Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
- Lazarus
- →
- The Necropolis
- →
- The Cantina
- →
- Democratic National Convention
| Welcome to the forums of the Undead Dominion of Lazarus. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features |
| Democratic National Convention | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 25 2016, 07:20 PM (523 Views) | |
| Adytus | Jul 25 2016, 07:20 PM Post #1 |
Blessed of the Vale
|
It starts in two hours! I know Loft will be watching!  I'm looking forward to it, and I'm glad the chief of the DNC stepped down. She needed to go. I knew she was not a nice person way before those emails came out, but I don't think that will have any impact on the election. EDIT: and the headline on CNN right now is "Russia meddling with the election?" Edited by Adytus, Jul 25 2016, 07:22 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| New Rogernomics | Aug 1 2016, 10:24 PM Post #31 |
Ghost of Kitties Past
|
Free and fair elections are not just where people get a vote and where everyone can stand for office. Visit Turkey, it is a real paradise.  1) Actually it isn't an appeal to popularity, as his argument is that it works well for all those countries, they haven't changed back, and there was a general drive in Europe to have proportional representation. 2) Actually yes. Greater stability did occur, in Germany and France in particular. If I am allowed to step outside the EU, then New Zealand has had stable governments for 17+ years after introducing MMP. If we go to the UK and United States though....total partisanship and deadlock. I just need to see the D- scores on US infrastructure and the pot-holes in the roads to shake my head or facepalm. Brexit was also a disaster to thank the torries for. 3) Coalitions do better in general, as they get many parties together, and are less likely to be deadlocked than a two-party state which is defined by extremes of policies i.e. Conservatives vs Liberals. Republicans and Democrats rarely agree these days, and that divide hasn't improved with time. Say all you want about coalition governments and multi-party systems, but they are a check and balance on the party in power, and also mean that the equivalent of Democrats and Republicans have smaller parties that can help their agenda's get passed. It is a cultural thing too though, if the people in the country decide on hard lines and refuse to compromise, then that attitude is likely to be passed on to the politicians in power. 4) India has 1.252 billion people, and Single Transferable Vote. Arguing that 'x can't happen' based on population couldn't be a reasonable argument, even if it could actually apply in this case, which it can't as functional democracy can't be defined exclusively by population size i.e. like claiming that Iran would have a better democracy based on population statistics. 5) It isn't 'racist' or 'bigoted', but factual, if you are discussing Europe at the time the video was made. Countries with proportional representation as a matter of fact have more women and minorities in government, whether it was argued the wrong way, doesn't really matter at this point. I don't see how stating the obvious is 'racist' or 'bigoted', unless it is stated that 'only Black people can represent Black people', which I didn't see anywhere in that video. John Cleese is neither 'racist' or 'bigoted', but a guy with a sense of humor. Some day hopefully America will let go off the two-party system, and establish a proportional system, and it isn't far off, if independents become an even bigger voting force. But till then, I don't feel my vote counts, at least until a third party sets up shop and starts to take some seats at Congress or perhaps take the Presidency. Simply increasing the number of seats doesn't go anywhere to actually fixing the flaw in itself, which is the lack of proportional representation when the votes are counted. I haven't 'changed the narrative', it has always been my narrative since I first got the right to vote to support multi-party systems and proportional representation whatever the country. Republicans can vote Trump, and Democrats vote Clinton. It doesn't bother me. In fact if either is elected it is sure to be the popularity ratings disaster that third party voters and candiates have waiting for. Edit: Shortened this down. Edited by New Rogernomics, Aug 1 2016, 10:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
| New Rogernomics | Aug 2 2016, 01:08 AM Post #32 |
|
Ghost of Kitties Past
|
Trump would be a real disaster for the country. Clinton would probably make a better President so far as civil and human rights. Though a Trump win, will probably win back Congress for the Democrats, and make Trump a one term President thanks to the social conservatives he surrounds himself with. Only thing I can say positively about Trump is that he won't send us to war with Iran any time soon, so he isn't another George W. Bush as far as foreign policy. |
|
|
|
| Frankender | Aug 2 2016, 01:25 AM Post #33 |
Hawk
|
Why do you think he'd be a one-term president? The country would become far more conservative, sure, due to congress voting with the President (something unheard of in years), but as long as he doesn't fuck us over on foreign affairs I doubt the incumbent would lose to a challenger. I'm not saying I like Trump, either, it's just that the President is not all-powerful or anything. |
|
|
|
| New Rogernomics | Aug 2 2016, 03:07 AM Post #34 |
|
Ghost of Kitties Past
|
He is going into office very unpopular i.e. 55%+ of Americans don't like him, and Clinton is in the same boat with 53%+ not liking her. But what will really do Trump in, is his social conservative streak becoming more apparent to people i.e. his Supreme court picks being essentially christian theocrats, his backward views on homosexuality, and finally his 'family values' stuff. Some of it is to shore up the Republican base, but a lot of it is unpopular policy that will come back to bite him. |
|
|
|
| Andrew | Aug 2 2016, 08:35 PM Post #35 |
I wanna be a Dinosaur
|
That would be a matter of opinion and whether it benefits a country or not. Whereas FPTP doesn't always provide true representation of the electorates wishes, its does deliver a decisive government in parliamentary systems that often have a majority, wheres as in proportional representation, its rare to have a party that always has the majority and tends to lead to government having to go into coalition. But on the plus side, with many parties represented, it would lead to parties having to come together and build bridges leading to constructive politics rather than just showy confrontational garbage (Germany comes to mind) but on the bad side, indecisive elections can occur when parties are especially stubborn and political gridlock (Spain fit the bill here I think) But this is me think of it in general not in practice in the USA. That would be quite interesting. If the libertarian and green party gain seats, I think we would see some change in congress that tends to agree more often with the president via coalition building. But not too much of a change of the current status quo. Edited by Andrew, Aug 2 2016, 08:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Andrew | Aug 2 2016, 08:40 PM Post #36 |
|
I wanna be a Dinosaur
|
Is that a good thing. Little changes? |
|
|
|
| Frankender | Aug 3 2016, 01:01 AM Post #37 |
|
Hawk
|
Social conservatism rings strong with republicans, though. Most of my republican friends would be perfectly okay with all of the above. Plus, Bush finished with a sub-thirty percent approval rating anyway. 45% isn't too horrible to start off with anyway. |
|
|
|
| Loftegen | Aug 3 2016, 07:25 AM Post #38 |
Supreme Autocrat
|
Little changes: the conservative mantra! |
|
|
|
| Loftegen | Aug 3 2016, 07:45 AM Post #39 |
|
Supreme Autocrat
|
Oh, and Roger, it occures to me that we're talking about two different things: you're saying that the representation derived from first past the post elections is unfair, while I'm saying that the election itself is fair. |
|
|
|
| Loftegen | Aug 3 2016, 08:09 AM Post #40 |
|
Supreme Autocrat
|
That he has no problem with it and had an openly and proudly gay speaker at the Republican convention? Yes, I agree, very backward! |
|
|
|
| 0 users reading this topic | |
 |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Cantina · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
 5:10 PM Jul 11
|
Theme by Sith - Recolored by Seth of Outline