SpeareChucker
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2017
- Posts
- 24,614
Still disagree. Most people do not pay any attention to politics and when they go to vote, it is based upon what they last saw on TV...
Americans WANT an Alternative
- Thread starter Ramone45
- Start date
Rightguide
Prof Triggernometry
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2017
- Posts
- 56,930
Or, maybe their personal economics.
runsilent
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2018
- Posts
- 721
Bingo....because democracy.
No it's not. We just have a lazy ignorant electorate.
Most folks don't even know the basics and I bet you less than 20% of them could name their representatives off the top of their head because they just aren't involved and don't pay attention.
Yes and no.
They are VERY interested in the people's business, because that's how they get elected.
What they are NOT interested in doing is shitting on the people that produce for or service that need to help out those who don't.
You are correct most people don't pay attention it's why don't vote for incumbents on general principle. Good grief most of electorate candidates are is 60 or 70. Hey I am getting older but realize younger people have good ideas too. We are talking about alternatives.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
I agree with that but it doesn't have anything to do with what I said.
What I'm saying is the elected give their attention and efforts to the voters that contribute the most to their campaign efforts.
That's why the person who contributed big money and manpower to getting someone elected gets help when they call on them.
And the bums get a "We'll get right on that, thanks!!" letter from an intern.
Last edited:
Sit at home to debate politics on the internet - not a luxury most Americans have.
You think the American people don't want or don't accept compromise then you are wrong. If you have doubts you either don't get out much or only read party-line opinion.
~ the will of the people ~
You think the American people don't want or don't accept compromise then you are wrong. If you have doubts you either don't get out much or only read party-line opinion.
~ the will of the people ~
runsilent
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2018
- Posts
- 721
Sad but true it's why I vote out incumbents. No delivering a stupid project to my district does not get a vote.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Self employment has it's perks.
You're not paying attention.....the polarization and cries for change away from dysfunctional centrism says otherwise.
For me it depends.....do I like the incumbent or not??
I don't think being an incumbent is a negative thing in and of itself.
If they are doing a decent job and I support their views then I have no problem leaving them there as long as they continue to do the shit I want them to do.
BoyNextDoor
I hate liars
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Posts
- 14,158
Ranked choice voting is an answer to a lot of the failures of the current system. It stops spoilers. It alleviates the vote for the lesser of two evils. It is a lot less expensive to implement that a run-off.
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,678
Everybody thinks they're Rush.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
magicalmoments
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2013
- Posts
- 4,798
i agree there needs to be an alternative but
the reality is ...unless term limits are put on congress....stymied ineffective govt will just continue as normal. current govt's main objective is to preserve their benefits and way of life at any cost and to take in as much money as possible by selling their influence. the old idea of representation of constituents has sort of fallen by the wayside. i suspect some honest idealogs actually got to Washington but it didn't take long for the system to suck them in and wring out any shred of decency or honesty.
the basic requirements for being president should be upheld though......like being an American born person as an example
Yeah, and the other basic criteria as well: male; white; definitely not a papist or community oriented!
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
No such thing as nonpartisan political analysts.
And they say that in total DENIAL of the world they are living in, because the majority of voters aren't voting for moderate anything right now. Otherwise Kasich would be POTUS and AntiFa wouldn't be out in the streets with the MSM cheering them on against "the Nazis".
Demoz are nominating and electing progressive/social democrats and outright socialist left and right. They are out in the streets getting violent and destructive in the name of "progress". Obama won on the promise of hope and CHANGE.
GOP'erz wanted an outsider, fresh corporate blood!!! They elected Trump and are about to start up some Article V shit and do some totally not moderate compromised into completely useless shit.
Nope, just the concept of a term limit applied to a liberal democracy.
Last edited:
adrina
Heretic
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2017
- Posts
- 21,456
With a touch of Alex Jones.
This is a simple concept. Voters must choose between increasingly polarized Congressional candidates that do not represent the majority. The majority of voters are MODERATE politically. BOTH party platforms are increasingly extreme. Voters want compromise in Congress so the work gets done. That is the REAL world.
Nonpartisan political analysts exist. The professionals who study both sides of an issue and report on it OBJECTIVELY are out there. Get real.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Voters elect those polarized Congress critters. They aren't made to choose between them.
Compromise doesn't accomplish shit, it's not working. That's why the majority on both sides are screaming for change, that is what is pushing the polarization.
LOL whatever lies you gotta tell yourself buddy.
Last edited:
SpeareChucker
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2017
- Posts
- 24,614
Politically, 'compromise' means you will adopt Progressive ideas or the Press and Social Media will take you out, even if they have to censor you.
That is the point. They have to vote for them. Voters increasingly have to make a choice between two polarized candidates.
Compromise is positive. Party platforms are polarized by special interests. The average American voter who is politically moderate is not driving polarization. Get real.
