Leave A Comment

Subscribe
Notify of
25 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Adrian

so is this anti-democrats propaganda? I don’t get this debate!? Wasn’t there someone who said that “You’re Un-American if you don’t vote Republicans”? So you DON’t get a democratic choice??? So what you’re basically saying is that you’re against Democracy???

Anonymoose

That’s the point, really. You force the two party system into such a binary that a third party can’t ever exist again – then you use this binary to force as many people as possible into one of the two camps, even though there’s no way anyone wholly agrees with every part of what “their” party is doing. Once you have everyone in separate camps of vaguely equal size, you grab ahold of the most spineless, ignorant, fearful, and angry of the group and really rub them raw, get them talking and irritated. This will finally have both sides forgetting… Read more »

The Matrix: Rebooted

This is a basic game theory problem. Mathematically speaking, any voting system with “first past the post” winner criteria will eventually converge on a binary opposition of nearly equal size. Preferential voting or proportional voting give stronger results to diverse parties and candidates because there’s no such thing as a “wasted” voted under those systems.

Reaver

Parties are just an excuse to mindlessly cast your ballet

Korinthian

It’s better if you don’t try to understand these crazy people.

Anonymoose

* I should have just went with that.

Adrian

nope. I’m glad somebody else sees the deeper issue at hand.

Alec Dalek

I guess this means republicans are commies. That have been since 2000.

przxqgl

the united states has never been a proper “democracy“. it has always been a lot more of a “republic” (the phrase “and to the republic for which it stands” should be a hint)…

gor

Another hint is the U.S. Constitution. Article 4, Section 4 to be exact.

GrandAdmiralThrawn

except we’ve fucked it up and made it two democratic. Senator’s should be appointed by the respective States, not elected by the masses.

Oriahna

always been curious why its democrats and republicans…
i mean its a democratic country right? so the democrat part makes sense
why republicans? its not a republic country.

/if i have just commited some grave stupidity then please don’t say anything mean

outlanderssc

Its not stupid – the Democrats want a Democracy (everyone has an equal vote) the Republicans want a Republic (a small group – the wealthy and successful, control the government) Back in the colonial days, the wealthy didn’t think the average citizen was bright enough to be involved in government, so some elites like James Madison developed the concept of “representative democracy” so that the fortunate could maintain a power base and still claim that we have “government by the people”. Today, the majority of Senators and Congressmen are millionaires, many are multi-millionaires. In modern times, the Republicans want to… Read more »

GrandAdmiralThrawn

You realize you are totally and completely wrong? Matrix covers it in his post. Thanks

outlanderssc

Sorry, no -as I said it might be oversimplified but we don’t really have space here for a 200 page treatise on the history of politics. Are you saying that most Congressmen and Senators are not millionaires? That Republicans didn’t press for tax cuts for the upper class? That they aren’t now pushing for cuts to welfare and Medicare? That James Madison didn’t develop the concept of “representative democracy”?
Methinks it is you that are wrong.
Thanks

The Matrix: Rebooted

The names are historical. The Democrats started out as the Democratic-Republicans back in Jefferson’s times, when their opposition was the Federalists and later the Whigs and the Know-Nothing Party. Gradually the dropped the “Republican” part of the name, because it was just too long. The modern Republican party doesn’t show up until Lincoln, where the name emphasized remaining unified as a Republic, in contrast to the Confederates who try to divide and form their own government. Neither name as anything to do with their current political views.

przxqgl

abraham lincoln was a whig, not a “republican”…

The Matrix: Rebooted

Try reading your own link.
Whig (1832–1854)
Republican (1854–1865)
Also the article has a whole section title “Redefining Republicanism” that goes into detail about what I said in the last post.

outlanderssc

The Republican party was a combination of the Whig party, the Free soil party plus anti-slavery activists. Lincoln was a Whig so he went with the new party as it was anti-slavery. But today, with Republican Presidential candidates calling for secession and Virginia Governor McDonnell calling the Civil War “a noble fight for independence against the power of the dreaded Union Army” I doubt the Republican party of today would support a candidate like Lincoln for president. Lincoln felt that the Federal government had a “sovereign right” over individual states – how many Republicans today support that view?

DMYTRIW WDS

Containment? Like in concentration camps? Keep staying classy GOPers.

gor

Well, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Democrat) didn’t have a problem with “containment” when he put Japanese-Americans into “Interment Camps” via Executive Order 9066. That was real classy.

DMYTRIW WDS

And it totally won us the war. Booyah.

gor

Yeah, it was the locking up of innocent woman and children that won the war. It had nothing to do with actually fighting the Imperial Armed Forces of Japan.

Just like a liberal, when someone they don’t like does something they don’t like it’s evil, but when on of their own does it, it’s great!

nyoki

And we’re trying to make amends for that…as we should.

KommissarKvC

i think all the smaller parties should ally to forge a realistic 3rd party, and rally against the binary democrat vs republican system