|
Post by AFCTUJacko on Jul 9, 2019 17:19:10 GMT -5
To sum up in 3 (or 5) pithy words: proportional representation FTW. I agree 100% Jack. But don't see it changing in either UK or US this generation US - agree. Difficult in a Presidential system and there is really no 3rd party to speak of
UK - I think it's possible, but it will take an extraordinary electoral event (like a general election where no party gets more than 200 seats) to trigger the discussion. The Parties currently surging (Lib Dems, Greens, Brexit) all back electoral form. The big two, for entirely selfish reasons, do not.
All depends on whether come election time people retreat to them as they did in 2017 or if they finally decide they've had enough.
|
|
|
Post by cliffs on Jul 9, 2019 18:30:10 GMT -5
despite a Supreme Court ruling that forbade asking the question.
Why have a Supreme Court if those who don't like their ruling just say FU we aren't going to abide....gimme a break and try not to kill yourself with the spin. If you read the decision. They did not forbid asking the question. In fact, you could even say they said it was allowed since it was asked since 1820. It is a really weird ruling to a layman but that is the way it reads. Has something to do with the Administrative Procedure Act not the constitutionality of asking the question. So it was a technicality. Doesn't mean if Barr can find a LEGAL reason to meet the Supreme Court's ruling then he is not usurping the Supreme Court. You either have to read the ruling yourself or trust what I say is not spin. It is in the majority opinion as well. You may disagree with it but it isn't spin. I even provided the link. Winning...............
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2019 20:20:36 GMT -5
To be a independent in America is a gun in your mouth.
You got Trump or whatever the left has.
Imop the libs could go middle and win but seem to not learn from their mistakes . What do they do go further left. I guess it's human nature to not think and react.
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jul 9, 2019 21:02:00 GMT -5
Centrist Democrats will not win. Hillary was a centrist pro-corporation candidate.
Progressive ideas are extremely popular. Why go pro-corporation status quo?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2019 21:14:43 GMT -5
Exactly...
Gl with that .
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jul 10, 2019 2:37:32 GMT -5
once again, someone banging on about "the left" in America. There is no left in America. There is Sanders, who has caused some noise, but never had any power, and that's it.
Obama was not "left," anything you personally don't like does not equal "left..."
|
|
|
Post by Warwick Todd on Jul 10, 2019 4:20:20 GMT -5
Happily dropped out of this thread at a good time I think.
The next election is going to be very telling. Either America votes Trump out and he becomes a short term stain on what America stands for - Or this (disgusting mess) is who they really are. All of the assurances that your system wouldn’t allow him to do what he’s doing have been wrong - he’s effectively a dictator with no oversight that counts for anything.
I wonder how the people on this thread who support him will re-tell this period in 20 years...
|
|
|
Post by cliffs on Jul 10, 2019 5:45:43 GMT -5
I guess it's human nature to not think and react. Exactly how DT got elected.
|
|
|
Post by TarheelGolfer on Jul 10, 2019 7:44:38 GMT -5
Happily dropped out of this thread at a good time I think. The next election is going to be very telling. Either America votes Trump out and he becomes a short term stain on what America stands for - Or this (disgusting mess) is who they really are. All of the assurances that your system wouldn’t allow him to do what he’s doing have been wrong - he’s effectively a dictator with no oversight that counts for anything. I wonder how the people on this thread who support him will re-tell this period in 20 years... Please tell me how he has acted as a dictator? To quote from above and in this context: Anything that you don't agree with is not a form of dictatorship. Also, I think there has been quite a bit of oversight on him. Now I don't always agree with his words and some of his actions but come on a dictator? Edited: I will say this he has a lot more democratness in him then anyone on both sides would care to admit. I do wish he could just let things go sometimes, but in the end some of his responses are just plain needed and I believe that the opposition media wants him to respond. It is how they keep the "hate" going, IMO. END EDIT. Finally, I am not sure how I will re-tell this period 20 years for now. I do know that if I bring it up it will be considered whataboutism.
