BS: Groan...another US Presidential election

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 06:51 PM

Ha! ;-D No, Bill. Think back: they did not yet have any political parties at the original Constitutional Convention. And James Monroe, one of your founding fathers, advised strongly against ever forming them, saying it would eventually destroy democracy. I believe he was quite correct about that.

You don't need political parties in order to provide a field of candidates for an election...but as soon as you have those parties in existence, they completely take over the process, and their primary purpose becomes enlarging and perpetuating themselves and securing a hold on power by any means possible, fair or foul. And the politicians all become servants of the parties themselves, NOT servants of the public.

Like a corporation, a political party is a potentially immortal and self-perpetuating artificially created entity that devours and outlasts the very people who form it. It's a monster.

A one-party system is probably even more pernicious. It's an even bigger monster.

The best system is to have no parties whatsoever, and to provide equal public funding for a broad slate of independent candidates who get elected by the public NOT on a partisan basis, but strictly on their own individual merits and ideas. They then form a national legislature, vote for some officers amongst themselves to help organize it in a procedural sense, and then work as a united parliament of independent voices, all with an equal voice in passing legislation. That's a real democracy, devoid of party politics. It can be done. It has been done here and there in the past. It should be done. It would end much of the corruption of the present order (though surely not all of it).

That's a political theory. Yeah, I know it's not going to happen in the near future...or is at least very unlikely to...but I am discussing political theory, okay? If we didn't now and then consider theoretical alternatives to things we've all grown up with, how would humanity ever move forward to anything better than what they already have?

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Songwronger
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 07:01 PM

In our New Year's poll, when asked what news event they fear most about 2012, Americans by a margin of two-to-one said Obama's reelection. Only 16 percent said they fear the Democrat won't win a second term, while 33 percent said they fear four more years.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/01/09/poll-americans-2-1-fear-obamas-reelection

Obama's history. The only way he'll another term is with a 2000-style supreme court theft. Good riddance.

Romney currenly has 12 electoral votes and Ron Paul has 10. I hope Paul gets the nomination and doesn't split the vote with a third-party run, but we'll see. I guess that's another way Obama could get another term.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 07:51 PM

"The best system is to have no parties whatsoever, .."

Perhaps...but you KNOW like-minded folks would collude behind the scenes. It might be safer to keep them semi-public about it. *IF* there are to be parties, a genuine multi-party system like Israel uses could at least allow people to group themselves into arrangements that more closely represent their actual views....This would require a total change in the primary process and voting procedures, as well as congressional changes.

"...but strictly on their own individual merits and ideas."

That is the rub....such a system would allow really good ideas and candidates, but would also invite every off-the-wall kook to claim equal rights to the process instead of being vetted BY the party system. (as we see at the moment, it is already a problem within the system). Designing a way to sort thru the field without $$$ involved would be tricky. I AM willing to consider ideas to make that work.

Remember, the Greek system required everyone to serve a term, like the jury system.... that both intrigues & scares me.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 03:23 AM

Bill, I have a very good friend who was part of the Domocrat organisation in Chicago, the same organisation which propagated Mr obama.



She is now married and resides in Scotland, but is a child of a top Dem political family. I can assure you that the "classic Chicago mentality" has not been left in the twentieth century.
She was a supporter of Mr Obama,as she believed that the groundswell of support for him would inspire the man; she was bitterly disapointed, but not surprised when that political capital was squandered.
"It is the Chicago disease", said she.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 08:52 AM

That's not what is usually meant by "Chicago politics".

And given that AFAIK the polls for Obama against any republican show Obama several points clear I don't understand how Songwronger's assertion above can be correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 09:30 AM

Conclusions from the poll Songwronger quoted are deeply suspect.

"What is your SINGLE biggest fear?" Does not translate well to "Who will you vote for?"

Here are the results from the link.....

As we enter the presidential election year of 2012, what potential news event do you fear the most?

President Obama wins reelection 33%

Taxes will increase 31%

Iran will get a nuclear weapon 16%

Obama will lose reelection 16%

North Korea will attack South Korea 4%

.......

Songwronger seems to be way off base interpreting those results as a sure sign that Obama will lose. In fact if you added.

"Romney will be elected."
"Ron Paul will become President and announce the dismantling of the US monetary system."
and
"Gingrich will get his hands on the Nuclear launch codes"

The results would be much different. Obama generally does better against any single Republican than against a generic, ideal, theoretical, unexamined GOP candidate.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 10:34 AM

Actually what America needs in half a dozen parties and do away with voting districts in states to favor a delegation that best represents the entire electorate... I mean, if 10% of your state's population supports the Green Party and that state had 10 House members then one should represent the interests of the Green Party...

