Is the US political system a model for other countries?

[TU Curmudgeon]

Your hypothetical assumes an electoral system different than the one we have.

Nope, all it "assumes" is more than two parties being allowed to participate in the electoral system in a meaningful manner.

The situation where I choose to live is that

• each political party had contests in each electoral district to choose the nominee for that political party (a primary)
• each political party uses its own rules to determine eligibility to vote in the choosing of that nominee (a primary election)
• each political party's nominee tells the voters who they are, what they have done, what their party intends to do (a party platform), and why the voters should vote for them and not for the other nominees (an election campaign)
• using consistent eligibility rules, the residents of each electoral district vote for the candidate of their choice (an election) and do so under consistent rules for the conduct of that voting,
• the elected candidate then goes off to the seat of the central government and works to implement the party platform the said they supported while running for election.

(the bits in red are the only essential differences between "the Canadian electoral system" and "the American electoral system).

 

[Big Brother]

No. Your pissing contest doesn't interest me because while you're only interested in the symptom, I'm interested in the cause.

Nice rant.

As Johnnie Mac once said "You cannot be serious!" You are convinced Clarence Thomas is behind all the corruption in the government, because he accepted some gifts? Is he the Supreme Court or are there another 8 justices? Let me guess, only the justices confirmed by the right are corrupt. No left leaning SC judge would ever let a rich person even pick up the tab at a hamburger joint. How can you fixate on something so small like the gifts to Thomas and completely ignore how much money flows through every friggin' democrat politician today, including the POTUS? How can you ignore Joe Biden's past? Let me guess, he's squeeky clean. As usual, you will have nothing to say except "Nice Rant." Or some other stupid troll response.

 

[anatta]

Really, Canada is next door, do tons of Canadians cross the border to immigrate to the US?

nothing to do with my post.

 

[anatta]

Bill of Rights in the Constituition is invaluable

 

[Perotista]

You're missing the point because you're getting hung up on labels. The names don't matter with regards to how our electoral system actually works.

Here's why we're a two party country:

Duverger's law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yes, I do get hung up on labels when they’re a lie. As for our two-party system, you can take that all the back to Jefferson and Hamilton. Federalist vs. anti-federalist. Industry vs. Agriculture. North vs. South federal power vs. state power, etc. But at no point in our long history has those who don’t affiliate with either party been so high as to a percentage of the electorate. I think both major parties should be asking why? Why are they shrinking and independents growing? From 30% in 2006 to 44% today if Gallup is to be believed.

Even so, we still have only two realistic choices which are chosen by less than half of all Americans. That isn’t going to change, I realize that. I do however, see independents continue to grow as a percentage of the electorate as both party’s drift further left and further right giving those in the middle, the more moderate, those who are more pragmatic and not ideologues leave both major parties for hope somewhere else. Will that ever be realized, I don’t think so. So, what we can do, those non-affiliated, those less to non-partisans swing voters, those more pragmatic and not ideologues is to vote one party in one election and out the next. This is basically what we have done since 2006.

Nominating again, two unwanted and disliked candidates for the presidency for 2024 only will enhance the shrinkage of the two major parties in my opinion, the growth of independents. But the power will always lie with the two major parties as they write our election laws to keep any viable third party from rising. By two unwanted candidates, I mean 55% of all Americans don’t want Biden to run again, 54% of all Americans don’t want Trump to run again either. Questions 21 and 22. Most Americans are being totally ignored by the two major parties. Hence, the continued growth of independents as the number of Americans who tell both major parties to stick it where the sun don’t shine, increases.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/1el6dff3an/econTabReport.pdf

 

[Yes_Minister]

nothing to do with my post.

Sure it is, you said the US takes immigrants from all over the world, but how many are from other Western Democracies? How many countries want to copy the Electrical College or Gerrymandering or any other unique aspects of the US system?

