ABOLISH ALL POLITICAL PARTIES

[steve dave]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/why-i-refuse-to-vote-for-barack-obama/262861/

This along with his continued support of the Patriot act, the construction of the largest spy center in NSA history in Utah for the purpose of covertly spying on all domestic communications without a warrant, his support of the NDAA clause that gives the right of an executive to arrest any American citizen and detain them without trail indefinitely on suspicion of terrorism, and the needlessly intrusive tactics of the TSA and DHS under Janet Napolitano are all major strikes against him. Not to mention the DoJ's lack of enthusiasm in effectively prosecuting those responsible for the 2008 financial crisis.

Instead of abolishing all political parties we need 4 - One for the progressives, one for the center-left, one for the fiscal conservatives, and one for the social conservatives. It'd provide a decentralization of power coveted by the right while giving the radicals and centrists from both parties a welcome opportunity to split off from each other. You'd still have opportunities for coalitions but not nearly as much disingenuous pandering to the more fervent elements of one's base.

 

[Dugout DickStone]

But we really should do away with political parties

you think it's ok to take away people's ability to form groups based on their common beliefs to support a candidate of their choice? this isn't communist russia, this is mother rough ridin' america friend.

I agree but the 2 party system makes us choose between 2 bad choices.  I don't really follow politics because of it.  I know who most closely aligns with what I prefer and vote that way even though half their platform is thoroughly distasteful to me.

[steve dave]

start another party you can bring people from the others to your new one

[steve dave]

Ultimately, what the people pissed at the parties are pissed about is that people don't see things the same way they do. Someone who you almost 100% agree with was running at some point in this election. They didn't get the nomination or dropped out on their own. That's not a party fault, that's the voters.

[p1k3]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/why-i-refuse-to-vote-for-barack-obama/262861/

This along with his continued support of the Patriot act, the construction of the largest spy center in NSA history in Utah for the purpose of covertly spying on all domestic communications without a warrant, his support of the NDAA clause that gives the right of an executive to arrest any American citizen and detain them without trail indefinitely on suspicion of terrorism, and the needlessly intrusive tactics of the TSA and DHS under Janet Napolitano are all major strikes against him. Not to mention the DoJ's lack of enthusiasm in effectively prosecuting those responsible for the 2008 financial crisis.

Instead of abolishing all political parties we need 4 - One for the progressives, one for the center-left, one for the fiscal conservatives, and one for the social conservatives. It'd provide a decentralization of power coveted by the right while giving the radicals and centrists from both parties a welcome opportunity to split off from each other. You'd still have opportunities for coalitions but not nearly as much disingenuous pandering to the more fervent elements of one's base.

 

Stevedave hates the truth

[Dugout DickStone]

The first paragraph is nutty, second one is good.

[steve dave]

The first paragraph is nutty, second one is good.

opposite

[Dugout DickStone]

The first paragraph is nutty, second one is good.

opposite

Whoops, I had forgotten how well the 2 party system had performed lately.

[0.42]

Meh. It's not like the 4 party idea will ever become a reality. It's just what I think would be the best system in Congress, go ahead and hate all you want on a hypothetical.

Plus the rollback on civil liberties in this country is a problem. It's not necessarily that Obama's turned us into a fascist police state like the conspiracy nuts claim he has, but he's continued some terrible Bush policies and has helped lay a groundwork in place for more abusive leaders to clamp down on our liberties if this stuff doesn't get overturned. You don't have to believe in the Bilderberg bullshit to see that. It'd be one thing if we passed these policies in order to counteract a given threat (like if we were at war with China or something), but this is all aimed at a War on Terror that doesn't have an end date in sight.

Anyway, commence with your 

[steve dave]

Meh. It's not like the 4 party idea will ever become a reality. It's just what I think would be the best system in Congress, go ahead and hate all you want on a hypothetical.

