300,000,000

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

Originally posted by aoxamaxoa


pancakes? Why does everything have to be left wing or right wing, liberal or conservative...Democrat and Republican? Is it everyone's objective to drive the wedge as deep as possible in our lifetimes?

Because, deep inside, what we Americans love more than anything is a good fight.  Heck, we'll watch pro-wrestling.  Ultimately, what's right and what's wrong matters so much less than who wins or losses.  A good fight means good ratings for the media, so they'll get spin doctors like Carville and Novak to yell at eachother, without really saying anything, cuz what people care about is who yells the loudest (and therefore wins), not what they say.

Right on target PM...

Can I get an "AMEN!" here?

[snopes]

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

quote:Originally posted by aoxamaxoa


Hey. I only insult republijerks and hate mongers. Sometimes, imposters.

Okay, now look here, Aux, lemme ask you something. What goes through your mind when you see a right winger use some term like "Dimacraps" or "Dims"? I'll tell ya what goes through my head. I think they look pretty damn childish. In fact, I think to myself, "Now here's a real mental midget." So how is it any different if you use words like "republijerks"? Well, it's NOT any different. It just makes you a left wing version of a right wing dunderhead. I mean, Jesus CHRIST, dude. Is everyone that's not a liberal your enemy?

pancakes? Why does everything have to be left wing or right wing, liberal or conservative...Democrat and Republican? Is it everyone's objective to drive the wedge as deep as possible in our lifetimes?

Amen Papaspot! I lean toward the conservative side for sure, but my best friend is very liberal. I have a lot of conservative friends as well, of course, but my liberal friend has more ethics in his little finger than many of my so-called conservative friends. It's not all black and white aox.

[iplaw]

I wonder how much longer we are going to tolerate a two party system that doesn't work?

[snopes]

Good question Iplaw. I don't know. Things are certainly coming to a head over the last decade and more. I think most people, liberal and conservative, are alot closer in values and goals than people believe. I do believe that it is the party leaders that have created this divisive attitude between the common folk.

[Conan71]

I don't think a sharply divided 24-hour media is much help either.

I think the biggest part of the problem lies in the present mentality of party leaders being more concerned with a power grab instead of really worrying about what direction the country is going.

To that end, I see the present philiosphy as being that power is more attainable by sticking their thumb in the eye of their opponent.  It's easier to snipe about what the other party is doing wrong instead of offering up what changes can realistically be made to benefit every American.

Maybe I've got blinders on, but I don't hear any real solutions from either party right now.  All I hear is fear-mongering from both sides about what will happen if the opposing party takes power or remains in power.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by snopes

Good question Iplaw. I don't know. Things are certainly coming to a head over the last decade and more. I think most people, liberal and conservative, are alot closer in values and goals than people believe. I do believe that it is the party leaders that have created this divisive attitude between the common folk.

I think the easiest way to end the tyranny of the two party system would be to introduce some form of proportional representation. It would require a major rework of the constitution, which would involve the parties signing over there hegemonic power. So in other words it ain't happening.

[iplaw]

You don't need proportional representation to facilitate that.  People are free to start parties that represent them at any time and there is no constitutional mandate of a 50% majority to win the whitehouse.

People's ideas must change.  The constitution is fine as it is.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

You don't need proportional representation to facilitate that.  People are free to start parties that represent them at any time and there is no constitutional mandate of a 50% majority to win the whitehouse.

People's ideas must change.  The constitution is fine as it is.

It would make it a lot easier though.
Under first past the post a vote for anyone other than a Republican or a Democrat is a wasted vote. Proportional representation would encourage people to consider voting for other parties as their chances of getting in would be raised much more. In the UK there is a three party system, (four in Wales, Scotland and NI) using first past the post so it possible. However those three parties have been around for over 100 years, in various forms, its nearly impossible to break into a first past the post system. In contrast in elections where there is proportional representation (Scottish Assembly and the EU) more parties are springing up.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

Sorry I guess what I'm trying to say is that in my experience its possible to move away from the 3 party system within a first past the post system, but it is harder to achieve when compared to proportional representation.

PS Am I getting called an imposter?

[pmcalk]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

You don't need proportional representation to facilitate that.  People are free to start parties that represent them at any time and there is no constitutional mandate of a 50% majority to win the whitehouse.

People's ideas must change.  The constitution is fine as it is.

The problem with that is ballot access--places like Oklahome make it extremely difficult for any other party to get on the ballot (like the Green or the Libertarian party, which have both been trying to be included for a number of years).

[iplaw]

First past the post...

First off, to make it possible in America we're gonna have to call it Takin' the checkered flag or King of the hill to make it more appealing.  Americans don't like words such as bumbershoot, anti-clockwise and candy floss.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

First past the post...

First off, to make it possible in America we're gonna have to call it Takin' the checkered flag or King of the hill to make it more appealing.  Americans don't like words such as bumbershoot, anti-clockwise and candy floss.

You already have first past the post. But let's change it and call it an ABBA inspired 'winner takes it all' system.