21 Sep 11
Bill Clinton's recent interview brought up a very imporntant point that has been lost amid the masses of left and right wing TV talking heads. I don't have an exact quote, but President Clinton pointed out much of the blame for the gridlock and lack of progress our government has shown recently has to be shared by the American voting public. By reversing political course every 2 years, expecting instant gradification, and voting for a deeply divided government, the American voters have brought this gridlock upon themselves. Despite some minor reversals, Tea party members, Rank and File Republicans, Blue Dog and Liberal Democrats are simply carrying out the agenda's they were elected to do. The American voting public, by changing direction every 2 years needs to be held accountable for much of the lack of progress we see today.
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by bill718The oscillation indicates that what people really want is a Centrist party that avoids the extremes of either side -- but a third party can't easily establish itself under winner-takes-all voting systems like ours.
Bill Clinton's recent interview brought up a very imporntant point that has been lost amid the masses of left and right wing TV talking heads. I don't have an exact quote, but President Clinton pointed out much of the blame for the gridlock and lack of progress our government has shown recently has to be shared by the American voting public. By reversing pol ...[text shortened]... ion every 2 years needs to be held accountable for much of the lack of progress we see today.
People know what they want -- it just isn't being offered to them.
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by spruce112358I want a party that is as far to the left as is possible.
The oscillation indicates that what people really want is a Centrist party that avoids the extremes of either side -- but a third party can't easily establish itself under winner-takes-all voting systems like ours.
People know what they want -- it just isn't being offered to them.
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by spruce112358A third party wouldn't necessarily be "centrist". Two-party systems tend to produce parties that are very close to each other, as is the case in the US. So opening the system up to more parties will also make the Democrats and the GOP move further apart.
The oscillation indicates that what people really want is a Centrist party that avoids the extremes of either side -- but a third party can't easily establish itself under winner-takes-all voting systems like ours.
People know what they want -- it just isn't being offered to them.
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by bill718Has it ever occured to you that gridlock may be the best thing that can be expected, and that is by design that we get it.
Bill Clinton's recent interview brought up a very imporntant point that has been lost amid the masses of left and right wing TV talking heads. I don't have an exact quote, but President Clinton pointed out much of the blame for the gridlock and lack of progress our government has shown recently has to be shared by the American voting public. By reversing pol ...[text shortened]... ion every 2 years needs to be held accountable for much of the lack of progress we see today.
22 Sep 11
Originally posted by bill718I completely agree!!
Bill Clinton's recent interview brought up a very imporntant point that has been lost amid the masses of left and right wing TV talking heads. I don't have an exact quote, but President Clinton pointed out much of the blame for the gridlock and lack of progress our government has shown recently has to be shared by the American voting public. By reversing pol ...[text shortened]... ion every 2 years needs to be held accountable for much of the lack of progress we see today.
No, sorry, I changed my mind. What a bunch of bunk!! ðŸ˜
22 Sep 11
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThe more parties, the more they can specialize. So a larger party might tend to fracture into "extreme" splinters and larger, more centrist groups. But I think that separating the extremists leaves the main parties still more centrist and so drives them closer together.
A third party wouldn't necessarily be "centrist". Two-party systems tend to produce parties that are very close to each other, as is the case in the US. So opening the system up to more parties will also make the Democrats and the GOP move further apart.
22 Sep 11
Originally posted by bill718The assertion that people collectively vote with the intention of dividing congress is bunk. Everything is done on a state by state basis. When I cast a vote in Michigan it doesn't affect what happens in California and vice versa.
Bill Clinton's recent interview brought up a very imporntant point that has been lost amid the masses of left and right wing TV talking heads. I don't have an exact quote, but President Clinton pointed out much of the blame for the gridlock and lack of progress our government has shown recently has to be shared by the American voting public. By reversing pol ...[text shortened]... ion every 2 years needs to be held accountable for much of the lack of progress we see today.
All of this is a design by the establishment to keep things the way they are and lay the blame on the American people. Bill Clinton is just another corrupt tool of the establishment who is working to fool you all into thinking it is your own fault when you voted in the midterm elections.
Were things much different before the midterm elections? I don't recall much change before that either. Wasn't it the filibuster that was to blame before? Somebody remind me of why we had no real change before the midterm elections. My memory is a bit fuzzy.
22 Sep 11
Originally posted by spruce112358It will drive them closer in terms of rhetoric, and willingness to cooperate. It will separate them in terms of policy.
The more parties, the more they can specialize. So a larger party might tend to fracture into "extreme" splinters and larger, more centrist groups. But I think that separating the extremists leaves the main parties still more centrist and so drives them closer together.
22 Sep 11
Originally posted by Metal BrainMetalbrain...I did not say people voted with the INTENTION of dividing Congress. It's simply worked out that way. it's also the major reason for our dysfunctional government.
The assertion that people collectively vote with the intention of dividing congress is bunk. Everything is done on a state by state basis. When I cast a vote in Michigan it doesn't affect what happens in California and vice versa.
All of this is a design by the establishment to keep things the way they are and lay the blame on the American people. Bill ...[text shortened]... emind me of why we had no real change before the midterm elections. My memory is a bit fuzzy.