UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Sorry there aren’t many pedophile candidates
Be happy while conalds time innoffice lasts
A third major political party?
- Thread starter tangerinegreen555
- Start date
Be happy while conalds time innoffice lasts
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Yes, I bet you are sorry about that.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
“No you’re the pedophile” says the racist who thinks “certain” 12 year olds can consent
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I don't think you are a pedophile, but you could be a coprophiliac. Please excuse my shitty spelling.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
And you deep throat your own feet.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
londonfog
Well-Known Member
why do you share racist views ? Why do you think some 12 year old are mature enough to have sex with an adult ?I toe tally do not.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I don't have racist views. I respect every persons right to be free from being forced to serve another person against their will. it's wrong to enslave people.
I sure hope you don't force 12 year olds to associate with you, since you're obviously okay with at least SOME forced human associations.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Yes, I do, excellent idea.
That would require in what we in multiparty countries call the formation process, where coalitions are formed. If no party reaches a majority, they need to form a coalition with another. That’s effectively what it means if the vote goes to the house. The candidate of the largest party in the coalition becomes potus.
For an imaginary example... Hillary needs Bernie’s support to get a majority to beat Trump. Hillary thus has to make a deal with Bernie, give him a top position in her cabinet, or, most logically elsewhere, make him VP. Such a deal involves all sides make compromises, which avoids extremes and exposes people who merely want power. It allows people to focus on policy instead of the most popular puppet.
Important to learn from history, but one bad example doesn’t make a trend. Ideally you’d have both an extra right and an extra left party. Giving Trump voters / republicans more options than the gop, and non-voters more options than the dems and gop, would only help reduce Trump and his supporters’ influence.
The division fueled by the 2-party system is by itself more than enough reason to get rid of it like the plague. All this left vs right, liberal vs conservative, capitalism vs socialism, even racist vs no racist, all dumbed down to often misunderstood labels that make any constructive dialogue impossible. It makes everything so ridiculously and hopelessly binary and doesn’t just stop at a discussion about politics. “America, land of extremes”
The POTUS is supposed to be merely an executive branch. The senate is far more important yet the main attention always goes to the popularity contest of the next great leader. Yet the senate is as least as messed up when it comes to dividing the power. Less than 600,000 people in Wyoming get 2 senators, and California with 40mil gets 2 as well... With a more realistic representation of the population in congress, Trump would have been impeached already.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
Fairy tale.
Until such time as the actual voters can be objective election cycle to election cycle.
But that's not going to happen because at least 40% of the electorate is stupid at all times.
And the people want government to do something for them. Some want a free ride, some want to pay no taxes, some want judges to restrict free choice, some want to pretend some god is actually in charge of what happens and that we'll always have clean air and fresh water and an endless food supply.
Gone are the days of, 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.'
Go ask 12 different people what's wrong with the political system and you'll get 12 different answers. 4 will be stupid, 3 will be unrealistic, 2 will be criminal, 2 will be wishful thinking and 1 will say WTF?
It's not like a country of 350 million people, all of whom have IQs between 125 and 140.
Where are these multiparty countries that are having great success? Name them.
Seems to me they all seem to be having difficulties across the oceans. They can't even resolve their economic ideas in Europe. Russia and Saudi Arabia aren't above killing people in their way, China's not much better and North Korea keeps their people in darkness.
And then you get to the middle east religious wars.
Let congress pick the leaders instead of the voting public? They can't even agree on what a fucking crime is.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Nah, just foreign to you yet reality in many western democracies.
There are 50 rather different countries in Europe. There are 28 countries in the EU. Which countries according to you are having problems resolving their economic ideas and how is a multiparty responsible for that in a way a two party system wouldn’t be? Most countries here are doing just fine.
There is a lot more to politics than just economics. No people going bankrupt by medical bills in europe, universal healthcare, much higher minimum wages than the US, combined with lower cost of living, free pension and housing for the retired,child care support for everyone but the rich, affordable/free public education, proper public transport including superior trains, superior powergrids, affordable healthy food, lower rape and murder rates, less drug abuse, maintained roads, clean drinking water... basically common sense. Best of all, it allows the sane majority to work together against populistic rightwinged minority. Even when they disagree on many other points.
Sure, Italy, Hungary, some othet shitholes aren’t doing too well. Not something that would have been avoided with a 2party system, more likely that would worsen the left-right division.Italy, France, Spain are here commonly used as examples that too much socialism isn’t good for the economy. That’s above all bad management.
For your interest, a two party system isn’t the norm, a multiparty system is quite common.
“Good examples of countries that have this system include Brazil, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Taiwan, Philippines, and South Korea. ”
Don’t know what the heck north korea, russia and other communistic dictatorships have to do with it, but as with any political systems, it’s not some sort of guarantee to utopia. It does lead to deadlocks sometimes. That list includes the best places to live when it comes to quality of life. It does have its cons and bad examples sure, but anything is better than the binary system where people are forced to be on one of two opposing sides. Even in the UK this is apparent and the 2party system got a serious dent over the past weeks with people at both sites splitting off.
In NL we have over a dozen parties and I thank proverbial God for the right not being one party (we’d be in the same shit you are), or the too socialistic left being one party, or the christians...