Plus the rollback on civil liberties in this country is a problem. It's not necessarily that Obama's turned us into a fascist police state like the conspiracy nuts claim he has, but he's continued some terrible Bush policies and has helped lay a groundwork in place for more abusive leaders to clamp down on our liberties if this stuff doesn't get overturned. You don't have to believe in the Bilderberg bullshit to see that. It'd be one thing if we passed these policies in order to counteract a given threat (like if we were at war with China or something), but this is all aimed at a War on Terror that doesn't have an end date in sight.

Anyway, commence with your 

it has nothing to do with that, it's that the 4 party doesn't solve any of your problems. the govt. doesn't mandate two parties. make 3, make 4, make 12. do whatever you want. your problems (and mine) are more to do with making the dumbfucks in this country (unfortunately most of the country) realize that they are dumbfucks and the AM radio and TV don't necessarily have their best interests at heart.

[ednksu]

Meh. It's not like the 4 party idea will ever become a reality. It's just what I think would be the best system in Congress, go ahead and hate all you want on a hypothetical.

Plus the rollback on civil liberties in this country is a problem. It's not necessarily that Obama's turned us into a fascist police state like the conspiracy nuts claim he has, but he's continued some terrible Bush policies and has helped lay a groundwork in place for more abusive leaders to clamp down on our liberties if this stuff doesn't get overturned. You don't have to believe in the Bilderberg bullshit to see that. It'd be one thing if we passed these policies in order to counteract a given threat (like if we were at war with China or something), but this is all aimed at a War on Terror that doesn't have an end date in sight.

Anyway, commence with your 

it has nothing to do with that, it's that the 4 party doesn't solve any of your problems. the govt. doesn't mandate two parties. make 3, make 4, make 12. do whatever you want. your problems (and mine) are more to do with making the dumbfucks in this country (unfortunately most of the country) realize that they are dumbfucks and the AM radio and TV don't necessarily have their best interests at heart.

partially correct.  the unfortunate thing is that there are legitimate barriers to entry for alternative parties.

[puniraptor]

Set limits so all parties can only spend the same limited amount of money. I think that would fix it. Like NASCAR for you rednecks out there. Restrictor plates and crap. Vroooooooooooooooooom Green Party bitches.

[Panjandrum]

Who's going to legalize hookers and weed?

I mean, if you want to buy an election, it's easily hookers and weed.

[SdK]

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=23084.0

[sys]

proportional representation.

[EMAWmeister]

Does Ron Paul have the most butthurt supporters in the history of politics?

[Institutional Control]

Does Ron Paul have the most butthurt supporters in the history of politics?

2nd. Ross Perot supporters in 1992 are still in the lead.

[Stupid Fitz]

Meh. It's not like the 4 party idea will ever become a reality. It's just what I think would be the best system in Congress, go ahead and hate all you want on a hypothetical.

Plus the rollback on civil liberties in this country is a problem. It's not necessarily that Obama's turned us into a fascist police state like the conspiracy nuts claim he has, but he's continued some terrible Bush policies and has helped lay a groundwork in place for more abusive leaders to clamp down on our liberties if this stuff doesn't get overturned. You don't have to believe in the Bilderberg bullshit to see that. It'd be one thing if we passed these policies in order to counteract a given threat (like if we were at war with China or something), but this is all aimed at a War on Terror that doesn't have an end date in sight.

Anyway, commence with your 

it has nothing to do with that, it's that the 4 party doesn't solve any of your problems. the govt. doesn't mandate two parties. make 3, make 4, make 12. do whatever you want. your problems (and mine) are more to do with making the dumbfucks in this country (unfortunately most of the country) realize that they are dumbfucks and the AM radio and TV don't necessarily have their best interests at heart.

Yep,  I mean, they are creating reality tv shows (I am sure they will be unbiased) to "educate" people on Obamacare.  They are also trying to get big tv shows to work it in their plots.  I disagree with SD one point though.  I am pretty sure they already know they are dumbfucks.  No one needs to make them realize it.  The scary part is that they don't even care that they are dumbfucks.  As long as a Kardashian tweets out her lunch plans and Honey Booboo is on the stupid box every night, life is good. 

