Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you are wondering why we are having these problems I suggest simply following the money. Witch segment of the America public has become rich or richer during the last 30 years? Which segment has become poorer? Who do you think controls the politics and policy of the NATION?
OP – Our attention span has been systematically lowered by TV broadcasting format. We watch 12 minutes of programming followed by 3 minutes of advertizing every hour. This has trained our minds to be unable to concentrate on anything for more than the expected time. We have also been taught to care more for our “family” of characters on the tube than our real world neighbors.
This has been great for a consumer economy but devastating for our communities. It has let a few very dedicated schemers take over our politics for their benefit at our expense.
... This has been great for a consumer economy but devastating for our communities. It has let a few very dedicated schemers take over our politics for their benefit at our expense.
There is a problem with having a strong third party. There has been no presidential election where there were only two candidates, however, third-party candidates are rarely represented in a majority of the states, and those that were on the ballot in a majority of states have never been successful.
Politics and Government is based on the economic and military needs of a country. I'm Focusing on the economic needs, because it alone forces the two party need.
Think of a black and white line scale, dark on each end growing lighter into the center. One Side extreme business, hard right Republicans. The other side extreme socialists hard left Democrats. Different Representatives on both sides have different positions on the scale. None cross the center but will meet at the center.
Now add a 3rd party between the middle and the end of either a given side. As a result representatives and philosophies on that side are no longer able to reach from middle to end. One side would have broader movement and receive more votes then the two individual parts of the split side. A snake eating it's own tail. In fact when one party is split in this manner the opposite side can all but insure victory in the campaign and focus on other campaigns.
The best example is Nixon vs. Johnson enter George Wallace splitting Democrat votes in 1968, and Bush 41 vs. Clinton. Enter Ross Perot splitting Republican votes in 1992.
I will say that having unwinnable third parties like we have seen in the are an essential part of the political process. They go a long way to bring attention to their positions, and their is a long list. However the larg third party can only be looking at the scale not a part of it. That being the constituency aka the voters.
I usually don't vote based on party but this year I am looking to put balance back in the branches. So I'll be looking at replacing extreme liberals with Republicans.
I would rather vote for a more moderate candidate but we are in so much trouble from the extreme left liberal push.
Good point
The problem is that there are a FEW moderate democrats... Unfortunately for them, they have a big D next to their name so that makes them guilty by association. Any moderate democrat who wants to survive needs to go Independent ASAP.
Good point
The problem is that there are a FEW moderate democrats... Unfortunately for them, they have a big D next to their name so that makes them guilty by association. Any moderate democrat who wants to survive needs to go Independent ASAP.
The same could be applied to Republicans and the extreme religious right. Realistically when we get to far on one side we are lop sided for lack of a better term.
So now the Republicans have regained the trust of the public since the Democrats have underperformed. Back and forth we go, slipping away as a country. These two parties are destroying this country and all I see here and in public is finger pointing among two sides.
The government, rife with Democrats and Republicans and their power players, lobbyists, and industry power players, have failed to effectively govern this country for decades. All we have seen is blatant abuse of civil liberties and privacy, tremendous fraud, waste, and abuse, and rampant corruption.
Is this not common knowledge? Has this country become so dumbed-down and passive; there's this problem with your own country being destroyed from within, yet you support a lesser of two evils to see us through dark times?
the problem isnt with the parties themselves, it is the progressives in the parties that are the problem, and has been for more than 100 years. these are the people that want to eliminate the constitution, and have been doing it a little at a time. and yes the problem is the voter, because they hear the words being spouted by the candidates, but they dont listen to the candidates. for instance people heard obama say he was for economic justice, but few people listened when he told joe the plumber that he wanted to spread the wealth to everyone under him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
OP – Our attention span has been systematically lowered by TV broadcasting format. We watch 12 minutes of programming followed by 3 minutes of advertizing every hour. This has trained our minds to be unable to concentrate on anything for more than the expected time. We have also been taught to care more for our “family” of characters on the tube than our real world neighbors.
This has been great for a consumer economy but devastating for our communities. It has let a few very dedicated schemers take over our politics for their benefit at our expense.
television programming is even more insidious that you realize. the content of the programs has been indoctrinating children for decades, molding young minds to easily accept the progessive agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewmik
There is a problem with having a strong third party. There has been no presidential election where there were only two candidates, however, third-party candidates are rarely represented in a majority of the states, and those that were on the ballot in a majority of states have never been successful.
really? no third party candidate has ever been successful? did you forget about lincoln? yes he was a republican, but at the time the republicans WERE the third party. and the election of 1860 went to a brokered convention where lincoln was able to garner the votes needed to put him in the oval office.
Ya just look at France great example of a country. Its hard enough to get things done with 2 parties 8 would be a disaster
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