|
|
|
Post by TarheelGolfer on Jul 10, 2019 8:11:56 GMT -5
once again, someone banging on about "the left" in America. There is no left in America. There is Sanders, who has caused some noise, but never had any power, and that's it. Obama was not "left," anything you personally don't like does not equal "left..." You have to take it in the context of the USA. The democrats fully accept they are liberal and progressive "which I and others call leftist". So if someone can say that white nationalist have appropriated the Betsy Ross Flag. Which I have issue with the Democrats have appropriated those monikers. I am fully up to whatever you want to call them in the context here but realize these are the monikers as an American society give them. I mean if they aren't left/liberal, then is it not fair to call me a rightist/authoritarian? I do consider myself to be center/right but this moniker is what it is deemed in the USA. I also have been thinking lately to be more clear that I am more right of center in the global context by just my interactions here alone. But, does this make me authoritarian/racist/homophobe? In the eyes of most democrats it does. And in the eyes of a few here I do believe that is the case as well.
|
|
|
Post by Warwick Todd on Jul 10, 2019 8:17:17 GMT -5
I won’t rehash, I’ve successfully disengaged. My opinions and justifications are all over the first 450 odd pages 👍
|
|
|
Post by TarheelGolfer on Jul 10, 2019 8:34:02 GMT -5
I won’t rehash, I’ve successfully disengaged. My opinions and justifications are all over the first 450 odd pages 👍 Well I can't/won't force you to engage but I still don't see your opinions and justifications? All I can see is a few posts/likes. I guess another username. Anyhow, thanks for playing. (Sorry right wing extremists coming out of me )
|
|
|
Post by gregfordyce on Jul 10, 2019 8:42:17 GMT -5
Aye, same as "New Labour" over here in the UK. Which is why the Labour party is getting so messy with infighting - the true socialist left have re-taken the party, the right wing centrists no likey. Are we going to see the same battle play out in the US Democratic Party? My guess is not quite to the same degree - love of capitalism & loathing of socialism a bit too ingrained in the American psyche. I agree. The progressive left in the Dem party here are not "socialists" in the pure sense of the word, but they embrace socialist positions on certain things (Medicare for All/Universal healthcare, free education, taxing financial transactions, etc.) while still approving of capitalism but with some restrictions placed on it ("regulations") to prevent the natural uber-greedy-@!$#-the-planet-and-workers-for-higher-profits route that capitalism always takes in the long run. However, since the mainstream Dem/DLC party is comprised of Neoliberal uber-capitalists no different from the Republicans in that regard, they are shunning the progressive left of their own party and joining with their Republican buddies to slam them as "socialists" and make sure that term is made as dirty as possible. Thus all the infighting. They are fighting a losing battle IMO - poll after poll shows the younger generations are open to more "socialist" positions and more regulation of corporations, and are embracing things like a Green New Deal, Medicare-For-All, progressive taxation, laws that favor unions and the workers and restrict corporate power, etc. Not to mention their very progressive views on people of color/immigrants/etc. The Republicans have been aware of this for a long time - they can read the polls, too - which is why they work so hard at gerrymandering and enacting laws that restrict voting rights for minorities and lower-income people (who have more progressive views and traditionally vote Democrat), etc, because they see the writing on the wall and the direction the future is heading in. They - and the Neoliberal establishment Dems - are becoming an outmoded, fossilized, living-in-the-past minority, and they know it, and they are trying everything they can to hold onto power. Trump is the best example of this, with his fascist, anti-immigration and anti-brown-skinned people rhetoric and demonizing "socialism" and anything and everything that doesn't "MAGA" - referring to the ancient past when whites held all the power and all the cards. They can try all they like. All they are doing is delaying the inevitable tide of progressivism and diversity that will make their old, white, rich fat asses a minority in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jul 10, 2019 8:49:32 GMT -5
Considering Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden "leftists" is flat-out wrong. They are not. These are pro-corporation centrists. They're generally conservative on economic issues and generally liberal on social issues.