 

[anatta]

Sure it is, you said the US takes immigrants from all over the world, but how many are from other Western Democracies? How many countries want to copy the Electrical College or Gerrymandering or any other unique aspects of the US system?

because we are getting the dregs of the world. There are a few rich Chinese (lots of currency) coming but the vast majority are not fleeing persecution (asylum claim) they are coming for the money.
The US is a unique ssytem of checks and balances because the feds and states are co-equal and both sovereign.

It's not so much the style of government , it's the written Bill of Rights that is what makes the US Constitution invaluable

 

[post]

The goverment should reflect the people and their culture and mannerisms. Everyone is different. There's no one-size-fits-all goverment.

= American exceptionalism and all of the avoidable misery resulting from it....

There are best practices... vs malgovernance



Gun ownership ......2018 Gun deaths per 100,000 ....... 4 year college degrees ......incarceration per 100,000 pop.
Wyoming 66.2% ...........................17.5 .......................................................... 29.2% ............................. 850
Alaska 64.5% ...................... ..........23.0.............................................................32,8% ....... .......................718
Idaho 60.1% ..................................14.6............................................................. 30.7% .............................. 761
West Virginia 58.5% ............17.5 ........................................ 24.1% .................... 731
Arkansas 57.2% ......................17.7 ....................................... 25.3% .................... 942
Alabama 55.5% ..................... 21.4 ....................................... 27.4% .................... 938
Oklahoma 54.7% ................... 19.6 ....................................... 27.9% .................... 993
Louisiana 53.1% .................... 21.2 ....................................... 26.4% .................... 1,094
Georgia 49.2% .................................. 14.9 ........................................................ 34.7% ............................. 968
Florida 35.3% .................................... 12.6 ......................................................... 33.2% ............................. 795
Illinois 27.8% ......................... 11.6 ........................................ 37.1% ................... 497
Connecticut 23.6% ......................... 4.6 ........................................................... 42.1% ............................. 394
New York 19.9% ................... 4.4 .......................................... 39.9% .................... 376
New Jersey 14.7% .....................,..... 5.5.............................................................. 43.1% ........................... 341
Massachusetts 14.7% .................. 4.4 ............................................................... 46.6% ........................... 275

Maximum-security prison in Walpole to close as incarceration rates drop

The Massachusetts Department of Correction announced Thursday it is closing down MC-Cedar Junction, the maximum-security prison in Walpole.

www.boston.com

April 7, 2022

The Fed - Distribution: Distribution of Household Wealth in the U.S. since 1989

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

federalreserve.gov

 

[Big Brother]

...snip

By two unwanted candidates, I mean 55% of all Americans don’t want Biden to run again, 54% of all Americans don’t want Trump to run again either. Questions 21 and 22. Most Americans are being totally ignored by the two major parties. Hence, the continued growth of independents as the number of Americans who tell both major parties to stick it where the sun don’t shine, increases.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/1el6dff3an/econTabReport.pdf

I don't think most people remember that Trump was the "stick it where the sun don't shine" candidate in 2016. I think a lot of people also don't remember at first how much the republican establishment abandoned Trump and actually helped the left demonize him much more than he actually deserved. I think this will continue to happen with any establishment outsider, no matter how liked they are. If Obama could run as an Independent today, the right AND the left would crucify him mercilessly if he were to win. As George Carlin rightly said: "It's a big club, and we ain't in it."

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Bill of Rights in the Constituition is invaluable

You do realize that "The American Bill of Rights" was NOT an original concept and, in fact, was pretty much poached from the English Bill of Rights of 1689 (with necessary changes due to the fact that America had no hereditary nobility) don't you?

You do realize that one of the things that the Founding Fathers claimed they were doing was "fighting for the rights of Englishmen", don't you?

 

[mrjurrs]

It could be, but the other country would make changes to it before it was implemented.

 

[anatta]

You do realize that "The American Bill of Rights" was NOT an original concept and, in fact, was pretty much poached from the English Bill of Rights of 1689 (with necessary changes due to the fact that America had no hereditary nobility) don't you?