SpeareChucker
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2017
- Posts
- 24,614
Myself, I vote Libertarian as a protest vote. No danger of winning, but an excellent opportunity to show both parties that there are active voters out there who they can court in a tight race.
We just don't have any tight races down here. Outside of the primaries, Democrats and Libertarians need not apply; ginger step-children.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
The candidates are polarized because the voters put them up and vote for them.
The voters can NOT avoid their responsibility in a democracy.
If they wanted more moderate candidates they would run and vote for them....but they don't because we are not as moderate as you want to pretend we are.
Not always, if you take it too far it's totally dysfunctional.
Our Romneycare system is a prime example of compromise taken to the point of making the "reforms" total shit.
The average American voter used to be politically moderate, that time has passed because compromising everything into total uselessness, like ACA is getting old and more and more people are fucking tired of it.
That's why they all want that change...which is really just picking a direction and getting off top dead center for once.
I am going to post this again. Follow the logic. Most voters are Moderate on the issues. Candidates run on the party platform. The party platforms are increasingly polarized because of special interests.
Moderate voters have to choose between two candidates running on a polarized platform. The voters want compromise in Congress. They want Congress to get their work done. This does not happen very often because of party polarization.
Most voters are moderates. They are not driving party polarization.
Political analysts agree that party polarization is a problem in US government right now.
Paul_Chance
The Watcher
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2011
- Posts
- 21,492
Though there are generally rumblings of a third party and an increasing number of votes are registered independents, most of the efforts at creating a third party tend to be either more conservative than the GOP or more liberal than the Dems. Those independents are themselves split. There are attempts at centrist party, but it generally gets nowhere.
One of the challenges faced by the small parties is that at some point in their platform they tend to embrace the crazy a little too much, which prevents them from drawing widespread support, because, as mentioned, all in all America is a central-right nation.
Yes, there could be viable alternate parties to the GOP and Dems, but it would take a tremendous amount of work and money to get to the point of viability on a national scale. The right candidate and leadership team could do it - but its a testament to how difficult it is that it hasn't been done yet.
The other challenge is that with reps and senators elected locally, here is the simple truth - unless you're in the congressional district or state you don't have a say in who they elect. You might hate them with a passion, you can always send some money, but you don't even get a vote in who Bumfuck, NY elects as their representative or senator. Which is exactly how it should be if you're not a resident of Bumfuck, NY.
I live in very liberal California. We tend to elect very liberal candidates here by a significant margin. That is what we, the majority, in this district and this state want. If I lived in Arizona it would be the opposite. And that's all good.
Politics has always been a messy and contentious business, the only difference between today and a hundred years ago is with the vast proliferation of media and the dawn of the information age we get to see every leaf on every tree and it blinds us to the forest. Most voters think their tree is fine (hence the strength of incumbents), but it's everyone else's tree that's fucking up the forest.
The good news? We'll make it. LOL - it's just politics and a society struggling to adjust to the information age disruption.
One of the challenges faced by the small parties is that at some point in their platform they tend to embrace the crazy a little too much, which prevents them from drawing widespread support, because, as mentioned, all in all America is a central-right nation.
Yes, there could be viable alternate parties to the GOP and Dems, but it would take a tremendous amount of work and money to get to the point of viability on a national scale. The right candidate and leadership team could do it - but its a testament to how difficult it is that it hasn't been done yet.
The other challenge is that with reps and senators elected locally, here is the simple truth - unless you're in the congressional district or state you don't have a say in who they elect. You might hate them with a passion, you can always send some money, but you don't even get a vote in who Bumfuck, NY elects as their representative or senator. Which is exactly how it should be if you're not a resident of Bumfuck, NY.
I live in very liberal California. We tend to elect very liberal candidates here by a significant margin. That is what we, the majority, in this district and this state want. If I lived in Arizona it would be the opposite. And that's all good.
Politics has always been a messy and contentious business, the only difference between today and a hundred years ago is with the vast proliferation of media and the dawn of the information age we get to see every leaf on every tree and it blinds us to the forest. Most voters think their tree is fine (hence the strength of incumbents), but it's everyone else's tree that's fucking up the forest.
The good news? We'll make it. LOL - it's just politics and a society struggling to adjust to the information age disruption.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Ok..
That's not logic, that's a bunch of wild assumptions that fly in the face of observable reality....the most insane of which is that compromise = effective governance.
I agree with them, but what we do not agree about is why.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
There is very little about California or it's representatives/politics that is liberal.
Highly socialistic is FAR more accurate way to describe it's current social/economic climate.
Vermont and Alaska, blue and red, but both are far more liberal across the board than California.
Last edited:
Compromise is not a wild assumption. Most people prefer it for solving issues in Congress. Look it up.
The majority of voters have a moderate view on issues like healthcare, gun control, immigration, taxation, etc. Look it up.
If you think observable reality is spending most spare time talking politics on a free speech board, then I can see why you think most voters are polarized.
Similar threads
