| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jowy Atreides
Joined: 13 Jul 2004
Post Count: 265
486378 Potch
0 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:38 am Post subject: |
  |
|
Has Nader announced that's he running for the Greens? He'll probably end up being their candidate, as no one's heard of their other candidates, but he seems completely independent right now.
While I don't have any particular problem with the two-party system, if Ralph Nader could actually pose a threat to either party I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. But, until then, it's a wasted vote.
As for the upcoming primaries, it looks pretty close between Clinton and Obama, with McCain (eventually) taking the Republican nomination. I'll be voting for Obama in the Texas Democratic Primary on March 4th, personally.
Last edited by Jowy Atreides on Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Amyral
Windriders
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Post Count: 1355
Location: Sawgrass Landing
544907 Potch
4066 Soldiers
620 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| John Layfield wrote: |
| Perhaps the problem there is in the frame that is the American two party system, rather than the picture itself. ;) |
Or the fact that fringe parties are counter productive when they reach that level?
The point of third parties in a system like the US has (winner take all, plurality elections) is primarily to get platforms adopted by the other parties. They did that, but lingered around longer, thus shooting the candidate who adopted it in the foot.
It's not like it's built into the constitution to have two parties, it's just how it's most likely to end up when you have the system set up like it is. Groups have to consolidate to get the votes they need, and there's no advantage to winning a lesser percentage (unless you're in a state that has proportional representation). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ujitsuna
Red Shoes Dance
Joined: 24 May 2006
Post Count: 4823
Location: Pale Plains
936547 Potch
12000 Soldiers
675 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Amyral wrote: |
The point of third parties in a system like the US has (winner take all, plurality elections) is primarily to get platforms adopted by the other parties. They did that, but lingered around longer, thus shooting the candidate who adopted it in the foot.
It's not like it's built into the constitution to have two parties, it's just how it's most likely to end up when you have the system set up like it is. Groups have to consolidate to get the votes they need, and there's no advantage to winning a lesser percentage (unless you're in a state that has proportional representation). |
It's not that it is two parties, it's that when it comes time to decide who is in power, focus is placed on individuals (like McCain and Obama) rather than parties, so there is never any consistency with third parties who attract a lot of votes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Amyral
Windriders
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Post Count: 1355
Location: Sawgrass Landing
544907 Potch
4066 Soldiers
620 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hayashi Ujitsuna wrote: |
It's not that it is two parties, it's that when it comes time to decide who is in power, focus is placed on individuals (like McCain and Obama) rather than parties, so there is never any consistency with third parties who attract a lot of votes. |
That's something different, altogether, really.
It's also not a bad thing at all, because parties aren't unified entities, they're massive groups of people, often with widely varying opinions, who may not like each other much at all, just hate the other people more. If a person becomes president, his view is going to determine what occurs more than the national party will.
And, in reality, third parties don't attract that many votes relative to the total number of voters. Perot, for example, was very successful relative to other third parties, he got 19% of the popular vote and didn't win a state (he did finish second on occassion and stole quite a few votes from Bush the Sr.). Most don't get too many votes at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jowy Atreides
Joined: 13 Jul 2004
Post Count: 265
486378 Potch
0 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Another aspect of the two-party system is that both are extremely weak, i.e. their platform doesn't have to be followed by every single member of the party. Both parties have whips (high-ranking members who enforce party discipline), but they lack any real power. This is why Ron Paul, who once ran on the Libertarian ticket, is now running for the Republican nomination (but still holds the same views). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ujitsuna
Red Shoes Dance
Joined: 24 May 2006
Post Count: 4823
Location: Pale Plains
936547 Potch
12000 Soldiers
675 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jowy Atreides wrote: |
| Another aspect of the two-party system is that both are extremely weak, i.e. their platform doesn't have to be followed by every single member of the party. Both parties have whips (high-ranking members who enforce party discipline), but they lack any real power. This is why Ron Paul, who once ran on the Libertarian ticket, is now running for the Republican nomination (but still holds the same views). |
Theres no question the GOP is the more diverse party in terms of ideaology, you've got social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, warhawks, libertarians and the ones who are mixes of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shrew
The All-Star Rock n' Breakdance Electronic Band from Shenzhen
Joined: 18 May 2004
Post Count: 2328
Location: Chefurbo Kaimuttal
237023 Potch
110 Soldiers
100 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, you have a similar mix of people on the Democratic side, but at the moment they're all united in a "Out with Bush" mindset. The Republican strength in the last few decades has largely been their organization, the ability to get everyone onto the same boat. Karl Rove was a genius at this. But now the party is coming under serious attack, and everyone is splintering, so you're seeing many more ideologies come out.
The Democrats on the other hand have had terrible trouble uniting, which is why they've been pretty weak until now.
