User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 26

  1. #11
    breaking out of my cocoon SearchingforPeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE None
    Posts
    6,797

    Default

    There is nothing stopping a real third party except voter apathy. Everything else can be overcome.

    Don't like the two major party choices? Vote for a third party closest to your beliefs.

    If everyone stopped voting for the lesser of two evils then we could get real reform. We could dump a two party system to get a multiple party democracy.

    Would it be hard? Yes. Would it take time? Yes. But mostly it would take saying "No."

    Parties can close their primaries because it is freedom of association. Open primaries result in non party members deciding who the party nominee will be. Like having a candidate whose values and principles are completely opposed by the party, but with the influence of a powerful outside body, win the party’s nomination.....

    There are a lot of reform ideas out there. This video with its whiny narrator really was not good at identifying the problem....
    Quote Originally Posted by Archilochus
    The fox knows many things--the hedgehog one big one.
    And I am not a hedgehog......

    -------------------

    Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers" not "blessed are the conflict avoiders.....

    9w8 6w5 4w5 sx/so

    ----------------------

    “Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984
    Likes Falcarius liked this post

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SearchingforPeace View Post
    There is nothing stopping a real third party except voter apathy. Everything else can be overcome.

    Don't like the two major party choices? Vote for a third party closest to your beliefs.

    If everyone stopped voting for the lesser of two evils then we could get real reform. We could dump a two party system to get a multiple party democracy.

    Would it be hard? Yes. Would it take time? Yes. But mostly it would take saying "No."

    Parties can close their primaries because it is freedom of association. Open primaries result in non party members deciding who the party nominee will be. Like having a candidate whose values and principles are completely opposed by the party, but with the influence of a powerful outside body, win the party’s nomination.....

    There are a lot of reform ideas out there. This video with its whiny narrator really was not good at identifying the problem....
    I would be curious how things play out with open primaries...examples...thoughts? I dont go by what was to decide my path, but interested to know the situations.

    When did they close, what was the initial reason?

    I can see the pluses. We picked our goup we like, now pick the ones you like out of this group. Pick which on of us you can work with best and we will return the favor. But that causes loss of control.

    Now that we have people that both sides have agreed on, who do we think would be best.
    Im out, its been fun

  3. #13
    breaking out of my cocoon SearchingforPeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE None
    Posts
    6,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poki View Post
    I would be curious how things play out with open primaries...examples...thoughts? I dont go by what was to decide my path, but interested to know the situations.

    When did they close, what was the initial reason?

    I can see the pluses. We picked our goup we like, now pick the ones you like out of this group. Pick which on of us you can work with best and we will return the favor. But that causes loss of control.

    Now that we have people that both sides have agreed on, who do we think would be best.
    Imagine instead what most European countries have: multiparty elections. Parties pick their candidates internally, but there are two rounds of voting, with the top two, regardless of party, advance. And because they have mutiple parties, the parties form coalitions to run the government. It encourages cooperation instead of polarization.......
    Quote Originally Posted by Archilochus
    The fox knows many things--the hedgehog one big one.
    And I am not a hedgehog......

    -------------------

    Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers" not "blessed are the conflict avoiders.....

    9w8 6w5 4w5 sx/so

    ----------------------

    “Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984
    Likes Poki liked this post

  4. #14
    Privileged Sh!tlord ZNP-TBA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx
    Socionics
    ILE Ti
    Posts
    3,071

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SearchingforPeace View Post
    There is nothing stopping a real third party except voter apathy. Everything else can be overcome.

    Don't like the two major party choices? Vote for a third party closest to your beliefs.

    If everyone stopped voting for the lesser of two evils then we could get real reform. We could dump a two party system to get a multiple party democracy.

    Would it be hard? Yes. Would it take time? Yes. But mostly it would take saying "No."

    Parties can close their primaries because it is freedom of association. Open primaries result in non party members deciding who the party nominee will be. Like having a candidate whose values and principles are completely opposed by the party, but with the influence of a powerful outside body, win the party’s nomination.....

    There are a lot of reform ideas out there. This video with its whiny narrator really was not good at identifying the problem....
    I support the idea of more options. My skepticism is concerning how big, powerful, and rich the two dominant parties are. Not to mention all the special interests entrenched with both. Someone running on a third party ticket could easily be sidelined and made irrelevant by the corporate media unless they have the charisma and resources to overcome that. Also, a third party person can be bought off by the larger party in exchange for some kind of seat or position if they are making too much noise. Being third, forth, or other party option doesn't automatically make someone incorruptible.

