Lets Just Say it Republicans are the Problem

[thekev]

Originally Posted by eric/

Agree with calboy on the government.

But all in all this thread is rather ridiculous. From your point of view republicans are all wrong, from their point of view democrats are all wrong. The fact of the matter is that both sides have valid criticisms and valid points to make. Making a sweeping generalization either way does no good. It to reinforce rigid political ideologies and foster resentment toward "the other guys".

I read the article. We have a political system that isn't entirely effective and many politicians who commonly lie about the projected results of their agenda. The Republicans seem to do this more often, but neither side is really exceptional. I hate fluff speeches. Both sides use them. The Republicans like to interject words like "communist" and "socialist" because they realize that these carry a negative connotation within mainstream US culture, and yet most people don't even understand when the words are being misused. It also annoys me how many people only pay attention to politics now because of recent economic problems.

[vrDrew]

I place the blame squarely on Fox News.

I'll be honest, and say that for most of my adult life, I voted (generally) Republican. I was in favor of limited Government, lower taxes, a strong Defense, and limits on the amount of power organized labor had over the workplace.

But thats no longer the province of the Republican party. Which nowadays seems to be locked in some sort of perverse "race to the bottom" in terms of which candidate can espouse the most radical rightwing nuttery. Case in point: The most recent AiPAC convention, when prospective Republican candidates fell all over themselves kowtowing to the demands of the most extreme politics of the state of Israel.

Now, don't get me wrong. I like, and admire Israel, its people and their accomplishments. But at some point you've got to step back and say that the job of the US President is to look out for whats best for the United States. If that coincides with the interests of Israel, great. But if not - sorry, I've got to say its worth annoying a small section of Israeli politicians, rather than enraging 90% of the Arab world (at great risk and cost to US military, diplomats, businesses, and travelers.)

This foolishness seems, to me, to have arisen at about the same time as Fox News became a major force. Under the risible banner of "fair and balanced" these jokers seem to have lost any semblance of journalistic impartiality. The "balance" seems between "right wing" and "even more right wing."

Fox News doesn't have that huge of an audience: Maybe 10 to 20 million people (out of a population of 300 million+) watch it on a regular basis. But those 20 million or so people have an outsized influence on Republican party primaries. And they've frankly poisoned the well for the rest of us decent, thinking "conservative" folks.

[CalBoy]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Easily passed laws would be [theoretically] easily fixed.

But thanks for the clarification of the British system.

I definitely don't know as much as I should about the other governments out there.

There is a school of thought that agrees with this notion, since theoretically a bad law could be overturned faster if the process was easier, but a big presumption of our legislative process is that frequent changes are a bad thing. Laws are supposed to be stable and predictable.

I'm not sure which poison I prefer. At least at the federal level, most laws are actually written by administrative agencies who carry out the orders of the US Code. The agencies don't make big changes very often, at least not without Congress. The rest of the laws are really social issues that can expand or retract the rights enjoyed by citizens. Most of the time an easy process or a difficult process would produce about the same net outcome for these issues, matching popular opinion over the long term.

The trade off then becomes choosing between outcomes like SOPA and UHC. There are a handful of issues that we need dramatic changes in, like healthcare, and people suffer until we can get over that large electoral hump. On the other hand, we also force those who would influence peddle to reach the same hump.

Of course as long as the Senate exists in its current form of being primarily composed of less populated states, effective majority rule is nigh impossible.

[samiwas]

Originally Posted by eric/

Don't need to

Maybe you shouldn't make sweeping generalizations about what people have said in this thread.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by samiwas

Maybe you shouldn't make sweeping generalizations about what people have said in this thread.

Take a look at the thread title and OP

[samiwas]

Originally Posted by eric/

Take a look at the thread title and OP

Yes. The thread title is the title of the Washington Post article, which you yourself said you do not need to read. Also, you said,

Originally Posted by eric/

From your point of view republicans are all wrong

So let's revisit the OP.

Originally Posted by AP_piano295

A nice editorial on the collapse of politics in the US. There might be major issues in both parties, but the true blame here lays with the Republican party and the right wing. Lets have no more bones about it.

Wait...what was that? Let me quote it again...

Originally Posted by AP_piano295

There might be major issues in both parties, but the true blame here lays with the Republican party and the right wing.

