How open to compromise are you?

[Belk]

Our current political system is a train wreck coming from both sides.

Not that is is possible, but are you open to compromise.

I would be willing to (from politics) eliminate Trump Jordan and Gaets if my Democrat friends would be willing to eliminate Biden, Nadler and Schiff.

These six are the biggest source of hatred and division.

This will never happen, but I thought it was an interesting hypothetical

I would agree to that work no qualms.

 

[dogs4thewin]

All it takes is one decision for folks to respect the US Supreme Court.

Yes, this was a HUGE decision, probably more significant than the overthrow of Roe. The House is now likely to become and stay Democratic for years to come. And yes, Kavanaugh is turning out to be a much better choice than we expected.

Even Ginzburg disagreed with the Roe decision. Abortion is an issue for legislation, now by the states. However, there certainly could be federal legislation. The Democrats FAILED to pass such legislation when they had the power to do so (when they had signifcant majorities in the House and Senate).

I have been looking into the people who are running on the republican side for president and some seem willing to pass a federal ban that would go along the lines of some of those state bans. I would support a federal "ban" that gave states a limit to say for example no state may allow abortion after this point, but I do feel that early term abortions should be legal as a matter of safety so you will not have women going into the back alley or otherwise seeking abortions in unsafe ways/conditions but there should be strict time lines and maybe even stricter limits on who may prescribe/preform them.

 

[JustOneWay]

So you all would give back ALL the Biden successes just to have your wish of a representative senator in West Virginia (Republican is a state that was the most Trump state in the nation).

I acknowledge all that we owe Manchin.

Getting rid of Manchin today does not mean passed legislature of the last few years would need to be given back. We don't owe Manchin anything - he was getting his cash from from the coal industry, and now that the coal industry is dying, WV is dying too. Manchin can't save them.

 

[stevil]

Our current political system is a train wreck coming from both sides.

Not that is is possible, but are you open to compromise.

I would be willing to (from politics) eliminate Trump Jordan and Gaets if my Democrat friends would be willing to eliminate Biden, Nadler and Schiff.

These six are the biggest source of hatred and division.

This will never happen, but I thought it was an interesting hypothetical

This is assuming "the same thing is going on in both sides"
As we know Joe Biden isn't constantly making public accusations of the Hunter Biden investigation being a witch hunt.
As we know Joe Biden isn't trying to conceal any sensitive documents in his possession.

Jordan and Gaets are pure political theatre.

Schiff, I think is pretty good, pretty responsible. He did a fantastic job in the first impeachment. Nadler, I didn't think did a very great job, but he acted professionally and with integrity (so much as I have seen).

But anyway, I don't think it matters who is the Democratic leader, I think the right wing media machine will go into overdrive trying to smear people. So you replace Biden, well, the right wing folk are equally going to hate Kamilla, or Clinton, or Butegeg or anyone that has the top job in the Democratic Party.

I'm not from USA, So I'm neither a Democrat nor Republican supporter.
But I am not seeing the level of nonsense happening in the Democratic party right now that you are getting in the Republican Party.
MTG, Boebert, Gaets, Trump, Jordon all attacking the DOJ, attacking the justice system, destroying peoples faith in elections and justice. When people lose faith in all this stuff, then elections no longer matter, and they will only be left with force and violence as a means to determine control of the country.

 

[IceJad]

Our current political system is a train wreck coming from both sides.

Not that is is possible, but are you open to compromise.

I would be willing to (from politics) eliminate Trump Jordan and Gaets if my Democrat friends would be willing to eliminate Biden, Nadler and Schiff.

These six are the biggest source of hatred and division.

This will never happen, but I thought it was an interesting hypothetical

Why not get rid of both parties? While at it, get rid of lobbying groups and the fourth pillar of the US government - Blackrock.

I believe Americans deserve a better democratic system.

 

[durangodawood]

Getting rid of this or that politician is not that important.

Abolish gerrymandered legislative districts. Now there's a compromise I could support.

 

[durangodawood]

Why not get rid of both parties?

Because you cant.

We have an electoral system that naturally games out to a 2 party right vs left contest. If you scrap Ds and Rs, they'll very quickly be replaced by the same thing under different names.

Want some different parties? Change the game. Ranked preference type voting is one way.

 

[stevil]

Because you cant.

We have an electoral system that naturally games out to a 2 party right vs left contest. If you scrap Ds and Rs, they'll very quickly be replaced by the same thing under different names.

Want some different parties? Change the game. Ranked preference type voting is one way.

Or MMP where it doesn't just come down to two parties. Parties need to form coalitions to form government. The "american" experiment is a disaster of a system. Which results in extreme partisanship and often gridlock.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Getting rid of this or that politician is not that important.