You do realize that one of the things that the Founding Fathers claimed they were doing was "fighting for the rights of Englishmen", don't you?

so what? a lot of our law comes from English common law,, the difference is it's codified in the USA

 

[Cardinal]

As Johnnie Mac once said "You cannot be serious!" You are convinced Clarence Thomas is behind all the corruption in the government, because he accepted some gifts? Is he the Supreme Court or are there another 8 justices? Let me guess, only the justices confirmed by the right are corrupt. No left leaning SC judge would ever let a rich person even pick up the tab at a hamburger joint. How can you fixate on something so small like the gifts to Thomas and completely ignore how much money flows through every friggin' democrat politician today, including the POTUS? How can you ignore Joe Biden's past? Let me guess, he's squeeky clean. As usual, you will have nothing to say except "Nice Rant." Or some other stupid troll response.

If not for Citizens United, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

so what? a lot of our law comes from English common law,, the difference is it's codified in the USA

One of the really neat things about "black letter law" is that it is very easy to argue "But the words don't say that." in opposition to the position "What the law was intended to do is ...".

In fact, if you have really competent legal draftsmen working for you, you can craft law that make whatever you want to do compulsory, totally forbid whatever you don't want to do, AND allow you to swap positions repeatedly depending on the situation.

Fortunately the US government doesn't have any of those. In fact, there are days when I suspect that the US government doesn't have legislative draftsmen who are competent to actually draft laws that actually do do what they were intended to do.

 

[Perotista]

I don't think most people remember that Trump was the "stick it where the sun don't shine" candidate in 2016. I think a lot of people also don't remember at first how much the republican establishment abandoned Trump and actually helped the left demonize him much more than he actually deserved. I think this will continue to happen with any establishment outsider, no matter how liked they are. If Obama could run as an Independent today, the right AND the left would crucify him mercilessly if he were to win. As George Carlin rightly said: "It's a big club, and we ain't in it."

2016 was interesting as below shows.

One in Four Americans Dislike Both Presidential Candidates

One in Four Americans Dislike Both Presidential Candidates

In the U.S., one in four view Trump and Clinton unfavorably, much higher than the percentage who disliked both candidates in 2012 or 2008. But this doesn't mean turnout will be low or a third-party candidate will be successful.

news.gallup.com

Interesting on Hillary Clinton 38% of all Americans view her favorably or positive while 56% unfavorable/negatively. Trump, it was 36% positive/favorable, 60% unfavorable/negatively. Another election where the major parties gave all Americans a choice they didn't want.

 

[Cardinal]

Yes, I do get hung up on labels when they’re a lie. As for our two-party system, you can take that all the back to Jefferson and Hamilton. Federalist vs. anti-federalist. Industry vs. Agriculture. North vs. South federal power vs. state power, etc. But at no point in our long history has those who don’t affiliate with either party been so high as to a percentage of the electorate. I think both major parties should be asking why? Why are they shrinking and independents growing? From 30% in 2006 to 44% today if Gallup is to be believed.

Even so, we still have only two realistic choices which are chosen by less than half of all Americans. That isn’t going to change, I realize that. I do however, see independents continue to grow as a percentage of the electorate as both party’s drift further left and further right giving those in the middle, the more moderate, those who are more pragmatic and not ideologues leave both major parties for hope somewhere else. Will that ever be realized, I don’t think so. So, what we can do, those non-affiliated, those less to non-partisans swing voters, those more pragmatic and not ideologues is to vote one party in one election and out the next. This is basically what we have done since 2006.

Nominating again, two unwanted and disliked candidates for the presidency for 2024 only will enhance the shrinkage of the two major parties in my opinion, the growth of independents. But the power will always lie with the two major parties as they write our election laws to keep any viable third party from rising. By two unwanted candidates, I mean 55% of all Americans don’t want Biden to run again, 54% of all Americans don’t want Trump to run again either. Questions 21 and 22. Most Americans are being totally ignored by the two major parties. Hence, the continued growth of independents as the number of Americans who tell both major parties to stick it where the sun don’t shine, increases.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/1el6dff3an/econTabReport.pdf

And what do those Independents believe in?

