Anybody else wondering

[Renae]

Both parties are playing political games, that much is so. They believe that their vision is the right one? That's worth a belly laugh. They both believe that they can grab on to as much power as possible while trying to make the opposition look bad.

Neither party is driven by a "vision." They're driven by power and money.

You're a Libertarian. I hate to break it to you, but what do you think the leaders of the Libertarian party are driven by? Principle?

 

[Baralis]

What could have been accomplished if the President wasn't dealing with a bunch of people who are determined to make sure he is a one-term President?

Or for that matter, if Grover Norquist didn't have the collective balls of his pledge signers, hanging from his rearview mirror.

We probably would have increased the debt limit by now and continued the same old routine. In 10 years we would have been another several trillion in debt and the US would be worse off.

That said I have no faith in Washington from either side to give us any sort of serious reform and we will still end up in a financial calamity. As it stands we might save a little bit along the way but no enough to be meaningful.

 

[Dittohead not!]

You're a Libertarian. I hate to break it to you, but what do you think the leaders of the Libertarian party are driven by? Principle?

I lean libertarian in social issues. I don't belong to the Libertarian Party.

IMO, we'd be far better off without political parties of any sort.

 

[BDBoop]

I lean libertarian in social issues. I don't belong to the Libertarian Party.

IMO, we'd be far better off without political parties of any sort.

Actually, I started that thread a few hours back.

 

[Renae]

I lean libertarian in social issues. I don't belong to the Libertarian Party.

IMO, we'd be far better off without political parties of any sort.

And that... is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

 

[BDBoop]

And that... is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Why? Obviously, the two-party system is broken, and quite possibly said break is irrevocable. What's your solution?

 

[jgmotorsport]

And that... is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Parties just replicate political leanings. You don't think Republican you are classified Republican a
Republican=Moderate Convservative Economic ideas and Moderate Statist Social ideas.
Democrat=Libertarian social issues and moderately liberal economic views


When you claim a party you are claiming to a party you think is closest to representing you. Its really a farce because those candidates usually have to adhere to that parties guidlines as posted on their official documents or else they get the cold shoulder (see Ron Paul).

the 2 party system is a joke.

We are all independents and the oligopoly that REP and DEM have on us is ridiculous

 

[soccerboy22]

I lean libertarian in social issues. I don't belong to the Libertarian Party.

IMO, we'd be far better off without political parties of any sort.

Parties do serve a purpose, just ours are so wrong they have become basically useless.

 

[Renae]

Why? Obviously, the two-party system is broken, and quite possibly said break is irrevocable. What's your solution?

No parties? Just vote for the best individuals? It CANNOT Work. The only the wrong with the two party system is that voters are ****ing idiots.

 

[Fiddytree]

Boy, the defeatism in this thread is humorous. I'll keep the parties, and turn away ideas from incessant whiners.

 

[Kal'Stang]

No parties? Just vote for the best individuals? It CANNOT Work. The only the wrong with the two party system is that voters are ****ing idiots.

With no emotes it is hard to tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Please tell me you are being sarcastic here.......

 

[atrasicarius]

What could have been accomplished if the President wasn't dealing with a bunch of people who are determined to make sure he is a one-term President?

Or for that matter, if Grover Norquist didn't have the collective balls of his pledge signers, hanging from his rearview mirror.

We know what would happen. There were two years where the Democrats had a filibuster proof super majority against the Republicans. What happened?

 

[Renae]

With no emotes it is hard to tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Please tell me you are being sarcastic here.......

No I'm serious. The voters keep screwing it up. How many people voting can name anyone on the Supreme court, the three branches of government.. the bill of Rights? I bet most can tel you who was evicted from big brother, who what some worthless cast member from jersey shore had to say about some drama in their lives. But actually have a clue what the hell is going on in the country?

Nope.
(And that, btw is on both sides)

 

[Aunt Spiker]

What could have been accomplished if the President wasn't dealing with a bunch of people who are determined to make sure he is a one-term President?

Or for that matter, if Grover Norquist didn't have the collective balls of his pledge signers, hanging from his rearview mirror.

Obama seems determined to ensure that for himself with some of the decisions he's made - or not made . . . and some of the flip flops he's put on. He has a few snazzy, flashy pairs that are hard to ignore.

 

[atrasicarius]

No I'm serious. The voters keep screwing it up. How many people voting can name anyone on the Supreme court, the three branches of government.. the bill of Rights? I bet most can tel you who was evicted from big brother, who what some worthless cast member from jersey shore had to say about some drama in their lives. But actually have a clue what the hell is going on in the country?