”pick the leaderS”... Ironically, they ARE the leaderS, picked by the public. The whole reason Trump declared a national emergency is because he isn’t THE leader, he is merely the executive branch of three, and in many ways not the most powerful even though he acts like that.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
How many of those countries elect by direct popular vote?
We don't get that luxury here. There's only hope for the future. Until then, we're kind of fucked. And it will be more fucked if 435 is condensed to 50 to elect the POTUS here IMO
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you advocated that it is polite and reasonable to hang racial segregation signs
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Its a 200 year old democracy and we have some kinks to work out, that's for sure. The largest problem lies in the control that the wealthy have taken in our economy. It's causing all sorts of problems. A re-balancing of the ledger is in order. Then there is the change in demographics that is being used by the wealthy to divide us. That will work out over time. If you look at California, that's where the rest of the country is headed in about 10 years. More socially liberal and less Darwinian capitalism overall but still pretty much a capitalist economy.
The Senate reflects the divide between rural and urban areas. It may be time to look at the reasons why so few people live in such large tracts. This country had more people in rural areas 100 years ago. Maybe it's time to re-size our states or maybe we need to make it possible for people to earn a living wage in rural areas. A lot of people are moving to the cities by need and not desire to do so. Some of THAT is due to the automation and industrialization of agriculture.
Just saying, maybe a parliamentary system seems better now but there have been times when it did not to me. Italy or Poland or Greece, for example aren't exactly sterling examples of the greatness of their systems. But fundamentally, their problems are economic ones, not how people elect their representatives any more than it is here.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Uhm... France and uhm... maybe a few others. Most leaders in europe are not elected by direct popular vote either, and not even in a separate election. The winning party’s leader wins. Not sure if that would be a luxury, as it implies there is one person “the” leader... fuck that. With control of the house and the senate, or even just with a proper functioning senate, the POTUS can’t do a whole lot without cooperation of congress anyway.
Fair point on the 435 vs 50 at least as long as they neither are an accurate representation of the nation wide population.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
France doesn't elect by popular vote?
I thought they did. If not a majority in the first round, they go to the 2nd.
Macron got more votes than anyone else, did he not in the next round?
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Yes I answered France as an example to your question, where they do elect by popular vote. It’s to my knowledge an exception, but might very well be a few others too.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
I said “you wish” out loud. Sorry about that. Don’t know where that was coming from lol. I do hope you’re right, the timeframe just seems a little overly positive.
Those aren’t issues unique to the US though. I think it would be smart to address legitimate issues from people in rural areas, especially a fair living wage, but it’s really beyond me that a city like New York or the state of California puts up with this crap. Looks really bad on them.
If you accept/tolerate the current situation where a small populated state gets the same influence as a much larger part of the population, you accept/tolerate that the major decisions are based on a vote per state, and you basically choose to do what most states want, not what most people want. Everything else is just a side issue.
Low bar man. Italy was fascist not too long. Also a huge difference between north and south italy. Still one of the largest economies in the world, in most areas not a terrible place to live at all. Poland lost all the good folks to NL and Germany, major brain drain, the rest are fucked in the head because of the war and being behind the wall so long. Barely 30 years ago still under Sovjet control. The weather is way too good in Greece to do any labor and pay tax, come on
. There is no reason to assume not having a multiparty system would have prevented that, or it being a result of having one. Yet there are plenty of obvious advantages. Low bar because the US is much better than those countries. But like I said in a previous post, surely there are bad examples. It’s no ultimate solution to all problems, just arguing it’s better in more obvious ways than it could potentially be worse or just a as bad.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Netherlands, right?I said “you wish” out loud. Sorry about that. Don’t know where that was coming from lol. I do hope you’re right, the timeframe just seems a little overly positive.
Those aren’t issues unique to the US though. I think it would be smart to address legitimate issues from people in rural areas, especially a fair living wage, but it’s really beyond me that a city like New York or the state of California puts up with this crap. Looks really bad on them.
If you accept/tolerate the current situation where a small populated state gets the same influence as a much larger part of the population, you accept/tolerate that the major decisions are based on a vote per state, and you basically choose to do what most states want, not what most people want. Everything else is just a side issue.
Low bar man. Italy was fascist not too long. Also a huge difference between north and south italy. Still one of the largest economies in the world, in most areas not a terrible place to live at all. Poland lost all the good folks to NL and Germany, major brain drain, the rest are fucked in the head because of the war and being behind the wall so long. Barely 30 years ago still under Sovjet control. The weather is way too good in Greece to do any labor and pay tax, come on
Nice country. Good economy. People seem to be pretty happy. So Parliamentary system looks good
Greece. Kind of fucked up right now. So Parliamentary system doesn't look so good.
US isn't in a good place right now, so our strange system looks bad.
I'm saying our problems aren't because of the Senate. I'm saying our problems are the same that other countries have had in past times. We have to work through it like they did.
About 10 years maybe 15 is when the population shifts from single race dominated to multi-race. California is already there. Yeah, I'm optimistic, CA is doing pretty good.. Nothing to be ashamed of there.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Sure, and you knew that Hillary would be elected President in 2016 too.
Did your cat shit on your crystal ball?