Abolish gerrymandered legislative districts. Now there's a compromise I could support.

Yeah, individual politicians, while influential, are merely a symptom of the problem. Getting rid of them solves nothing - unless you work to fix the system that spawned them, a similar (or worse) replacement will rise up to take their place.

 

[jayem]

Our current political system is a train wreck coming from both sides.

Not that is is possible, but are you open to compromise.

I would be willing to (from politics) eliminate Trump Jordan and Gaets if my Democrat friends would be willing to eliminate Biden, Nadler and Schiff.

These six are the biggest source of hatred and division.

This will never happen, but I thought it was an interesting hypothetical

If I were in Congress, I'd support that compromise. But only if another compromise would be passed: Donald Trump's southern border wall and security package would be enacted in full. And in return, the law would allow for undocumented immigrants, who've been living and working in the US for years and have otherwise clean records, to register, receive legal resident alien status, and eventually become eligible for citizenship. The template for this already exists. It's Senate Bill 744 of 2013. Which passed the Senate 68-32 in 2013. (This means that 15 Republicans voted for it along with 53 Democrats.) And Pres. Obama agreed to sign it. But the House--in Republican hands--refused to even give it a hearing. They said it was an amnesty. But what's wrong with an amnesty that must be earned and includes very tight border security over the long term?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/744

 

[Pommer]

If I were in Congress, I'd support that compromise. But only if another compromise would be passed: Donald Trump's southern border wall and security package would be enacted in full. And in return, the law would allow for undocumented immigrants, who've been living and working in the US for years and have otherwise clean records, to register, receive legal resident alien status, and eventually become eligible for citizenship. The template for this already exists. It's Senate Bill 744 of 2013. Which passed the Senate 68-32 in 2013. (This means that 15 Republicans voted for it along with 53 Democrats.) And Pres. Obama agreed to sign it. But the House--in Republican hands--refused to even give it a hearing. They said it was an amnesty. But what's wrong with an amnesty that must be earned and includes very tight border security over the long term?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/744

What a border wall would need to be (to stand the test of time), is a six-lane, interstate Highway laying on its side; that sounds like a good idea?

 

[durangodawood]

Or MMP where it doesn't just come down to two parties. Parties need to form coalitions to form government. The "american" experiment is a disaster of a system. Which results in extreme partisanship and often gridlock.

Well MMP is a re-write of our system of govt. I was just trying to think of election process solutions that dont require massive constitutional editing. Maine, for example, has already done RCV.

 

[Kale100]

Well MMP is a re-write of our system of govt. I was just trying to think of election process solutions that dont require massive constitutional editing. Maine, for example, has already done RCV.

All the Mainers I've talked to don't like RCV.
A) They don't understand what the point is or really how it even works.
B) The candidates are still lousy, as while the 2-party system in not an inherent part of a RCV ballot, it is so deeply culturally ingrained that it is an inherent part of the people filling out the ballots.

Not against RCV at all, but it's going to take a lot of states doing it and a lot more education on the subject for it to start making a noticeable difference.

 

[durangodawood]

All the Mainers I've talked to don't like RCV.
A) They don't understand what the point is or really how it even works.
B) The candidates are still lousy, as while the 2-party system in not an inherent part of a RCV ballot, it is so deeply culturally ingrained that it is an inherent part of the people filling out the ballots.

Not against RCV at all, but it's going to take a lot of states doing it and a lot more education on the subject for it to start making a noticeable difference.

Well I dont think any system is going to overcome people's disinterest in understanding the basics of politics or political systems. Thats the other half of a solution: people caring enough to put in just a little more effort than they might at the Sonic drive up menu.

At least with RCV type systems, when you do care enough to participate more than semi-consciously, the game doesnt rationally guide you away from what might be your preferred candidate.

 

[jayem]

What a border wall would need to be (to stand the test of time), is a six-lane, interstate Highway laying on its side; that sounds like a good idea?

I doubt a wall has ever been built that couldn’t be scaled by a tall enough ladder, undermined by a deep enough tunnel, or breached by enough explosives. But if building a wall is the price of a rational, sensible, and humane immigration policy, then I’m all for it.

 

[stevil]

Well MMP is a re-write of our system of govt. I was just trying to think of election process solutions that dont require massive constitutional editing. Maine, for example, has already done RCV.

USA can keep its constitution, that's kind of ok.
They need to remove references to god from the declaration of independence, so that all people are included not just Christians.
They need to get rid of the electoral system so that gerrymandering and this shenanigans about an alternative slate of electors is done away with. Trump just wants the Republican electors to vote for him and to ignore the votes of the people.
They should do away with the second amendment. Firearms should be a privilege not a right.
They should do away with mid term elections, it causes gridlock.
They should make it easier for a party to change their leadership, A Party should get elected, not a president. If the party losses confidence in their leader they should be able to take an internal vote and oust the party leader (a.k.a the president) and replace them.
They should do away with the guideline on not indicting a sitting president.

