Originally posted by JimL
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
The Beginning of the End of Gerrymandering?
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostBut they do.
Originally posted by JimL View PostOr perhaps you have it backwards, perhaps the source of the polarization is the parties themselves.
Be that as it may - it is unlikely that a different model will emerge. Perhaps, at some point, a multi-party system, but then you will necessarily have parties caucusing together to achieve an effective majority and have sway.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostWhy? It certainly wasn't the original intent of the founding fathers, and G. Washington himself warned against it. Looks to me like he was spot on.Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostThe "original intent' of the founding fathers is open for debate - as is the question...."should their original intent be our sine qua non?" Or perhaps we should be thinking for ourselves...?"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostYes, and I agreed that they are both guilty of gerrymandering. The point I made in refutation to you was that republicans took it to a whole new and ridiculous level."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostJim's correct about the original intent - this one's not in a gray area. And here we have a perfect example of you failing to address the actual question of why you think Jim would not like a government that had no political parties. THIS is what people complain about with you - you are not addressing the issues and that happens when you don't seem to have a direct answer. Here Jim called you on what appears to be an off-the-cuff remark. No representative form of government comes without parties. Even totalitarian governments usually have factions (rarely strongly divergent ones, of course). So what model did you have in mind when you told him he wouldn't like a government with no parties?
The "why," IMO, is that a single-party system provides no vehicle for dissent. We would have that, effectively, if the Republicans continued to gain seats in all legislatures and state houses, and ended up with a veto-proof trifecta at the federal and state levels. Whatever this dominant party wanted would happen, disempowering those who disagree with them. If you do not see that, imagine how you would feel if that scenario occurred for the party that you are most opposed to. Are you a deep-red Republican? Imagine the only party was the Democrats - with a trifectsa in all statehouses and at the federal level, and a hammer-lock on the courts as well. Are you a deep-blue Democrat? Do the reverse. It will give you a visceral feel for what a single-party system (or no party system, which is equivalent) were to be implemented.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostAs with Sparko - you are right on this one. I need to respond to fewer posts and spend more time on them. He asked why and my answer focused on the sentence that followed. I never went back to the "why."
The "why," IMO, is that a single-party system provides no vehicle for dissent. We would have that, effectively, if the Republicans continued to gain seats in all legislatures and state houses, and ended up with a veto-proof trifecta at the federal and state levels. Whatever this dominant party wanted would happen, disempowering those who disagree with them. If you do not see that, imagine how you would feel if that scenario occurred for the party that you are most opposed to. Are you a deep-red Republican? Imagine the only party was the Democrats - with a trifectsa in all statehouses and at the federal level, and a hammer-lock on the courts as well. Are you a deep-blue Democrat? Do the reverse. It will give you a visceral feel for what a single-party system (or no party system, which is equivalent) were to be implemented.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostI don't think that a no party system would be equivalent a single party system. Parties, and their individual members, are susceptible to special interests and party strong arming.
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostAs with Sparko - you are right on this one. I need to respond to fewer posts and spend more time on them. He asked why and my answer focused on the sentence that followed. I never went back to the "why."
The "why," IMO, is that a single-party system provides no vehicle for dissent. We would have that, effectively, if the Republicans continued to gain seats in all legislatures and state houses, and ended up with a veto-proof trifecta at the federal and state levels. Whatever this dominant party wanted would happen, disempowering those who disagree with them. If you do not see that, imagine how you would feel if that scenario occurred for the party that you are most opposed to. Are you a deep-red Republican? Imagine the only party was the Democrats - with a trifectsa in all statehouses and at the federal level, and a hammer-lock on the courts as well. Are you a deep-blue Democrat? Do the reverse. It will give you a visceral feel for what a single-party system (or no party system, which is equivalent) were to be implemented.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostI don't think that a no party system would be equivalent a single party system. Parties, and their individual members, are susceptible to special interests and party strong arming.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Terraceth View PostI would say a no party system is equivalent to a single party system for the simple reason that I don't see any other way a no party system could feasibly accomplished. People will naturally find other politicians with ideologies similar to their own and band together to form parties. To avoid that, you need to have everyone on the same page (eliminating any need for parties), effectively creating a one party state.
Most of this is moot anyway. We're not likely to see the party system end anytime soon. However, with the growing number of "independents," perhaps Jim's dream will get a test.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
The two parties in the US seem to have a large mix of viewpoints within them, due to there only being two options. If both parties split then there may be more ‘choice’ between them. Though I imagine the moderate republicans and big money democrats probably won’t have much to tell the difference between them.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EvoUK View PostThe two parties in the US seem to have a large mix of viewpoints within them, due to there only being two options. If both parties split then there may be more ‘choice’ between them. Though I imagine the moderate republicans and big money democrats probably won’t have much to tell the difference between them.
I guess we shall have to see. Far right has it's Trump. Far left has it's Bernie. Not sure who the champions of "right-of-center" and "left-of-center" are, or if there is a champion of "moderates."The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI guess we shall have to see. Far right has it's Trump. Far left has it's Bernie. Not sure who the champions of "right-of-center" and "left-of-center" are, or if there is a champion of "moderates."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Terraceth View PostIn what way is Trump far right? Except for perhaps immigration, he actually seems surprisingly moderate in terms of policy positions. His behavior can be construed as extreme in a number of ways, but not really his policies.
...his regulatory stance, which is shifting money from individuals to businesses...
...his immigration stance...
...his tax approach...
...his protectionist rhetoric...
...his emerging trade practices...
...but mostly, as you note, his behavior. Specifically his belicose rhetoric to the left, his derogatory language to "other", and his tendency to conspiracy theory
I will also note that his fairly recent embrace of "christian" with the accompanying disconnect between what that term is purported to mean, and how it stands against his behavior. From my perspective, the more to the right someone goes, the more they seem to cling to "Christian" and the less obviously Christian they actually are - at least outwardly. And I tend to make my assessments by the outward manifestation of a person's views. You can say, "Christian" all day long, but if you're paying off the porn star so she won't tattle on you? If you're lying, admitting to lying, and take pride in it? If your priority is the golf course and not the religious community you proclaim to be part of? If you need to "get even" with anyone and everyone you think might have slighted you?
I find there is more of that kind of behavior at the extremes of the political spectrum. That particular list is more common to the far right.Last edited by carpedm9587; 03-28-2018, 07:36 AM.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Although much of the attention has been on Republican gerrymandering, let us not forget that gerrymandering is not about one party or another - it is about the party that happens to be in power when the census is completed and redistricting is executed. The Maryland case is a good case in point. Like many of the leaders of the 2010 gerrymandering effort, the Democratic governor there has acknolwegded the desire to skew the districts so Democrats would gain a seat in Congress.
Based on recent court activity, there is reason to hope that SCOTUS may finally step in and declare such practices unconstitutional. One can only hope...The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
|
16 responses
160 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
Yesterday, 11:55 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
53 responses
400 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Yesterday, 11:32 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
114 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
198 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Yesterday, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
84 responses
379 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Yesterday, 11:08 AM
|
Comment