Unfortunately, the answer to that question requires something about policy, which if I understand from past conversations with you correctly, you don't like to talk about.

I'm not trying to be rude, Perotista, but from my point of view it doesn't seem like you believe in anything. Nothing concrete, at least.

 

[anatta]

One of the really neat things about "black letter law" is that it is very easy to argue "But the words don't say that." in opposition to the position "What the law was intended to do is ...".

In fact, if you have really competent legal draftsmen working for you, you can craft law that make whatever you want to do compulsory, totally forbid whatever you don't want to do, AND allow you to swap positions repeatedly depending on the situation.

Fortunately the US government doesn't have any of those. In fact, there are days when I suspect that the US government doesn't have legislative draftsmen who are competent to actually draft laws that actually do do what they were intended to do.

I think it's more about the ABC administrative state run wild - since Congress delegates the power to enforce to them

 

[noonereal]

America should be learning lessons from Canada, and most all of the Nordic countries. They have what most people say are the best run governments in the world. They concentrate on issues that affect their populations quality of life, like healthcare, transport, employment, infrastructure, etc. They have an easy tax system, little confusion. We could learn a ton from them. I'd say they're the model governments of the world right now.

We don't have the same luxuries as do Nordic countries.
We are tasked with world leadership which umbrellas them and contributes to their enhanced cultures.

 

[Big Brother]

If not for Citizens United, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Again, your beef seems to be with one specific supreme court ruling, and based on one ruling you extrapolate to absurdity. Yes, Citizens United was a bad ruling, but that didn't stop the democrats from using it to great effect. Right? Another question for you to avoid at all costs. Here's another question to avoid: Would you support a republican bill to get all big money out of politics completely and forever, that went all the way through the Supreme Court, overturning Citizens United, even if the democrats universally opposed it? I bet you would find a reason to side with the democrats to continue the use of Big Money to fund the democrat agenda. But if the democrats proposed the exact same bill you would be all for it.

 

[Cardinal]

Again, your beef seems to be with one specific supreme court ruling,

If you don't like big money in politics then you should have a beef with it too.

and based on one ruling you extrapolate to absurdity. Yes, Citizens United was a bad ruling, but that didn't stop the democrats from using it to great effect. Right?

The question is: do you want big money in politics or don't you?

Another question for you to avoid at all costs. Here's another question to avoid: Would you support a republican bill to get all big money out of politics completely and forever, that went all the way through the Supreme Court, overturning Citizens United,

Of course, but Republicans wouldn't do that.

even if the democrats universally opposed it?

They wouldn't oppose it.

I bet you would find a reason to side with the democrats to continue the use of Big Money to fund the democrat agenda. But if the democrats proposed the exact same bill you would be all for it.

You assume that because you're cynical then I must be too. Don't project your beliefs onto me.

 

[Big Brother]

2016 was interesting as below shows.

One in Four Americans Dislike Both Presidential Candidates

One in Four Americans Dislike Both Presidential Candidates

In the U.S., one in four view Trump and Clinton unfavorably, much higher than the percentage who disliked both candidates in 2012 or 2008. But this doesn't mean turnout will be low or a third-party candidate will be successful.

news.gallup.com

Interesting on Hillary Clinton 38% of all Americans view her favorably or positive while 56% unfavorable/negatively. Trump, it was 36% positive/favorable, 60% unfavorable/negatively. Another election where the major parties gave all Americans a choice they didn't want.

But Trump was the FU vote against the establishment, they could have just as easily put in Britney Spears or Howard Stern. Clinton was considered the serious candidate. As I see it, 2016 was a vote for establishment vs anti-establishment and the people said FU to the establishment. 2020 was the establishment saying FU to the people. And 2021-current is pure retribution.

 

[Big Brother]

The question is: do you want big money in politics or don't you?

