Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
ONE PARTY RULE
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatRobGuy" data-source="post: 75591352" data-attributes="member: 123415"><p>We technically have more than two, but how many are represented in House/Senate? Justin Amash was a Libertarian House Rep, and when Sanders runs for senate he does so as Independent, but identified as Democratic when running for president.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But even Canada and UK (much smaller nations than we are) even with similar voting systems, still have more diversity in their legislative branch than we do.</p><p></p><p>Canada:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]290522[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>UK:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]290523[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>US:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]290524[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>AV/Runoff is definitely a better system for having more diverse representation, however, as UK and Canada show, FPTP doesn't always have to equate to a total two-party monopoly at all levels of government.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The point I was touching on is that due to the fact that there's only two political parties (which means you end up sharing the baggage with everyone else who has the same letter after their name), something another person (who just happens to be on the same side of the bisecting line) does/says/etc... can impact another person from that same party 5 states away. Sort of an unfair "guilt by association" effect. Democrats lost seats in the house due to things democrats in other states were saying and pushing for. Republican governors (who may not share that much overlap with Trump & McConnell) get the brunt of voters who are out to spite-vote against anyone with an (R) after their name.</p><p></p><p>Even if there were 4 parties (FarLeft/CenterLeft/CenterRight/FarRight), that would at least allow moderates to distance themselves from the more extreme people who could end up sabotaging them and stirring up resentment against anyone who happens to exist under the same banner.</p><p></p><p>If there were a Center-Left party, Tulsi Gabbard wouldn't have to care what AOC said. If there were a Center-Right party, Charlie Baker wouldn't have to do damage control after Trump says something stupid.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatRobGuy, post: 75591352, member: 123415"] We technically have more than two, but how many are represented in House/Senate? Justin Amash was a Libertarian House Rep, and when Sanders runs for senate he does so as Independent, but identified as Democratic when running for president. But even Canada and UK (much smaller nations than we are) even with similar voting systems, still have more diversity in their legislative branch than we do. Canada: [ATTACH=full]290522[/ATTACH] UK: [ATTACH=full]290523[/ATTACH] US: [ATTACH=full]290524[/ATTACH] AV/Runoff is definitely a better system for having more diverse representation, however, as UK and Canada show, FPTP doesn't always have to equate to a total two-party monopoly at all levels of government. The point I was touching on is that due to the fact that there's only two political parties (which means you end up sharing the baggage with everyone else who has the same letter after their name), something another person (who just happens to be on the same side of the bisecting line) does/says/etc... can impact another person from that same party 5 states away. Sort of an unfair "guilt by association" effect. Democrats lost seats in the house due to things democrats in other states were saying and pushing for. Republican governors (who may not share that much overlap with Trump & McConnell) get the brunt of voters who are out to spite-vote against anyone with an (R) after their name. Even if there were 4 parties (FarLeft/CenterLeft/CenterRight/FarRight), that would at least allow moderates to distance themselves from the more extreme people who could end up sabotaging them and stirring up resentment against anyone who happens to exist under the same banner. If there were a Center-Left party, Tulsi Gabbard wouldn't have to care what AOC said. If there were a Center-Right party, Charlie Baker wouldn't have to do damage control after Trump says something stupid. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
ONE PARTY RULE
Top
Bottom