So, there are issues in both parties? Quite different from saying Republicans are all wrong. Of course, I expect some debate-club language to follow.

Now, as for some quotes from said article:

Originally Posted by Washington Post

Democrats are hardly blameless, and they have their own extreme wing and their own predilection for hardball politics.
-----
No doubt, Democrats were not exactly warm and fuzzy toward George W. Bush during his presidency.

Hmmm...next time, just read the article.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by samiwas

So, there are issues in both parties? Quite different from saying Republicans are all wrong. Of course, I expect some debate-club language to follow.

Bolded parts are what's important here. No need for "debate club language". Just basic reading comprehension.

Originally Posted by AP_piano295

A nice editorial on the collapse of politics in the US. There might be major issues in both parties, but the true blame here lays with the Republican party and the right wing. Lets have no more bones about it.

Thread Title:

Originally Posted by AP_piano295

Let's just say it, republicans are the problem

My face when I make an accurate sweeping generalization about what one person literally said

[AP_piano295]

Originally Posted by samiwas

So, there are issues in both parties? Quite different from saying Republicans are all wrong. Of course, I expect some debate-club language to follow.

Person A and B are having an argument, they're both being complete *******s suddenly person A pulls a gun and shoots person B. Who is to blame for this event?

Obviously person A, while person B could have avoided the killing by being less of a dick or backing down the fault ultimately remains with the trigger man.

In any conflict you can partition blame to both involved parties. That doesn't change the fact that one party is still to blame.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by CalBoy

You also don't want a system that makes it too easy to pass laws either. We might not have gotten UHC this time, but we also didn't get SOPA (or its latest incarnation).

To play devils advocate, we haven't got SOPA either as there is less money floating around our politics.

[Sydde]

Originally Posted by NathanMuir

Knew there was one I was forgetting: The Washington Times. You could have been thinking of that one also.

Hardly likely. The Reverend Sun Myung Moon's rag merits no consideration – it makes Newscorp seem almost respectable.

[thewitt]

Originally Posted by AP_piano295

A nice editorial on the collapse of politics in the US. There might be major issues in both parties, but the true blame here lays with the Republican party and the right wing. Lets have no more bones about it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...T_story_1.html

Complete and utter nonsense as usual.

[leekohler]

Originally Posted by thewitt

Complete and utter nonsense as usual.

Really? Got anything to actually say of substance?

[MorphingDragon]

Originally Posted by leekohler

Really? Got anything to actually say of substance?

Its much easier and a much more ripe trolling opportunity to say disjointed, unbacked statements.

I should know, I do it all the time.

[Huntn]

Originally Posted by thewitt

Complete and utter nonsense as usual.

Why?

[Zombie Acorn]

When politicians are doing whatever they can to get re-elected its really the people that are to blame. I think people are confused about what they think is ideal and what actually works in the US. It would be as if the left wing decided that communist ideals are best for the country and blocked any legislation that wasn't in line with that.

The mess we are currently in has been brewed by both parties, it has been very rare for the president and congress to be dominated by one party and the democrats have actually had more leverage over the years than their victim card would suggest.

[leekohler]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

When politicians are doing whatever they can to get re-elected its really the people that are to blame. I think people are confused about what they think is ideal and what actually works in the US. It would be as if the left wing decided that communist ideals are best for the country and blocked any legislation that wasn't in line with that.

The mess we are currently in has been brewed by both parties, it has been very rare for the president and congress to be dominated by one party and the democrats have actually had more leverage over the years than their victim card would suggest.

At this point in time, it does no one any good to sweep what has happened with the GOP under the rug. There can be no denying that they have become extremists of the worst variety.

[Zombie Acorn]

Originally Posted by leekohler

At this point in time, it does no one any good to sweep what has happened with the GOP under the rug. There can be no denying that they have become extremists of the worst variety.

I don't disagree with this, the right wing has gotten more radical as time goes on for sure. The democrats haven't attempted anything far enough left to justify the response at this time either.

Its like someone on the left lit a match and the right called the fire department to come put it out.

[MorphingDragon]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

When politicians are doing whatever they can to get re-elected its really the people that are to blame. I think people are confused about what they think is ideal and what actually works in the US. It would be as if the left wing decided that communist ideals are best for the country and blocked any legislation that wasn't in line with that.