Of course, but Republicans wouldn't do that.

They wouldn't oppose it.

You assume that because you're cynical then I must be too. Don't project your beliefs onto me.

I would love nothing more than big money out of politics and both current parties out of politics. Yes, democrats would fight it tooth and nail because they benefit the most from it at the moment.

 

[Perotista]

And what do those Independents believe in?

Unfortunately, the answer to that question requires something about policy, which if I understand from past conversations with you correctly, you don't like to talk about.

I'm not trying to be rude, Perotista, but from my point of view it doesn't seem like you believe in anything. Nothing concrete, at least.

My research into independents has revealed that they aren’t this monolithic group of moderates somewhere in-between ideological wise between the GOP and Democrats. What I found is they tend to support the Republicans on some issues, oppose them on others, same with the Democrats, support them on some, oppose them on others. They’re a mixed bag. I suppose one could say since independents tends to go one issue at a time. That they don’t have any hard feelings one way or the other isn’t true. They don’t fall into line on every issue that the two major party’s membership do with their party.

An independent may be pro-choice and pro-2nd amendment at the same time with fails the litmus test of both major parties. They may support the democrats on health care but oppose them on immigration and so on. Most don’t fall into this all or nothing group that both major parties think one should. Abortion for example, most independents classify themselves as pro-choice. But believe abortion should be legal during the first trimester for any reason or under any circumstance, but illegal after that with the exception for rape, incest and the life of the mother. They’re against making abortion totally illegal, most Republicans, they’re against allowing abortion right up to the point of birth, most Democrats. I suppose that does put independents right in the middle of this hot issue. Against the extremist and ideologues of both sides of the aisle. This is where I stand.

Where do I stand. That depends on the issue. I’m more like the average swing voter I used as an example above. I have about as many policy differences with Democrats as I do Republicans. When I vote, it’s more about the candidates, not the party. Each party thinking, I should follow them lockstep like some mindless robot really irks me. I like being a free agent. Give me a good candidate, I vote for him. Give me a bad candidate, I won’t. If both major parties offer what I consider bad candidates, I’ll vote against both. It’s all about the candidates with me. Like most swing voters, candidates’ matter, party not so much. I’ve made my views known here on some issues from abortion to gun control to health care to immigration, to crime, to the national debt and more. The national debt is probably my number one issue, but since both major parties don’t give a owl’s hoot about it, it’s a pick and choose who I vote for which is usually the candidate I think will do the best job for whatever office they’re running for. If I don’t neither major party candidate, I’ll vote against both major party candidates.

When it comes to Trump vs. Biden 2024, I think both major parties ought to be listening to most Americans. Not just their quarter of the population that make up their base. Me, I consider myself more of a pragmatist than an ideologue regardless of the issue. Commonsense and practiable solutions ot our problems. Not extreme right or left solutions.

 

[Perotista]

But Trump was the FU vote against the establishment, they could have just as easily put in Britney Spears or Howard Stern. Clinton was considered the serious candidate. As I see it, 2016 was a vote for establishment vs anti-establishment and the people said FU to the establishment. 2020 was the establishment saying FU to the people. And 2021-current is pure retribution.

Yeah, but the bottom line is neither was wanted be it establishment vs, anti-establishment or not. A friend of mine put 2016 this way after the election, Trump was a businessman, a reality TV show host, no one knew how he’d govern, he was the devil we didn’t know. Clinton, everyone knew exactly how she’d govern, she was well known, perhaps too well known. She was the devil we knew. We went with the devil we didn’t know over the devil we did.

However, one looks back on 2016, I think my friend summed it up nicely. It was a contest between two devils. A pick your own poison election, arsenic vs. cyanide. 2024 seems to be shaping up to be another 2016, anything can happen between two unwanted candidates by most Americans.

 

[bomberfox]

Next thing you know, they are going to want a 4th of July as well.

Incidentally Thomas Paine tried to form a revolution against the monarchy in England.