_________________
Fear our Vagueness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vextor
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Post Count: 12086
Location: Hell
11331071 Potch
23689 Soldiers
160 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hayashi Ujitsuna wrote: |
Theres no question the GOP is the more diverse party in terms of ideaology, you've got social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, warhawks, libertarians and the ones who are mixes of them. |
I wouldn't count all of those into the GOP though. I'm definitely a fiscal conservative, but have never voted for the GOP. There has been nothing fidcally conservative about them at least in the past 8 years, and the Clinton years have been far more pleasing for fiscal conservatives considering how the budget was balanced. Libertarians would also not always side with the GOP either, especially not with the current GOP which has been taking away individual liberties of US citizens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jowy Atreides
Joined: 13 Jul 2004
Post Count: 265
486378 Potch
0 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd consider myself a libertarian, in the civil sense, and I'll be voting for a Democrat.
The other time we had a balanced budget was under Andrew Jackson, another Democrat, so perhaps they are the fiscally conservative party.
There's even a few warhawks in the Democratic Party, such as Paul Wolfowitz (despite his assoication with neoconservatism), and Zbigniew Brzeziński, Jimmy Carter's National Security Advisor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tullaryx
Custodiae Corvi
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Post Count: 5577
Location: Apacheta
4092785 Potch
200 Soldiers
20 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think by and large the majority of Americans can't be labeled easily as being Democrat or Republican. While both parties have members who live and die by the idealogy pushed by their respective parties most Americans seem to believe in a combination of ideas from both parties. I'm a registered Republican but I voted for Clinton once I saw the type of President he was during his first-term.
Also the way the parties themselves are run seem to change with each generation or two. In the past the Republicans were seen as more liberal in their ideas than the Democrats. It had been the Republican party who were quite the staunch abolitionist while the Democratic party had been very set in keeping slavery as part of the status quo.
_________________
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ujitsuna
Red Shoes Dance
Joined: 24 May 2006
Post Count: 4823
Location: Pale Plains
936547 Potch
12000 Soldiers
675 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vextor wrote: |
| I wouldn't count all of those into the GOP though. I'm definitely a fiscal conservative, but have never voted for the GOP. There has been nothing fidcally conservative about them at least in the past 8 years, and the Clinton years have been far more pleasing for fiscal conservatives considering how the budget was balanced. Libertarians would also not always side with the GOP either, especially not with the current GOP which has been taking away individual liberties of US citizens. |
Not now you wouldn't though, because the GOP is a mess that seems to have been hijacked by certain parties, I'll be surprised if John McCain wins. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Amyral
Windriders
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Post Count: 1355
Location: Sawgrass Landing
544907 Potch
4066 Soldiers
620 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hayashi Ujitsuna wrote: |
| Theres no question the GOP is the more diverse party in terms of ideaology, you've got social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, warhawks, libertarians and the ones who are mixes of them. |
Honestly, that seems to be making it seem like there's more disparity than there is. The democrats aren't unified, they're made up of a whole bunch of groups that hate each other and everyone else. Were there a democrat in office right now, the republicans would seem more unified, because they have a universal figure they could hate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Timbo
The Wandering Prophets
Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Post Count: 2964
Location: Darja
410837 Potch
300 Soldiers
835 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Amyral wrote: |
| Hayashi Ujitsuna wrote: |
| Theres no question the GOP is the more diverse party in terms of ideaology, you've got social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, warhawks, libertarians and the ones who are mixes of them. |
Honestly, that seems to be making it seem like there's more disparity than there is. The democrats aren't unified, they're made up of a whole bunch of groups that hate each other and everyone else. Were there a democrat in office right now, the republicans would seem more unified, because they have a universal figure they could hate. |
I have to agree. Almost all social minority groups are looking out for their best interests and usually settle with the democratic party, for lack of a better option. Most have radically different agendas.
_________________
"There is no normal life, there's just life. Now get on with it" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sparhawk
Lords of Foolishness
Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Post Count: 3234
Location: North Gouran
207476 Potch
0 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hayashi Ujitsuna wrote: |
| Vextor wrote: |
| I wouldn't count all of those into the GOP though. I'm definitely a fiscal conservative, but have never voted for the GOP. There has been nothing fidcally conservative about them at least in the past 8 years, and the Clinton years have been far more pleasing for fiscal conservatives considering how the budget was balanced. Libertarians would also not always side with the GOP either, especially not with the current GOP which has been taking away individual liberties of US citizens. |
Not now you wouldn't though, because the GOP is a mess that seems to have been hijacked by certain parties, I'll be surprised if John McCain wins. |
At the moment I consider the divesity of opinion in the GOP refreshing, not a mess. What it appears to be to me is that there are several strong viewpoints being represented.
However, almost all the Democrats share the same views but cannot get along. It's the 3rd grade all over again.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Timbo
The Wandering Prophets
Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Post Count: 2964
Location: Darja
410837 Potch
300 Soldiers
835 Nation Points
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
However, almost all the Democrats share the same views but cannot get along. It's the 3rd grade all over again. |
Not really. If you ask the opinions of a environmentalist democrat, a feminist democrat and a black civil rights democrat, their priorities and methods are vastly different. I think you are overgeneralizing too much.
_________________
"There is no normal life, there's just life. Now get on with it" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
