RE: Parties for proportional representation

RE: Parties for proportional representation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Politesub53 -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 4:48:04 PM)
Id love to see a system where the brightest thinkers of either party get elected, and work together for the good of the nation. Too much of World Politics seems to be made up of people on the take and with only their own interests at heart.

kdsub -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 4:51:03 PM)
That is what I thought... have the answers you have received even addressed the issue you posted? To me no... Am I wrong? I would think the focus would be how the various parties would interact in congress… How and who would control committees… how would coalitions form …would the inclusion of many parties break the strangle hold of the current parties and would this demand compromise? Otherwise would our congress become more efficient. Butch

TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 4:54:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam What has one man, one vote got to do with the 3/5 compromise? Nice try at a smokescreen but in case you didn't hear, Mississippi finally ratified the 13th amendment the other day. I'm sure that was a lovely gesture on their part. Somebody threaten the highway money, or did they come up with it on their own? If you are talking about determining which people get representation, based on their legal classification, I think a reference to the previous arrangement is quite in order. Illegals put their kids in our schools, drive on our roads, pay the point of sale taxes the rest of us do, and count as members of the total population. Taxation without representation, and all that, y'know?

kdsub -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 4:54:50 PM)
OR Would the many differing positions and minority agendas just further paralyze congress? Butch

kdsub -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 5:16:26 PM)
I am sure I am showing my ignorance of the Constitution but I do not believe this is a federal issue. Otherwise there is nothing in the Constitution, or is there, that says we must have only two parties represented in congress. So it is at the state level changes would have to be made...Is this correct?

TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 5:18:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub OR Would the many differing positions and minority agendas just further paralyze congress? Butch How much more paralyzed are we going to get, Butch? The two-party system isn't in the Constitution, much less carved into stone. If the House has to rewrite the rules for who sits where, so be it. And yes, while we have diversions into tangents on specific planks, I think there have been good answers, and an on-topic kind of discussion. We could use some genuine US liberal thought in here, but it might be best to just leave well enough alone.

kdsub -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 5:33:32 PM)
quote: How much more paralyzed are we going to get, Butch? I can envision where it could make things worse... the only way these minority representatives could have their platforms addressed is by selling allegiance to a majority party and having their particular agenda added as pork. So rather than streamlining the process and compromise we get more bridges to nowhere and oddball legislation add-ons that do NOT represent the majority. I am not saying this would happen only it could. Butch

TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 6:17:57 PM)
I think you are assuming too much loyalty to the current major parties, Butch. The power of both would be greatly diminished. The scare tactics of the first election would be horrendous, but a fiscally conservative party that kicks the religious nuts to the curb would do pretty well in destabilizing the Republicans, while fiscal liberals that admit they hate gays and illegals would be a drain for the Dems. It isn't magic, or immediate, but I think we would be better served, than by what we have now.

Owner59 -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 7:19:34 PM)
Ha....lol!.....Typical republican hacks who`ll trash their beliefs/ideals/principals/precedents/values when its suits them......

Hillwilliam -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 9:49:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam What has one man, one vote got to do with the 3/5 compromise? Nice try at a smokescreen but in case you didn't hear, Mississippi finally ratified the 13th amendment the other day. I'm sure that was a lovely gesture on their part. Somebody threaten the highway money, or did they come up with it on their own? If you are talking about determining which people get representation, based on their legal classification, I think a reference to the previous arrangement is quite in order. Illegals put their kids in our schools, drive on our roads, pay the point of sale taxes the rest of us do, and count as members of the total population. Taxation without representation, and all that, y'know? The Mississippi thing was noticed by a recent immigrant who was a professor at one of their universities after watching "Lincoln". The vote was held in the 19th century but paperwork wasn't ever filed. Neat trivia. So, are you saying non citizens should be allowed to vote?

Hillwilliam -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 9:53:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub OR Would the many differing positions and minority agendas just further paralyze congress? Butch I disagree. Multiple parties would force everyone to negotiate so long as one party didn't have a majority. Gridlock is caused by our 2-party 'my way or the hiwa'y system because the 'out' party knows that if things get bad enough, the people will blame the 'ins' and switch the power structure. If everyone is 'out' these treasonous saboteurs will have to stop.

