User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Ban Parties?

  1. #21
    Learning to fly Array Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008


    Quote Originally Posted by chickpea View Post
    most of my problems with it are in the yankeedom/midlands/tidewater. which happens to be the area where I grew up, probably I'm feeling so nitpicky about it.

    putting michigan/wisconsin/minnesota together with the northeast and separating them from the other midwestern states was very strange to me.
    I get that, because my parents are from the Midwestern "Yankeedom" (Northern Illinois), and that describes their own attitudes pretty well. (My attitudes seems a little more Midlands, except more cynical.)The voting patterns certainly justify it. It sounds weird to call Midwesterners "Yankees", but if, instead of thinking of the traditional connotation of the term, and attitudes, it makes a great deal of sense. To me, anyway.

    also extending the midlands to the point where maryland is together with the dakotas and nebraska.
    That part is rather odd. They probably belong in the Far West.
    plus they chose the county I grew up in as one of the northern borders of tidewater, and besides being on the coast don't see the connection culturally.
    Where would you place it? Tidewater (and NYC being separate.. I'm not sure that it's different enough from either Midlands or Yankeedom to justify it beyond the history of Dutch settlement) is maybe the one I have the hardest time being convinced of; it's seems like it's separate just to justify relatively recent voting patterns.
    I'm gonna get myself in fighting trim... scope out every angle of unfair advantage. - The Mountain Goats.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Array Lark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009


    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I just happened to be reading material on this lately. What analysis of elections at a local level show (for what that's worth), absence of parties does reduce partisan elements but it just increases the amount that people blindly vote for incumbent politicians.

    The main take away is basically this: Voters often rely on lazy heuristics. Partisanship is one of them. If you take it away, they just put more weight on some other lazy heuristic which isn't necessarily better. I personally think candidate incumbency is even worse.

    Incidentally, voter turnout was also lower in non-partisan elections.
    I certainly know that in the republic of ireland, which as five or six main parties as opposed to two with dynastic elements like the Bush family or Clintons that this is exactly how it goes. People vote for the same person their family always voted for and who has always held the office or whoever they recommend when they are going to retire.

  3. #23
    Senior Member Array Lark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009


    Quote Originally Posted by gromit View Post
    I want more parties!!!

    No, but seriously, I do. I don't really like either of the two we've got here in America. I think it could stir the pot and make people less stuck in their way of thinking. Or if they don't adapt then they get voted out.
    I think it was the election which resulted in the first Clinton administration which generated the most diverse political parties and was one of the most interesting from the stand point of a random internet observer.

    Now I know they were perhaps plunging the depths of obscurity but I remember a website which had maybe a dozen or more extreme left and extreme right parties listed, like the American Flange (!) or Libertarian National Socialist Green Party (!!), I remember thinking it had to have been made up, but each of them had supporting links to web pages and manifestos.

    Remember when Bob Dole tried to buy the presidency? He had a super nutty election manifesto, tried to draw on left and right politics to justify cuts to everything pretty much.

    Imagine if some of them had won! I know that the UK has said the cuts they've made since the cold war have meant they pretty much are defenceless against an air attack from Russia (although I never rated them as capable of defence anyway, not against one of the real powers).

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 291
    Last Post: 10-12-2016, 10:22 PM
  2. Political Party?
    By wyrdsister in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 08-04-2009, 08:09 PM
  3. Parties
    By substitute in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 10-13-2007, 11:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts