Ketamine Kid Starts Third Party

961 Views | 14 Replies | Last: 8 mo ago by going4roses
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Could actually become a very key "swing" vote in the legislative process.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
People don't like two parties. The more choices, the better for our "democracy" and voters. Even with this raging junkie.
PAC-10-BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
When are the Dems going to start spying on Elon if they haven't been doing so already?

Can he bought even though he's worth more than Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders combined?
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

People don't like two parties. The more choices, the better for our "democracy" and voters. Even with this raging junkie.


Straight dope fiend
How (are) you gonna win when you ain’t right within…
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

People don't like two parties. The more choices, the better for our "democracy" and voters. Even with this raging junkie.
People may not like two parties but in our winner-take-all Constitutional system, a third party only destroy the party it takes the most voters from. The winner is the party with less crossover appeal to the 3rd party. The supporters of the 3rd party that crossed over end up worse off.

The only way is to take a party over from the inside, like Trump did.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:




The only way is to take a party over from the inside, like Trump did.

And that's your "third" party.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

Anarchistbear said:

People don't like two parties. The more choices, the better for our "democracy" and voters. Even with this raging junkie.
People may not like two parties but in our winner-take-all Constitutional system, a third party only destroy the party it takes the most voters from. The winner is the party with less crossover appeal to the 3rd party. The supporters of the 3rd party that crossed over end up worse off.

The only way is to take a party over from the inside, like Trump did.
The way to have viable 3rd parties long-term would be to re-work our system to be more like a Parliamentary system; in those you have people elect reps and then the reps elect a Prime Minister, and the PM therefore often has to be the result of coalition-building between the parties.

Because we also directly elect our President as the head of government then everything naturally edges towards having one party to support him and one to oppose him. Whenever third parties have gained any traction in the US they have typically just had their platform co-opted by one of the two major parties and withered away. Once in a very long while there will be enough weakness in a major party that it winds up being replaced by a third party (see: the Whigs). But after that realignment we return to the two-party system because our Constitution incentivizes it.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

dajo9 said:

Anarchistbear said:

People don't like two parties. The more choices, the better for our "democracy" and voters. Even with this raging junkie.
People may not like two parties but in our winner-take-all Constitutional system, a third party only destroy the party it takes the most voters from. The winner is the party with less crossover appeal to the 3rd party. The supporters of the 3rd party that crossed over end up worse off.

The only way is to take a party over from the inside, like Trump did.
The way to have viable 3rd parties long-term would be to re-work our system to be more like a Parliamentary system; in those you have people elect reps and then the reps elect a Prime Minister, and the PM therefore often has to be the result of coalition-building between the parties.

Because we also directly elect our President as the head of government then everything naturally edges towards having one party to support him and one to oppose him. Whenever third parties have gained any traction in the US they have typically just had their platform co-opted by one of the two major parties and withered away. Once in a very long while there will be enough weakness in a major party that it winds up being replaced by a third party (see: the Whigs). But after that realignment we return to the two-party system because our Constitution incentivizes it.
All kinds of changes I'd like to see if we are changing the Constitution. Our constitution is a 21st century failure.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?

I'm not sure Elon Musk has much appeal anymore, especially as someone starting a new political party. It sounds like it would be based on libertarian principles? Well, how's the Libertarian Party doing? Does it even exist anymore?

That said, I think many Americans are craving a "Common Sense Party" in the center:

+ no cringe bs
+ reasonable attempt at equal opportunity and justice for all Americans... with some damn respect for everybody
+ regulated capitalism that is fiscally responsible
+ recognize that government has a role; make it better and more efficient
+ try and lead the world to a better place without meddling in other country's affairs
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:


I'm not sure Elon Musk has much appeal anymore, especially as someone starting a new political party. It sounds like it would be based on libertarian principles? Well, how's the Libertarian Party doing? Does it even exist anymore?

That said, I think many Americans are craving a "Common Sense Party" in the center:

+ no cringe bs
+ reasonable attempt at equal opportunity and justice for all Americans
+ regulated capitalism that is fiscally responsible
+ recognize that government has a role; make it better and more efficient
+ try and lead the world to a better place without meddling in other country's affairs


We already have that in the Democratic Party
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

Big C said:


I'm not sure Elon Musk has much appeal anymore, especially as someone starting a new political party. It sounds like it would be based on libertarian principles? Well, how's the Libertarian Party doing? Does it even exist anymore?

That said, I think many Americans are craving a "Common Sense Party" in the center:

+ no cringe bs
+ reasonable attempt at equal opportunity and justice for all Americans
+ regulated capitalism that is fiscally responsible
+ recognize that government has a role; make it better and more efficient
+ try and lead the world to a better place without meddling in other country's affairs


We already have that in the Democratic Party

Mostly, but we said some stuff that made a lot of people cringe. You and I may not have cringed, but plenty of swing voters did. And I never heard Biden or Harris talk about fiscal responsibility or government efficiency. Maybe they did, but I certainly never heard it.

Yes, though, a centrist Democratic Party platform is not far from where we ought to be, IMO.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Proportional representation would be a good first step which incidentally is not banned by the constitution but by an act of Congress in the 1960's
Chapman_is_Gone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

Big C said:


I'm not sure Elon Musk has much appeal anymore, especially as someone starting a new political party. It sounds like it would be based on libertarian principles? Well, how's the Libertarian Party doing? Does it even exist anymore?

That said, I think many Americans are craving a "Common Sense Party" in the center:

+ no cringe bs
+ reasonable attempt at equal opportunity and justice for all Americans
+ regulated capitalism that is fiscally responsible
+ recognize that government has a role; make it better and more efficient
+ try and lead the world to a better place without meddling in other country's affairs


We already have that in the Democratic Party

Nah, you want equal outcomes, not equal opportunity.

Because traffic cops were pulling over so many minorities (i.e., blacks) because blacks commit a disproportionate number of infractions, the City of Berkeley literally stopped enforcing their traffic laws. Pure stupidity. I could easily give you 50 other examples, such as "defund the police."

Progressives, in particular, are naive idiots.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yikes here we go again with the simultaneous gaslighting and racist reaching lord have mercy on y'all souls geez us H Christ.

I guess to yall Europeans were the chattel slaves that built America huh and unicorns exist
How (are) you gonna win when you ain’t right within…
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.