[mortons toe]

Does Ron Paul have the most butthurt supporters in the history of politics?

2nd. Ross Perot supporters in 1992 are still in the lead.

and why wouldn't they? He had 1/3 of the polls.

and fwiw, I live in one of the top 5 largest cities in the country and have seen far more Ron Paul campaign support than BO or RR. Unfortunately, Gary Johnson is next.

[kstatefreak42]

Pike, dont even try to argue with him. He is a complete vegetable. Even if you throw out facts that are on PUBLIC RECORD  and visible for all to see he will still deny it. He is just another  indoctrinated dumbshit who has caused  the further deterioration of our civil liberties ( who cares about those nowadays right?)   .. and the allowing of both political parties to RAPE our economic system and concentrate ALL OF THE WEALTH TO THE UPPER 1%  People like STEVEDAVE need to be left alone... they are already lost. Its better to focus the Liberty message to those who are not indoctrinated in this political ponzi scheme of a system we call DEMOCRACY LOL

[steve dave]

this isn't communist Russia kstatefreak, we have a little thing called freedom.

[HeinBallz]

SD, I see your point - why not just start your own party?   I get it.  There are other parties, but that's not the point.  The point is Republicans & democrats are automatic bids.  They're automatically in the debates.  They're automatically on the ballot in all the states.   They're automatically within a 50% slot of being the next president.   GJ will never win, because a 3rd party is essentially still splitting the votes - and if either a d or an r will be the big winner - it's still a 50/50 chance for the r's & d's regardless of a green party candidate, libertarian candidate, communist candidate, marxist etc. 

That's not a how the system is constructed; there are not rules that make this possible - it's a reflection of the monopoly that has been created within the political structure.   Republicans & Democrats have a monopoly on the power.  That's the issue. 

Why does a political candidate even seek affiliation with a political party? You and I know they do so that dumb asses with blinders on will vote for them no matter what they really stand for.  So why not abolish all political parties?  There would be no more: "I'm a libertarian, so I'm going to vote for Gary Johnson!"  or "I'm a Republican, so I'm going to vote for Mitt Romney!" or "I'm a democrat I'm going to vote for Barrack Obama!"  Wouldn't it be amazing if people actually knew what they were voting for and not accepting the lesser of two evils?  Why can't a debate be between Gary Johnson/Ron Paul/Mitt Romney/Barrack Obama/Michelle Bachman/Huntsman/Santorum/etc instead of a debate between the Republican vs. the Democrat? 

What if all of the religions were consolidated to two categories: Jews & Christians.  Can you imagine the "butt-hurt" athiest would feel? Mormons? Muslims?   Hindu? 

[steve dave]

they are automatic because they are popular...just like a party you create would be if they got a large percent of the popular vote

[HeinBallz]

they are automatic because they are popular...just like a party you create would be if they got a large percent of the popular vote

I think you miss my point.  It's popular because it has a monopoly; The basic ideals behind republicans & democrats are popular - but we have candidates that you've been told are either democrat or republican; but with their political actions on paper - no names attached & no political affiliation - Romney would have just as many actions that democrats agree with that Obama would have republicans agree with and a whole slew of things that no one would agree with.   

That's the "butthurt" that people are seeing with Ron Paul Supporters.  I was more in line with republican type of thinking until Bush - I Didn't immediately jump democrat - It just made me pay closer attention.  I now consider myself an independent.  I think we would go much further in society if everyone was independent and measured the actions of our political leaders, not decipher their political affiliation and put on the blinders to everything else.  You certainly wouldn't be getting the "well I don't agree with this candidate (A) - but I have to vote for him to get rid of candidate (B)".  That's just a damn slippery slope of voting for consistently worse options.

[steve dave]

they have a "monopoly" (they actually don't, but using your phrasing) because they are wildly popular...you are putting the cart in front of the horse.