Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 98

Thread: For Xyxxox

  1. #76
    56% of an excuse nail bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Province
    Kekistan
    Oratio
    29,567

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    Kzach you ignorant fuck.
    You should have just stopped there. That statements is factual and true. The rest not as much.
    I wouldn't even censor you.

 

  • #77
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by nail bunny View Post
    You should have just stopped there. That statements is factual and true. The rest not as much.

    You may want to read a history book.
    Trump is just Putin's little bitch.

  • #78
    56% of an excuse nail bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Province
    Kekistan
    Oratio
    29,567

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    You may want to read a history book.
    There was no "defacto" requirement for a two party system. If the states had stuck with the "district plan" (fuck you very much Maryland and Pennsylvania), or had Hamilton's amendment requiring that passed, we wouldn't have the problem we have now.

    Stick that in your history book you partisan hack.
    I wouldn't even censor you.

  • #79
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by nail bunny View Post
    There was no "defacto" requirement for a two party system. If the states had stuck with the "district plan" (fuck you very much Maryland and Pennsylvania), or had Hamilton's amendment requiring that passed, we wouldn't have the problem we have now.

    Stick that in your history book you partisan hack.
    So then, we ended up with a de facto dupolistic political system.

    See how that works?
    Trump is just Putin's little bitch.

  • #80
    Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Province
    Crystal Lake, IL
    Oratio
    8,366

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    The ONLY way to put an end to the current two party system is to end the absolute majority requirement for a win in the Electoral College, or end the Electoral College system altogether. Until that happens, we will always be a duopolistic political system, regardless of the makeup of those two parties because presidential elections are either a choice between two candidates or the election is always thrown to the House of Representatives where the party that can get buy in from 26 state delegations will always determine the outcome. Either way, it's always a choice between two parties.
    Unless, of course, the process of getting buy in from those 26 state delegations resembles the Parliamentary process - that is, it is a coalition of different parties hashing out the compromise to get 26 to agree. There is nothing defacto about the current two party system It was not a forgone conclusion that a two party system would emerge - it happened because the two parties grew in such power as to crowd out all the rest. This is where that non-swing-state-3rd-party-vote of which you roundly disapprove could have slowly started to turn the tide - a decades long turn, mind you, but the process must start somewhere...
    Last edited by Feanor; January 19th, 2017 at 04:48 PM. Reason: Using De Facto incorrectly
    My Other Sword Is Vorpal

  • #81
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
    Unless, of course, the process of getting buy in from those 26 state delegations resembles the Parliamentary process - that is, it is a coalition of different parties hashing out the compromise to get 26 to agree. There is nothing defacto about the current two party system It was not a forgone conclusion that a two party system would emerge - it happened because the two parties grew in such power as to crowd out all the rest. This is where that non-swing-state-3rd-party-vote of which you roundly disapprove could have slowly started to turn the tide - a decades long turn, mind you, but the process must start somewhere...
    It worked like that in the early days, hell there wasn't much in the way of party loyalty then either. All you have to do is look to the election of 1800 in order to know that.

    The issue is the fact that a duopolistic presidential system trickled down to all lower levels of the government, the first being the House.

    Now, the absolute PERFECT way for a third party to actually take hold and displace one of the two major parties would be to start at the bottom, get local, then state level officials elected in multiple states, working up to the House and the Senate, taking a few governorships along the way. That's how you do it.

    But doing that requires a massive effort by thousands of people with a common goal taking the long view of at least three to four decades before that third party actually gains any power at the national level and another couple of decades before they can actually field a candidate that would take enough electoral college votes in order to force the presidential election to the House, an occurrence that last happened in 1824 resulting in a schism within the single party of Democratic-Republicans.

    Instead, all you get are egotistical fucknuts like Nader, Stein, and Johnson who dream of a miraculous presidential election, all the while not realizing that all that would do would be to unite the two major parties in a massive effort to defy the third party president at all turns.

    It's been nearly a half decade since a third party candidate actually took a state, and that was a racist South voting for an avowed racist, and nearly two centuries since the House determined the outcome of an election.

    Want to actually do it within the confines of our constitutional system, show me a third party that holds legislative seats in the Senates of at least four different states from varying geographical regions. Then you have a viable third party that could actually rise up over several decades to supplant one of the two current major parties. But after that, your third party movement dies once again and you go back to having only two.
    Last edited by Xyxox; January 19th, 2017 at 05:02 PM.
    Trump is just Putin's little bitch.