The should go towards MMP.
That way the Republican party would fracture into several right wing parties. You would have the White power party, the Christian party, the White nationalist party, the far right party, the right moderate party. And when the votes of the people are added up, you'll see exactly what people want and the parties of significance can form a coalition. That way, people like MTG and Bobert are much less likely to get into government.

 

[variant]

I generally like compromise. When done well both sides can get something they really want and give up things they can live with. It requires actually talking to one another though and not simply wanting to win at all costs or demonizing one another.

The American political class has replaced compromise with zero sum incrementalism, where wins (no matter how small) are what is important and nothing is ever ceded to the "enemy" .

 

[mark46]

The American political class has replaced compromise with zero sum incrementalism, where wins (no matter how small) are what is important and nothing is ever ceded to the "enemy" .

I strongly disagree.

Much was accomplished through compromise during the presidencies of Clinton, Bush and Obama. And, certainly, much has been accomplished through compromise in the last 2+ years, THROUGH COMPROMISE.

Yes, the left and the right have gotten more and more extreme. HOWEVER, presidents from the vast middle can work with the opposition and can pass legislation. Biden may be left wing compared to Republicans, but he is president only because he is a centrist, on the right in the Democratic Party.

If ANY of the Republicans not named Trump or DiSantis is elected, there will be compromise, as there will be if Biden is re-elected.

 

[Hans Blaster]

USA can keep its constitution, that's kind of ok.

How generous of you.

They need to remove references to god from the declaration of independence, so that all people are included not just Christians.

Irrelevant. The Declaration of Independence has no legal power. It never set any structure for government or rights. It was merely a resolution declaring that the 13 colonies were independent states.

They need to get rid of the electoral system so that gerrymandering and this shenanigans about an alternative slate of electors is done away with. Trump just wants the Republican electors to vote for him and to ignore the votes of the people.

Gerrymandering has nothing to do with the electoral (college) system. "Alternative slates of electors" are not actually legal and criminal charges related to them are likely to happen eventually.

They should do away with the second amendment. Firearms should be a privilege not a right.

The 2ne amendment isn't the problem. People who can't read it are the problem. 18 states can block any amendment and there are definitely 18 to stop this proposal. It is a dead letter and not worth discussing. It also has nothing to do with the structure of government.

They should do away with mid term elections, it causes gridlock.

I thought you were letting us keep our constitution. The so-called "mid-term" elections are just Congressional elections that take place at the midpoint of a presidential term. (Frankly, I don't like the term.) One-third of the Senate and all of the House are elected every 2 years. "Mid-term" elections can't be done away with without some radical restructuring of the legislature of the United States.

They should make it easier for a party to change their leadership,

Parties can change their leaders anytime they want, and the often do. Most party leaders are relatively unknown. I forget who the Democrats' leader is right now. (The Republicans' leader is Ronna something or other.)

A Party should get elected, not a president.

O good grief, no.

If the party losses confidence in their leader they should be able to take an internal vote and oust the party leader (a.k.a the president) and replace them.

O good grief, no. I thought you thought the US Constitution was "kind of ok". Now you want to rip out the first two sections and replace it with some wretched parlimentary system?

They should do away with the guideline on not indicting a sitting president.

It's merely a guideline. Not much of a thing overall.

The should go towards MMP.

Why do you hate us so? With single member districts the reps at least nominally feel a need to represent the whole district. Multi-member districts makes everything about parties.

That way the Republican party would fracture into several right wing parties. You would have the White power party, the Christian party, the White nationalist party, the far right party, the right moderate party.

It's not as many different parties as you are making out.

And when the votes of the people are added up, you'll see exactly what people want and the parties of significance can form a coalition. That way, people like MTG and Bobert are much less likely to get into government.

I'm not sure how fragmenting parties helps prevent the election of extremists. MTG comes from a pretty conservative district, she's likely to get elected anyway. Boebert almost lost election anyway in a 2-party system.

 

[Pommer]

Let us revisit the Congressional Reapportionment Act of 1929 that permanently set the number of Representatives in the House at 435, when our population was 133,000,000?

Herding 1800 votes for this or that act would require real politicking and statesmanship; it would also open the field to new parties instead of this “my team good/your team bad” politics of the last 40 years.

Perhaps I should also explain that in addition to the 1800 congresspersons, and since the electoral college is tied to the number of congressional seats a state holds, the power to elect a President under an electoral college will be more equitably distributed, and it’ll become harder to succeed, breeding better politicians, serving constituents (not monied interests).