The mess we are currently in has been brewed by both parties, it has been very rare for the president and congress to be dominated by one party and the democrats have actually had more leverage over the years than their victim card would suggest.

It's a bit more than just party duality, there are fundamental issues with your voting system. America's Fear of change means you won't be doing anything about it soon, at least as far as political changes.

You have the electoral college and a plurality voting system.

The Electoral College isn't needed anymore, we have technology. The US needed it before when information was passed around by giving it to a guy on a horse and wishing him god speed. All it does now is add another human factor and an opportunity for corruption to take place. AFAIK, a lot of voting in the US now happens digitally? So the change will be not noticed by the citizenship. Get rid of the electoral college and make each citizens vote worth one vote, not a partial vote for another guy to make.

The 2 party system won't be changed until you get rid of your FPP-like system. It is susceptible to gerrymandering, its a Minority rule system and allow for dictatorship of a party within the house of parliament. The mathematics of how it works also means that the amount of parties trends towards 2. Like you know, what we're seeing now. There is no reason America can't take MMP or STV and adapt it to to the needs of the states. These voting systems can scale, they were designed like that. Plurality doesn't scale... at all.

EDIT: Oh, FPP has the spoiler effect, which means trying to add a secondary party is futile and probably means a win for your opponents.

[Zombie Acorn]

Originally Posted by MorphingDragon

It's a bit more than just party duality, there are fundamental issues with your voting system. America's Fear of change means you won't be doing anything about it soon, at least as far as political changes.

You have the electoral college and a plurality voting system.

The Electoral College isn't needed anymore, we have technology. The US needed it before when information was passed around by giving it to a guy on a horse and wishing him god speed. All it does now is add another human factor and an opportunity for corruption to take place. AFAIK, a lot of voting in the US now happens digitally? So the change will be not noticed by the citizenship. Get rid of the electoral college and make each citizens vote worth one vote, not a partial vote for another guy to make.

The 2 party system won't be changed until you get rid of your FPP-like system. It is susceptible to gerrymandering, its a Minority rule system and allow for dictatorship of a party within the house of parliament. The mathematics of how it works also means that the amount of parties trends towards 2. Like you know, what we're seeing now. There is no reason America can't take MMP or STV and adapt it to to the needs of the states. These voting systems can scale, they were designed like that. Plurality doesn't scale... at all.

I don't disagree with this either, I enjoy the parliament system much more in my new country. In fact, politics are just much more reasonable in general here.

[Huntn]

Originally Posted by MorphingDragon

It's a bit more than just party duality, there are fundamental issues with your voting system. America's Fear of change means you won't be doing anything about it soon, at least as far as political changes.

You have the electoral college and a plurality voting system.

The Electoral College isn't needed anymore, we have technology. The US needed it before when information was passed around by giving it to a guy on a horse and wishing him god speed. All it does now is add another human factor and an opportunity for corruption to take place. AFAIK, a lot of voting in the US now happens digitally? So the change will be not noticed by the citizenship. Get rid of the electoral college and make each citizens vote worth one vote, not a partial vote for another guy to make.

The 2 party system won't be changed until you get rid of your FPP-like system. It is susceptible to gerrymandering, its a Minority rule system and allow for dictatorship of a party within the house of parliament. The mathematics of how it works also means that the amount of parties trends towards 2. Like you know, what we're seeing now. There is no reason America can't take MMP or STV and adapt it to to the needs of the states. These voting systems can scale, they were designed like that. Plurality doesn't scale... at all.

EDIT: Oh, FPP has the spoiler effect, which means trying to add a secondary party is futile and probably means a win for your opponents.

Agreed. Wonder if there are any moves to get rid of it?

[CalBoy]

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

To play devils advocate, we haven't got SOPA either as there is less money floating around our politics.

To be fair, the entertainment industry is probably a bigger slice of the pie here than in the UK, so it would be expected for such a law to begin here. SOPA can be substituted for other bad ideas that never make it out of one chamber, but the public tends not to hear about such bills, and SOPA's strength as an example was that it satisfied both criteria.