Owner59 -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:02:41 PM)
I`m still unconvinced that multiple parties would influence gridlock or lessen it. That said I`m completely ok with a third or forth party if that`s the will of the people. The libertarians have been co-opted by the right-wing to the point of irrelevance. Maybe we`ll get a viable 3rd party after the GOP splits.

TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:14:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam So, are you saying non citizens should be allowed to vote? Not at all, Hill! And I think we're going to need plenty of buses to the border standing by, when we figure out who gets a path to citizenship, and who shouldn't be here. If Canada wants to offer them asylum, that might be nice. For purposes of counting population though, they are fully human. When we did the Reagan Amnesty, the deal was that the border got secured. It didn't happen, and we wound up right back here again. That has to happen. Damn. Even in California, I may be hard pressed to find a party that's going to hit all these bases.

jlf1961 -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:18:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Id love to see a system where the brightest thinkers of either party get elected, and work together for the good of the nation. Too much of World Politics seems to be made up of people on the take and with only their own interests at heart. The brightest thinkers of either party in the US is lower than the average IQ and common sense ability of the average American...

Real0ne -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/19/2013 4:19:30 AM)
still hanging on to the myth they are working for you huh

Real0ne -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/19/2013 4:22:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam So, are you saying non citizens should be allowed to vote? Not at all, Hill! hmm..... do they pay taxes on goods or services? yes they do.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/19/2013 5:24:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam So, are you saying non citizens should be allowed to vote? Not at all, Hill! And I think we're going to need plenty of buses to the border standing by, when we figure out who gets a path to citizenship, and who shouldn't be here. If Canada wants to offer them asylum, that might be nice. For purposes of counting population though, they are fully human. When we did the Reagan Amnesty, the deal was that the border got secured. It didn't happen, and we wound up right back here again. That has to happen. Damn. Even in California, I may be hard pressed to find a party that's going to hit all these bases. I was wondering because it almost sounded that way. As for them paying taxes, they use services don;t they? sometimes, they use a disproportionate amount of services. (Note, I said sometimes folks) That's what those taxes are for. As for representation, I think that should only be for citizens. Here's my logic. Let's say I hit the lottery. Summers will be spent in Kamchatka and Alaska and 'winters' in New Zealand and Argentina. Have flyrods, will travel. I will spend a lot of time in 3 foreign countries and spend a lot of money on various taxes. Should I be allowed to be represented in their legislature just because I pay more taxes than some small villages (Kamchatka example)? NO Representation is for citizens. Citizrns have the privelege of making the rules. If you don't like the rules, either become a citizen or don't come here in the first place. When I've travelled to a foreign country, I didn't get to make the rules. I either accepted their rules or I didn't go.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/19/2013 5:25:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam So, are you saying non citizens should be allowed to vote? Not at all, Hill! hmm..... do they pay taxes on goods or services? yes they do. Big fucking deal. When I travelled to foreign countries, I paid their taxes for goods and services but I didn't get to vote in their elections.

tj444 -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/19/2013 6:19:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 I`m still unconvinced that multiple parties would influence gridlock or lessen it. Canada does quite well with a multi-party system.. it even had a minority govt for 5 years.. when a party stops doing what people want, they choose one of the others.. so its harder for lobbyists and backroom deals and campaign fund donations to control what govt does when you have multi-parties.. You have seen what the 2 party system does, it make it easy for lobbyists & big business to create laws that are the opposite of what voters want.. There is absolutely no reason for Big Pharma, Big Insurance, HMOs, etc to get a big chunk of Obamacare but thats whats happened cuz its the 1% that govt actually listens to.. no matter the party you vote for.. But of course I dont see Americans being able to change their political system, you are stuck with it..

GotSteel -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/19/2013 6:46:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic ...pragmatic fiscal conservatives. That would be a wonderful change. I'm quite tired of the surprise we're not actually fiscally conservative and really just want to force our unpopular social positions on everyone conservatives.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875