Progressives like Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are, in fact, leftists. They are liberal economically and socially.
They still aren't so far left that they're pushing for outright socialism. They are pushing for the government to subsidize the gaps between the rich and the poor. They are pushing for policy that forcefully redistributes wealth towards the consumers and working class (and small business owners too!), fully understanding that some people will still be rich. They just will have to work a little harder, and be granted fewer inheritances.
I still don't understand what principles or misinformation you need to hold in order to not want this - to not want as many people as possible to be a part of this.
People - Americans in particular - draw this false equivocation between hard work and earnings/wealth. But there is almost no connection. You cannot, in all seriousness, argue that someone like Paris Hilton or Nicole Ritchie - people who inherited enormous wealth - work harder than I do. No, they were afforded a great opportunity by virtue of who their parents are. They could take business risk with impunity because of their massive wealth that they did not earn themselves.
Most people are barely scraping by, living paycheck-to-paycheck. There's no cushion. There's enormous risk in starting a business. These people almost have to work for someone else. As economist Richard Wolff explains, if you are working for someone else, you are necessarily paid less than the value of what you produce. So the system, as a matter of course, collects money at the top. The farther up towards the top you are, the more you're reaping rewards quasi-willingly forfeited by those beneath you.
And that is why increased marginal tax - and not a flat tax rate - is the fairest method of taxation.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Jul 10, 2019 9:04:09 GMT -5
once again, someone banging on about "the left" in America. There is no left in America. There is Sanders, who has caused some noise, but never had any power, and that's it. Obama was not "left," anything you personally don't like does not equal "left..." You have to take it in the context of the USA. The democrats fully accept they are liberal and progressive "which I and others call leftist". So if someone can say that white nationalist have appropriated the Betsy Ross Flag. Which I have issue with the Democrats have appropriated those monikers. I am fully up to whatever you want to call them in the context here but realize these are the monikers as an American society give them. I mean if they aren't left/liberal, then is it not fair to call me a rightist/authoritarian? I do consider myself to be center/right but this moniker is what it is deemed in the USA. I also have been thinking lately to be more clear that I am more right of center in the global context by just my interactions here alone. But, does this make me authoritarian/racist/homophobe? In the eyes of most democrats it does. And in the eyes of a few here I do believe that is the case as well. I don't have to take it in the context of anything. I mean, I get that we're talking in an American based politics thread, but these things have strict definitions, and bending those to the warped system you have in America would be asinine. Call it "liberal," call it "progressive" even, but it's not "left." Parts of left wing ideology/theory aren't even particularly liberal! This is the mistake Americans KEEP making with regards political theory. They just don't get it. It's been systematically drilled into you, so hard and for so long, that the "commies" are out to get you, that the political spectrum has ceased meaning anything to you. Left wing ideology is primarily based around economics, NOT identity politics surrounding race and sexual orientation. You can see that within this thread, where 1 or 2 of the rightists have expressed "progressive" views about sexuality and stuff. "People can do what they want" can easily be found in left/liberal/right wing political ideology. I wouldn't say you've come across at all "authoritarian" in this thread, I'd say 100% you've come across at right wing. Again, parts of left wing ideology, even moderate left wing can be seen as "authoritarian," tho I wouldn't personally call it that, I'd call it necessary "state intervention." Both the left and right, moreso the right in recent times have dabbled in covert interfence, govt spying, essentially. I don't agree with that, and most left wing people don't. Anyway, I digress. You may not like a lot of the "monikers" you are seeing, but they are true of modern America. There is no left, just centre (centre right even) liberals, and this really weird new invention of the alt-right, with their weird mix of old school nationalism and white supremacist ideals coupled with zero intervention Reaganomics, favouring the ultra rich. With the poor masses looking the other way, as long as their patriotism and nationalism is stroked for them.
|
|