This would force coalitions and compromise...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 10:56 AM

Yes, Bobert, I think that would be much better than the present 2-party system. Half a dozen relatively equal parties would result in coalitions and compromise, as you say...rather than a bitter "us against them" mentality, which is what you have now.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 11:00 AM

Isn't approximately half a dozen parties what Canada has now?

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 11:12 AM

Sort of. We've got 5 parties of significant size:

Conservative Party (sort of like the Republicans, only less so)
Liberal Party (sort of like the Democrats, only more so)
New Democratic (supposedly socialist...but not really...)
Green Party (ecological?)
Bloc Quebecois (strictly in Quebec)

There are some other really small parties, but they are of little significance.

One problem with the above scenario is that our "first past the post" electoral system has resulted in a party with only about 38-40 percent of the public on its side getting a majority in the last election! This has not been good for the country. We need to have proportional representation or some other kind of voting procedure to cure that problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 11:36 AM

Here in the UK we have a Monster Raving Loony Party. Official website here.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 12:34 PM

don't agree LH, I don't think a very large number of us Americans believe that, however, on TV all one ever gets to see is the outer edges of the zany ... cause well, it makes good TV. Most americans I know have their heads screwed on pretty well

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 01:27 PM

Most of the Americans I've met seem like nice folks, Olddude. Which belief were you referring to?

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 04:30 PM

akenaton: You mistake 'failure' (due to new Senate rules )for being controlled by a party machine.

"She was a supporter of Mr Obama,.......she was bitterly disapointed, but not surprised when that political capital was squandered.
"It is the Chicago disease", said she."

...and you do not see how both you and your friend have inserted personal opinions into your 'analysis' of what various events meant?
Unless she was an insider and privy to personal conversations WITH Obama, she cannot possibly know why or with what pressures Obama did anything! "Political capital was squandered" is a subjective opinion based on disappointment that certain things did not happen as she wished.

Very few presidents, with the exception of Lyndon Johnson, had enough 'capital' AND knew where enough bodies were buried to be able to force legislation on the unwilling and be able to make them smile while their arms were being twisted....and LBJ was able to TALK like a southern bigot while explaining that they just HAD to pass Civil Rights legislation. Obama would not and could not do that!


--------------------------------------


From: Bobert - PM
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 10:34 AM

Actually what America needs is half a dozen parties and do away with voting districts in states to favor a delegation that best represents the entire electorate


ummm...isn't that what I just said?

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 04:59 PM

I am not mistaken Bill and neither was my friend....we were referring to the promises of "change".
I said at election time, that Mr obama would change only what he was allowed to change and so it transpired, he now leads a country less free and more hated abroad than even George Bush could manage.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 06:30 PM

"he now leads a country less free and more hated abroad than even George Bush could manage. "

What and ugly steaming pile of horse shit!

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Jan 12 - 10:51 PM

he now leads a country less free and more hated abroad than even George Bush could manage."

I would suggest that Ake needs a better class of friends and acquaintances.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Jan 12 - 03:23 AM

Habeas Corpus?
Drone Warfare?
Failure to stand against Israeli expansion and murdering of civilians in Iran?
Permanent presence in Iraq?
"The beat goes on"

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Jan 12 - 03:28 AM

But Hillary the Hawk did make a wonderful speech on "gay rights".....so everything's OK in the "liberal" corral.

Subject: RE: BS: Groan...another US Presidential election
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Jan 12 - 11:19 AM

"..obama would change only what he was allowed to change "

Allowed by WHOM? Ask the Republican senate why they refuse to pass anything of significance! The whole point is to be able to say "he failed to pass anything"

Again...you are inserting your opinions as if they are what the world in general thinks.

You toss out lines like "Failure to stand against Israeli expansion and murdering of civilians in Iran?" as if it was obvious that he both could and should do such.

"Drone warfare" ... as opposed to the old-fashioned way of dealing with enemies that Bush & company employed? Like inventing an excuse to send 200,000 soldiers to run in circles and get themselves killed? Much of the drone warfare was needed because of the surge in terrorist activity caused BY Bush policies. NOTHING about warfare...on ANY level... is happy or easy to make palatable, but if we must cope with terror groups, drones are both cheaper & safer than about any other means.

Ake... one could take most of your complaints and opinions and cut & paste them into Republican political speeches and no one would notice.

(Jack & Ebbie said it more succinctly than I did, but you get the idea)