  • #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    Now, the absolute PERFECT way for a third party to actually take hold and displace one of the two major parties would be to start at the bottom, get local, then state level officials elected in multiple states, working up to the House and the Senate, taking a few governorships along the way. That's how you do it.
    Absolutely. Thinking that electing a president from a third party will help is a mirage.
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #83
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    It worked like that in the early days, hell there wasn't much in the way of party loyalty then either. All you have to do is look to the election of 1800 in order to know that.

    The issue is the fact that a duopolistic presidential system trickled down to all lower levels of the government, the first being the House.

    Now, the absolute PERFECT way for a third party to actually take hold and displace one of the two major parties would be to start at the bottom, get local, then state level officials elected in multiple states, working up to the House and the Senate, taking a few governorships along the way. That's how you do it.

    But doing that requires a massive effort by thousands of people with a common goal taking the long view of at least three to four decades before that third party actually gains any power at the national level and another couple of decades before they can actually field a candidate that would take enough electoral college votes in order to force the presidential election to the House, an occurrence that last happened in 1824 resulting in a schism within the single party of Democratic-Republicans.

    Instead, all you get are egotistical fucknuts like Nader, Stein, and Johnson who dream of a miraculous presidential election, all the while not realizing that all that would do would be to unite the two major parties in a massive effort to defy the third party president at all turns.

    It's been nearly a half decade since a third party candidate actually took a state, and that was a racist South voting for an avowed racist, and nearly two centuries since the House determined the outcome of an election.

    Want to actually do it within the confines of our constitutional system, show me a third party that holds legislative seats in the Senates of at least four different states from varying geographical regions. Then you have a viable third party that could actually rise up over several decades to supplant one of the two current major parties. But after that, your third party movement dies once again and you go back to having only two.
    The closest we have to that is the Libertarian Party. Which isn't very close, they have all of 2 house seats in state senates, and no representative seats. They do have 210 people at lower levels, though.

  • #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Yablo View Post
    Absolutely. Thinking that electing a president from a third party will help is a mirage.
    They don't think they can elect a president, they are interested in getting federal funding.

  • #85
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by cyphersmith View Post
    The closest we have to that is the Libertarian Party. Which isn't very close, they have all of 2 house seats in state senates, and no representative seats. They do have 210 people at lower levels, though.
    I left out the most important piece. Your third party movement actually must present ideas that will both work AND a majority will actually support.
    Trump is just Putin's little bitch.

  • #86
    Religipster Enkhidu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Dayton
    Oratio
    7,096

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    I left out the most important piece. Your third party movement actually must present ideas that will both work AND a majority will actually support.
    Add in, the third party movement must establish itself quickly enough that it avoids being consumed by one of the existing parties.

  • #87
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Enkhidu View Post
    Add in, the third party movement must establish itself quickly enough that it avoids being consumed by one of the existing parties.
    And even if successful, all the third party will accomplish is supplanting one of the two major parties, leaving us in a two party system.

    I suppose you could have two different third parties do the same thing simultaneously, but then all you get are two new parties replacing the two old parties.
    Trump is just Putin's little bitch.

  • #88
    56% of an excuse nail bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Province
    Kekistan
    Oratio
    29,567

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    I left out the most important piece. Your third party movement actually must present ideas that will both work AND a majority will actually support.
    That doesn't disqualify the two big parties, why exclude new ones over it?
    I wouldn't even censor you.

  • #89
    Religipster Enkhidu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Dayton
    Oratio
    7,096

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    And even if successful, all the third party will accomplish is supplanting one of the two major parties, leaving us in a two party system.

    I suppose you could have two different third parties do the same thing simultaneously, but then all you get are two new parties replacing the two old parties.
    Which brings us back to the election method. I don't think the answer is at the electoral college, though - its with the way we count votes period. Moving beyond first-past-the-post in the districts (to Single Transferable, maybe) would be a good start.

  • #90
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Enkhidu View Post
    Which brings us back to the election method. I don't think the answer is at the electoral college, though - its with the way we count votes period. Moving beyond first-past-the-post in the districts (to Single Transferable, maybe) would be a good start.
    Which gets us right back to the two major parties who would have to agree to a more complex election system as well as give up the power inherent to the two parties in a two party system.
    Trump is just Putin's little bitch.

  • Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •