If there were a viable 3rd party to form, do you think it would be in the center and draw rinos/dinos (for lack of better description) or to the right of pre Trump GOP (again for lack of better phrase)?
Our system of win by 1 vote and get 100% of leadership combined with simple majority on virtually everything, is the formula for failure imo.
Right between Republicans and Democrats. You could choose between 49.9, 50, and 50.1, instead of just between 49.9 and 50.1.
There is no incentive for compromise.
1 Like
My intention wasn’t to argue that such a change might be good or that making such. change would be impossible. However, it would be a structural change in the most fundamental part of our federal government. That said, my basic argument is that our system is fundamentally inadequate.
America has always been a divided country. The problem is that it is becoming a divided country intent on unifying.
1 Like
Yes! Supposed to be, oh, about 50 choices…but choices are hard…so we want to be like the other mega countries.
It’s a good question. Ross Perot was the last and probably most relevant example and he was a centrist IIRC. Ross got about 20 million votes, but no electoral college votes.
That’s a hard question. My brain says pick off the moderates who don’t like either fringe and can’t seem to find anyone to listen to them in govt. My gut says some mouth breather is going to be the one to start the fringe collective.
I agree as far as 3rd parties are concerned. As far as this… I dunno. I think alternatives have drawbacks as well.
Gotcha. Agree on the structural overhaul.
That’s one way to look at it. I suppose I would say that we’re a divided country with no desire to compromise and not enough civility left to figure other people may hold different views without being enemies.
As an individual or small group you are probably right, in most cases(Ruby Ridge, Waco). If a large segment of society refuse to capitulate, and have the weapons then they have a viable option. Its the basis of the American constitution, and the founding of America’s independence.
To me, this is exactly it.
The binary system already forces you to compromise within your party. But going to simple majority law making does not require any crossover appeal. Not sure how day to day mechanics would work for chairmanships, but bill writing would look different at 60% to pass.
None of that is really new. What’s new is that we’re beginning to desire that there be an answer. Freedom of religion, for example is not about compromise. It’s just acknowledging that we don’t need to compromise. We can all worship God as we please and it isn’t a problem.
But if the government is going to pay for health care, now you have to decide if the government is paying for abortions and birth control and blood transfusions. And now you have to find a compromise.
It’s not that we are worse at compromising than past people. We are just creating more situations where we have to agree instead of just agreeing to disagree.
3 Likes
How do you think the Communist countries became communist? They all weren’t perfect before, but at least they didn’t practice large scale arrests and extermination of their citizens, after they disarmed them.
Canada, Australia and Western Europe, lets deal with them. All these countries are becoming less free, than in the past, for various complicated reasons. But globalism, mass immigration, and multiculturalism, seem to be at the heart of the matter, all at the expense of the native populations. This has been happening despite all these countries being democracies, the people have never been asked to put it to a vote whether they want these changes or not. As time marches on and the native populations start to become a minority in their own country they lose the political ability to assert themselves in a democracy.
In Australia, we have effectively been disarmed. Gun ownership is extremely restrictive, and limited compared with how things used to be before the Port Arthur massacre, of 1996. Gun crime did not go down. Why? Because organised crime doesn’t give up their weapons and have the ability to clandestinely import weapons, or manufacture weapons. Gun crime in general was never bad, except for a few examples like Port Arthur, or the occasional gangland murder(that still go on now despite gun bans).
Canada has what I consider to be much more reasonable gun laws. You can still own all the good stuff, but you have limited magazine capacity, registration for semi auto, military calibre weapons, strict storage and transport laws. Its a better balance between personal rights and public safety.
Politically Canada is in a fucked up State. Trudeau is unashamedly Globalist, like his father before him. Immigration, especially from mainland communist China, is huge. Whether its residency or citizenship many of these immigrants have strong connections to China, and they infiltrate local politics and other spheres of influence, donate to political parties. Trudeau has entered a treaty with China, to have thousands of troops stationed in Canada.(how does that in any way benefit Canadians?).
The same Chinese communist party influence happens in Australia. A few years ago our chief of intellegence organization(spying and national security ASIO), was found to have married a chinese spy. China has donated money to politicians and political parties( Senator Sam Dastyari).
The port of Darwin was leased to the Chinese government for 99 years despite opposition and advice from our ally, the USA. Victorian premier Daniel Andrews has entered unilateral business deals with China against the advice from the federal government.
Australia is so reliant on China for exporting our raw materials. We are like drug addicts dependent upon trade money. Our politicians of both major parties have progressively destroyed our manufacturing industries, so that now they barely exist. Even our military uniforms are made in China.
Our tertiary education sector(I think our 3rd largest industry) is almost totally reliant on money from Chinese foreign students. Chinese students dominate the university politics, due to numbers and apathy from locals, this leads to pro China political support on university policies.
On to Europe. Most European countries, at least those in the EU are in just a bad a state as any other western democracy. EU is just another globalist, pro mass immigration of incompatible 3rd worlders. No one in any of these western countries gets a say, as all major parties are for globalism.
There are objective measures like the restriction of laws on freedom to own weapons, to do and say things, express your political views. They can’t be argued, these are factual changes. I have seen a lot of changes over my lifetime, nearly all negatives for freedom in the long term. The youth of today just think its always been like it is, so they automatically accept the way things are today as normal and tolerable.
Western democracies (expect the USA) have lots of implied rights like freedom of speech, freedom to defend yourself, freedom of religion. People have historically equated these implied rights with an actual bill of rights.
If you look closely enough these implied rights don’t exist under law, its just that we have had relatively benevolent leaders for the last 2 centuries, that haven’t abused them. Make no mistake we don’t have many if any real rights. They are all privileges that can be taken away by the ruling party of the day, or temporarily suspended because of a trumped up emergency that becomes never ending(egcovid, or the threat of terrorism)
Then you have more subjective landmarks. Like CCTV surveillance, data collection of private information, gps tracking in phones, govt ability to listen in or use web cams remotely if they choose too.
I’ve heard the argument if you have nothing to hide, then why should you be concerned.
It doesn’t hold up in a free society, it never has, nor will it ever be in the future.
The ability to make jokes that someone might find offensive. It falls under freedom of speech. Whilst most countries don’t have actual legislation that criminalises offensive humour(UK saw fit to do so with the Nazi pug guy, Count Dankula), a comedian that makes a joke that doesn’t pass the PC jury, is basically cancelled from getting a venue.
Express a traditional Christian view, such as saying the bible expresses that homosexuality is a sin. That’s now hate speech rather than one of many perspectives that is tolerated in a modern community.
I think I catch your drift, nudge nudge, wink wink:)
1 Like
It’s about toleration.
It’s about toleration. I tolerate your religious beliefs. You tolerate my beliefs. That is now compromise.
Globalism was much better when we called it colonization.
1 Like
No, that is tolerance. Compromise is when I get taxed to pay for an abortion that I think is murder. But that compromise is only necessary when we go down the path of government paying for healthcare at all.
3 Likes
Are you aboriginal Australian?