|
|
Post by HarleyThomas1002 on Sept 26, 2011 22:46:23 GMT -5
I think you're all just racist against invertebrates. And the sudden crash of every computer in America will bring the nation together as one. Norton helped me once. A two hour battle with multiple viruses was made even longer because it took goddamn forever to install Norton and all it did was get rid of one virus. Leaving many more behind. |
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Sept 27, 2011 0:23:33 GMT -5
One very high profile example of parliamentary trickery on the state level would be the recent Wisconsin Democrats fleeing in an attempt to delay the gutting of the public service worker salaries, pensions, etc. Sure, they do a little of that. It's okay to have internal party debate, and it's okay to have your party disagree internally- so long as it's a disagreement over means, not ends. Everyone in a party should pretty much agree on the ultimate goals of it. If they don't, they can make their own. Take Republicans. Every Republican agrees that taxes are bad and should be lowered. They disagree, sometimes, about how best to do that (being a deadbeat on debts?) but they all want lower taxes. That is exactly the worst thing about modern politics. At least the ALP used to believe something (in 1930), even if I don't agree with them. That is exactly the problem. People should vote for policies, not for people- but how can you do so if a party doesn't even present any consistent beliefs? |
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Sept 27, 2011 7:05:55 GMT -5
It's okay to have internal party debate, and it's okay to have your party disagree internally- so long as it's a disagreement over means, not ends. Everyone in a party should pretty much agree on the ultimate goals of it. If they don't, they can make their own. No they can’t. Not until the system is overhauled to actually make third, fourth, fifth, etc. parties viable. I guess that’s part of the problem. Two parties pretty well enforced by a grab bag of rules, but more than two real position combinations. So we wind up with one fairly focused party—the Republicans, and then a party for everyone else—the Democrats. The Democrats are perhaps a little too diverse, maybe? |
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Sept 27, 2011 7:32:03 GMT -5
That is the thing, political parties in the US are different that in places where you have multiply parties. In some ways our two main parties represent permanent coalitions of smaller parties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Sept 27, 2011 7:35:26 GMT -5
The Democrats are perhaps a little too diverse, maybe? That's the great paradox of liberalism. We're the party of diversity, which means we have tons of people to pander to who are all widely different in their goals and needs. |
|
|
|
Post by rookie on Sept 27, 2011 12:14:44 GMT -5
It's okay to have internal party debate, and it's okay to have your party disagree internally- so long as it's a disagreement over means, not ends. Everyone in a party should pretty much agree on the ultimate goals of it. If they don't, they can make their own. Take Republicans. Every Republican agrees that taxes are bad and should be lowered. They disagree, sometimes, about how best to do that (being a deadbeat on debts?) but they all want lower taxes. That is an interesting viewpoint, Fred. Doesn't work outside of theoretical models, though. First of all, the United States is a two party game. Sure, every now and then you'll see a third party pop up, but those are an exception and usually found only where the candidate's sheer personality is the key factor. (Here I am thinking of Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party and Ventura's Independent Party.) And also I am sure some local jurisdictions have third party people. But for national venues, you only have Coke or Pepsi, Ford or Chevy, Chocolate or Peanut butter. So that would have to change. And since the two parties are the ones who control everything having to do with the events leading up to the elections (debates for example) it is not in their self interest to change that. So that kind of stymies us there. Actually, it is a hurdle that, right now, is impossible to jump. But you are smart enough to know that. You see what is. Not only that, but I assume you are doing more than bitching about how you don't like it. You have a plan, right? I look forward to hearing the Fred Plan to Fix the U.S. Just remember, it has to be feasible and has to be palatable for at least half the nation. And it can't at all belittle the values and concerns of the minority. |
|
|
|
Post by malicious_bloke on Sept 27, 2011 15:09:19 GMT -5
This was probably mentioned somewhere in the three pages I didn't read after the OP, but what we can see here is just the usual politician switching from miserable failure mode into "campaign promise" mode.
TBH at this point it's not even a case of if he gets re-elected so much as which prestigious international award he'll get unilaterally given shortly after his inauguration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Sept 27, 2011 16:51:52 GMT -5
This was probably mentioned somewhere in the three pages I didn't read after the OP, but what we can see here is just the usual politician switching from miserable failure mode into "campaign promise" mode. Yeah, pretty much this. |
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Sept 27, 2011 18:05:41 GMT -5
It's okay to have internal party debate, and it's okay to have your party disagree internally- so long as it's a disagreement over means, not ends. Everyone in a party should pretty much agree on the ultimate goals of it. If they don't, they can make their own. No they can’t. Not until the system is overhauled to actually make third, fourth, fifth, etc. parties viable. Well, okay. Then some people's views are not going to be represented. I'd suggest that Blue Dogs, who already have a party, should be this group. Then the real short-term goal for liberals should be beating democrats into obeying them. Otherwise America has no chance of long-term survival. Conservatism, which is the explicit ideology of the only party, will destroy the country. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Sept 28, 2011 0:22:50 GMT -5
Will? Try present tense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Sept 28, 2011 2:54:49 GMT -5
I think you're all just racist against invertebrates. And the sudden crash of every computer in America will bring the nation together as one. Norton helped me once. A two hour battle with multiple viruses was made even longer because it took goddamn forever to install Norton and all it did was get rid of one virus. Leaving many more behind. Which is an oddly fitting metaphor for politics. |
|
