EPTLast week when I last visited this thread we were having a nice conversation about the pro and cons of the establishment of the US space force, or the various alternative renewable energies and their viability in USA and nuclear physics and the operation of nuclear reactors, when it was hijacked to this yet again. And so instead of catching up to an interesting discussion, I find that I am reading GH vs the democrats yet again for the entire week. A week of this! 5 pages of this! It's ridiculous.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1974
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Last week when I last visited this thread we were having a nice conversation about the pro and cons of the establishment of the US space force, or the various alternative renewable energies and their viability in USA and nuclear physics and the operation of nuclear reactors, when it was hijacked to this yet again. And so instead of catching up to an interesting discussion, I find that I am reading GH vs the democrats yet again for the entire week. A week of this! 5 pages of this! It's ridiculous. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24341 Posts
On December 31 2019 22:21 Dangermousecatdog wrote: No, just as people are tired of a certain poster spamming unelectable, unelectable, unelectable, or y'all on the right, over and over again, people are just tired of your spamming of democrats are evil, the institution is against the man, Obama is the worse thing ever, over and over again. Perhaps you need your eyes checked? I don't post those things lol Last week when I last visited this thread we were having a nice conversation about the pro and cons of the establishment of the US space force You were talking about the pros of Trump's space force and you're upset that was interrupted? okay... | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28892 Posts
| ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5299 Posts
question is: would we have republics and/or liberal democracies without the abolition of monarchies and feudalism, without the revolution of the frenches?. answer is: i don't know, no one can know, it's speculation. real question is: but are you glad it happened?. and right there and then, you'll see them start bickering about its methods, excesses, collateral damage, its costs and what not, but no self-respecting human being can deny that in the end, it, the revolution, was necessary and useful. tldr: they'll never deny the need for your existence but always quarrel over your methods. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22566 Posts
On December 31 2019 23:54 JimmiC wrote: That room doesn't go anywhere in a FPTP system that will naturally pull hard to a 2 party system. If there is a big enough voting block in the center to threaten both Democrats and Republicans it might pull both back closer to the center but I find that highly doubtful, especially on the Republican side based on the rise of the tea party and Trumps election.Perhaps it could usher in a third party which I think would be good for the US. There is members of the Dems and Reps that are closer to each other than the person who could end up leading their party. If each party pulls to its respective side there could be an opening for a new party in the middle. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12533 Posts
On December 31 2019 23:54 JimmiC wrote: Perhaps it could usher in a third party which I think would be good for the US. There is members of the Dems and Reps that are closer to each other than the person who could end up leading their party. If each party pulls to its respective side there could be an opening for a new party in the middle. That would be a very good thing imo. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28892 Posts
I would not be surprised if several other european countries followed a similar path, although I haven't studied that, at all. Anyway, for people, like me, who think FPTP comes with some intrinsic detriment for the political situation, it's something to consider. But it does kinda seem like theres a catch 22 in there, where third parties need no FPTP to be viable, yet ruling parties will only consider abandoning FPTP if there already is a viable third party. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12533 Posts
On December 31 2019 18:22 Biff The Understudy wrote: I consider that left wing is what pushes a country to the left. Obama was left wing because his social programs, vision of society and reforms pushed America firmly to the left. And that's what I believe is needed. Politics does not function in absolute terms imo. My ideal society is closer to the scandinavian model than anything in the democratic agenda, but I am a pragmatist and like to spend time on what is possible. I'm also convinced that if you had given Obama complete free reigns to do absolutely what he wanted, you would have ended with a european style, social democratic country. But that was never remotely on the cards, and already, Obamacare or the financial reform were huge accomplishments in the right direction. I don't know that this vision can really hold because in this case we're always treating leftwing as a comparison. Obama is pushing the country to the left, okay, so Hillary Clinton is to the right of him, does that make her rightwing? But then again she's to the left of Trump, does that make her leftwing? If both of the candidates that are poised to succeed him are more rightwing than him, can we say that Obama has failed in pushing the country leftwing? We can also wonder if it was Obama's goal to push the country leftwing; if you're right that he is a social democrat, then definitely that was his goal. But if GH and I are right that he's a liberal, then there's no reason that he should want that, as liberalism doesn't have "moving the country to the left" as one of its goals, they have the status quo and even arguably the opposite goal, as it's much more comfortable for them to have a conservative opposition than a leftist opposition based on their ideology. Should this sort of analysis of ideology and intentions be included in the analysis? | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On January 01 2020 00:16 Liquid`Drone wrote: Norway moved from FPTP because the two dominant parties (liberals vs conservatives) saw an emerging third party (labor) get so much support that the ruling parties were afraid the newcomers could end up completely dominating a FPTP system. I would not be surprised if several other european countries followed a similar path, although I haven't studied that, at all. Anyway, for people, like me, who think FPTP comes with some intrinsic detriment for the political situation, it's something to consider. But it does kinda seem like theres a catch 22 in there, where third parties need no FPTP to be viable, yet ruling parties will only consider abandoning FPTP if there already is a viable third party. Pretty sure if a 3rd party grows it would only dig in the fptp in America. If the green party got bigger it splits the vote from Democrats empowering Republicans who wouldn't mind the result and probably like to keep it that way. I suppose of a new 3rd party had wide appeal and would evenly take votes from both parties it would pressure them. That seems hard to predict because broad appeal doesn't seem possible in America with people consuming very contradictory information on what's going on. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Sent.
Poland9331 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24341 Posts
Presumably it's Biden (maybe Buttigieg as the AOC) since his floating the idea of having a Republican VP sparked it? | ||
|
Blitzkrieg0
United States13132 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On January 01 2020 01:57 GreenHorizons wrote: I figure Trump and Sanders/AOC are the figureheads of the right and (US) left respectively in this framing, what politician/s best represent/s this centrist party being theorized? Presumably it's Biden (maybe Buttigieg as the AOC) since his floating the idea of having a Republican VP sparked it? Bloomberg | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22566 Posts
On January 01 2020 01:59 Blitzkrieg0 wrote: The easiest Trump victory ever because Bernie would take votes from the Democrats and even if together they would get above 50% neither of them would be bigger then the Republicans.How does America look running up to the 2020 election if Bernie ran as labor party instead of a democrat? There are good reasons for why Bernie, an Independent candidate for his Senate seat, is trying to run as a Democrat. Aside from funding and a (D) next to his name and the automatic voters that brings, trying to run as a 3e party candidate in the US doesn't make 'your' side more likely to win. It merely makes it easier for the other side to win. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24341 Posts
If Musk was eligible I could totally see a Bloomberg-Musk party happening. As Gors points out though third party splits votes. Anyone to the left of the Republican primary candidates of 2016 pulls more from Democrats than Republicans and leaves you with two parties economically to the right of where Democrats are (and heading) now. Rather than a centrist party emerging the far more likely scenario imo is that centrists are forced to choose a side or be left complaining from the sidelines. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22566 Posts
On January 01 2020 03:06 JimmiC wrote: Ofcourse, any discussion about American politics has to account for the state of politics in America. Which is very tribal. The major media organisations are all owned by big time political donors of either party who use their networks to push their agenda. Its hard for things not to turn tribal in those circumstances.Probably but it really depends on how many center reps would swap to dems if the left part of the dems left. we have 6 parties and a first to the post system and 3 are real threats, but two dominate it. I do think it would be hard for many reps to vote Dem just because it seems more like Tribalism, supporting your team in sports whether they are good or bad, than voting with their ideals in mind. I bet a lot of it is how the media has even been turned into team Dem and Team rep. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