However, the crux of the issue is that there is always going to be a minority with a vested interest that will invest whatever it can into getting an advantage out of the public's laws. Sometimes the interests of the public align with the minority, but most of the time the public's loss is the minority's gain. If the legislative process is too easy, then even without vast sums of money, special interests can co-opt the legislative process for their own gain.

[Squadleader]

Originally Posted by MorphingDragon

The Electoral College isn't needed anymore, we have technology.

Except the Democrats consistently block Voter I.D. which doesn't take much technology at all (Picture ID)...It almost always seems the Dems try to stack the deck when it comes to most anything...The two party system is a necessity for checks and balances...The frivolous and unpopular legislation gets passed (or not) when the time comes...There are always those who want something and those who oppose it..If it wasn't that way, then only 5% of the population would pay 75% of the taxed instead of the now 10%... There always will be those who want something on the back of others and the demons who of course who oppose it..

[vrDrew]

Originally Posted by Squadleader

Except the Democrats consistently block Voter I.D. which doesn't take much technology at all (Picture ID)....

The fact of the matter is that Voter Fraud (which presumably Voter ID is there to prevent) is not only irrational, its also extremely rare. Studies show it occurs between 0.00004% and 0.0009%. (People are more likely to be struck by lightning than they are to commit voter fraud.)

Which brings up the question: Why are Republicans so dead set on pretending Voter Fraud is such a huge problem?

Republicans, and the Fox New propaganda machine, have been playing up this whole"Obama stole the election" fairytale. Look at all the ridiculous stories about the New Black Panthers, etc. That is, when they aren't kidding themselves that they are so much smarter than people who vote Democratic. (Without asking themselves why most Republicans actually vote against their own economic self-interest....)

There is pretty much no reason for Voter ID. It simply makes the electoral process much more cumbersome - and costly to taxpayers. It needlessly complicates the voting process, especially for college students and young people.

Do these people deserve to be disenfranchised, and taxpayers stuck with the bill for another layer of needless Government paperwork - just to satisfy the ludicrous imaginations of Republicans?

[Squadleader]

Originally Posted by vrDrew

The fact of the matter is that Voter Fraud (which presumably Voter ID is there to prevent) is not only irrational, its also extremely rare.

Thank-you for making my point.....

[Huntn]

Originally Posted by Squadleader

Except the Democrats consistently block Voter I.D. which doesn't take much technology at all (Picture ID)...It almost always seems the Dems try to stack the deck when it comes to most anything...The two party system is a necessity for checks and balances...The frivolous and unpopular legislation gets passed (or not) when the time comes...There are always those who want something and those who oppose it..If it wasn't that way, then only 5% of the population would pay 75% of the taxed instead of the now 10%... There always will be those who want something on the back of others and the demons who of course who oppose it..

Don't fall for a myth that poor people and illegal immigrants put voter fraud high on their list of activities. We have Voter Registration CARDs. While I would not be against a picture ID, we don't need a picture ID for voting, and while a drivers license should be an acceptable form of ID, it should not be required (as some states want), if the person has a voter card and the place of voting has a roster. It's that simple.

If I go to my registered voting location, they sign me in and I vote and they check my name off their list. How many other people do you think are going to go there and sign in with my name? It's a plot by a political party to try to squelch the vote in this country so their perceived candidates will receive a majority of those who were allowed to vote..

Originally Posted by vrDrew

The fact of the matter is that Voter Fraud (which presumably Voter ID is there to prevent) is not only irrational, its also extremely rare. Studies show it occurs between 0.00004% and 0.0009%. (People are more likely to be struck by lightning than they are to commit voter fraud.)

Which brings up the question: Why are Republicans so dead set on pretending Voter Fraud is such a huge problem?

Republicans, and the Fox New propaganda machine, have been playing up this whole"Obama stole the election" fairytale. Look at all the ridiculous stories about the New Black Panthers, etc. That is, when they aren't kidding themselves that they are so much smarter than people who vote Democratic. (Without asking themselves why most Republicans actually vote against their own economic self-interest....)

There is pretty much no reason for Voter ID. It simply makes the electoral process much more cumbersome - and costly to taxpayers. It needlessly complicates the voting process, especially for college students and young people.

Do these people deserve to be disenfranchised, and taxpayers stuck with the bill for another layer of needless Government paperwork - just to satisfy the ludicrous imaginations of Republicans?

My answer above.