blame just because the people are too ignorant, lazy, or unaware of the problems. Inaction on everyone's part is to blame.

And believe me... the people are to blame just as much as the leaders. It's the system's fault. But the people are the ones who allow the system to continue to function... and despite the lack of choice, the people still have somewhat of a choice in who gets to lead. And the leaders are the ones who are in a position to force change.

Everyone is to blame.

And the media isn't helping things... but they don't feel any responsibility to help because in their minds, it's all about profit.

PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT

that's all anyone cares about

All other concerns are secondary.

The Ferengi would be proud of our society.