Nope.
(And that, btw is on both sides)

I can't argue with that, man. I don't necessarily agree with the two party system, but the base of the problem, really the base of all our problems, is that the people in this country don't give two ****s about what happens to it.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Why? Obviously, the two-party system is broken, and quite possibly said break is irrevocable. What's your solution?

Well - first off we need to stop calling it a two-party system when it's not actually a two-party system.

The reason why it's dominated by the two is because everyone gives favor and preference to these two and all the others are ignored - completely. . . and dare mention you voted for a candidate from one of the other parties and you'll be accused of actually wasting your vote.

My wet dream is that the two completely lose favor and are no longer valued seeing as how they've dominated for so long and have RUINED everything - together.

 

[Renae]

Well - first off we need to stop calling it a two-party system when it's not actually a two-party system.

The reason why it's dominated by the two is because everyone gives favor and preference to these two and all the others are ignored - completely. . . and dare mention you voted for a candidate from one of the other parties and you'll be accused of actually wasting your vote.

My wet dream is that the two completely lose favor and are no longer valued seeing as how they've dominated for so long and have RUINED everything - together.

Right now, if you're voting outside of local political level... you DID waste a vote.

 

[Baralis]

And that... is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Can you imagine how it would change things. The voter would actually have to research candidates instead of voting across party lines. It would force people to become more involved *gasp!*.

 

[Ikari]

What could have been accomplished if the President wasn't dealing with a bunch of people who are determined to make sure he is a one-term President?

I often wonder what would be accomplished if the full of the government, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial did their jobs as prescribed by the Constitution and the spirit of the law instead of serving their corporate masters. It's not that Obama ain't a part of this whole problem, he certainly is. It's rotten, the whole of it.

 

[Ikari]

Right now, if you're voting outside of local political level... you DID waste a vote.

I love this. "Vote Republocrat or you waste your vote!" "Don't like the status quo? Well support the status quo or you waste your vote". What a waste of air. Keep it to yourself. My vote is my use of my power and my sovereignty which I bestow upon the government. I am NOT going to give it to a lesser of two evils. I am ONLY going to grant it to whom I believe best follows my political beliefs and who will do the best by the Republic.

Idiots trying to tell people what to do with their votes...piss off.

 

[Kal'Stang]

No I'm serious. The voters keep screwing it up. How many people voting can name anyone on the Supreme court, the three branches of government.. the bill of Rights? I bet most can tel you who was evicted from big brother, who what some worthless cast member from jersey shore had to say about some drama in their lives. But actually have a clue what the hell is going on in the country?

Nope.
(And that, btw is on both sides)

I was actually talking about getting rid of the party system. Not the idiocy of the voters en masse. I agree with you there. Now I do realize that it is the idiocy that makes people vote strictly for thier party of choice, which is why I favor getting rid of it. It would make people actually have to think and do research.

 

[Kal'Stang]

I love this. "Vote Republocrat or you waste your vote!" "Don't like the status quo? Well support the status quo or you waste your vote". What a waste of air. Keep it to yourself. My vote is my use of my power and my sovereignty which I bestow upon the government. I am NOT going to give it to a lesser of two evils. I am ONLY going to grant it to whom I believe best follows my political beliefs and who will do the best by the Republic.

Idiots trying to tell people what to do with their votes...piss off.

Currently it IS a waste when it comes to who gets elected. When's the last time you saw an Independent President? In fact can you name me a single President that wasn't a republican or democrat after the formation of those two parties?

 

[BDBoop]

Well - first off we need to stop calling it a two-party system when it's not actually a two-party system.

The reason why it's dominated by the two is because everyone gives favor and preference to these two and all the others are ignored - completely. . . and dare mention you voted for a candidate from one of the other parties and you'll be accused of actually wasting your vote.

My wet dream is that the two completely lose favor and are no longer valued seeing as how they've dominated for so long and have RUINED everything - together.

If all that's elected are R's or D's then it is, in reality, a two-party system. When the other parties have people elected on a regular basis, then your belief will stand.

 

[Tucker Case]

What could have been accomplished if the President wasn't dealing with a bunch of people who are determined to make sure he is a one-term President?

Nah. Almost all presidents end up dealing with a bunch of people who are determined to make sure they are one-term presidents.

Hell, one of the best presidents of all time was also the person most determined to make sure that he was a one-term president.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

If all that's elected are R's or D's then it is, in reality, a two-party system. When the other parties have people elected on a regular basis, then your belief will stand.

No see - they won't get elected until this belief is a more common and widely accepted one.

Most people would never dare consider voting other than the two - eventhough numerous people say they feel like they're voting for the lesser of the two evils. . . and no one ever seems thrilled with how congress handles anything.

:shrug:

People can change this rutt we're in if they really wanted to.