    Yeah I'm not giving solutions here but working within the system to fix the system seems like a moot point. I loved Ron Paul but even he had to work through the Republican machinery to get heard (couldn't really do it through the Libertarian Party, poor Gary Johnson). Even Trump won't revolutionize everything though he'll shake it up, to what extent remains to be seen.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,394

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SearchingforPeace View Post
    There is nothing stopping a real third party except voter apathy. Everything else can be overcome.

    Don't like the two major party choices? Vote for a third party closest to your beliefs.
    I think we spoke about this previously, not sure. I disagree with this, not in theory, because in theory, it makes sense. I disagree with the statement because it is fundamentally idealistic and ignores some realistic reasons why people vote the way they do. It ignores strategic voting. Which is valuable, although to some (maybe yourself? IDK), lacks integrity.

    But I have voted third party previously and seen who I didn't want to become elected - do so by a small margin. That margin being split between third party votes. My point is, my candidate wasn't even close to becoming elected but I made my moral decision. In doing so, the candidate that I thought would do the most harm (and did, IMO) slipped through.

    So, you know. Not disagreeing with you as far as how YOU want to vote but this is a reminder that not everyone values a vote based purely on ethics. Some voters include probabilities of electability of a candidate in that decision, too. This really has more to do with voting after the primaries, when more detailed information is at hand for the voter.



    Parties can close their primaries because it is freedom of association. Open primaries result in non party members deciding who the party nominee will be. Like having a candidate whose values and principles are completely opposed by the party, but with the influence of a powerful outside body, win the party’s nomination.....
    As far as open primaries....I think this is worth looking into. If reform happens, I can see it working really well at this level. Obviously, with some caveats, etc.

    But as for reforming the system further up the voting process - I am not opposed but I am much, much more hesitant.

    Remember when Howard Stern got 10% of the vote in NYC?

    Keep in mind Trump got the Republican Party nomination in part because that party was pretty lax about superdelegate percentages needed. They had a within party agreement that any superdelegates HAD to vote for whomever won their state. So, very democratic! Yay for them. But did we have the most qualified candidate there? In my opinion, no. There was a failure there. ...But that is my opinion and a bit off topic but I use that as an example of why some of these "elitist" checks and balances are in place. They all don't spring forth from some pure corrupt place.

    "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" - springs to mind as more of a realistic statement to describe all this.

    I am open to reform and I am pretty sure the Republican Party after this election will incorporate more stringent guidelines. The Dems have the opposite problem where public opinion lies. Too much power goes to superdelegate voting.

    Well, it would be nice if both parties would reform and agree upon set rules. I don't believe we have to upend all of it because some of these things are meant as a check/balance. Those are needed.

    I'm just reaalllly wary of putting this all on "corruption" because it isn't all about that. There are some legitimate reasons why some of these policies are in place. The key is not to go to far with reforms at the expense of ourselves in the long run. So, this post is my reminder to those who are rabid about reform but yet never speak about keeping balance either. (and no, I don't mean you, necessarily. Just an overall comment for the Peanut gallery)

  6. #16
    Unapologetic being Evo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SearchingforPeace View Post
    There is nothing stopping a real third party except voter apathy. Everything else can be overcome.

    Don't like the two major party choices? Vote for a third party closest to your beliefs.

    If everyone stopped voting for the lesser of two evils then we could get real reform. We could dump a two party system to get a multiple party democracy.

    Would it be hard? Yes. Would it take time? Yes. But mostly it would take saying "No."
    But why do you think it's so hard...?
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  7. #17
    Unapologetic being Evo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZNP-TBA View Post
    I support the idea of more options. My skepticism is concerning how big, powerful, and rich the two dominant parties are. Not to mention all the special interests entrenched with both. Someone running on a third party ticket could easily be sidelined and made irrelevant by the corporate media unless they have the charisma and resources to overcome that. Also, a third party person can be bought off by the larger party in exchange for some kind of seat or position if they are making too much noise. Being third, forth, or other party option doesn't automatically make someone incorruptible.

    Yeah I'm not giving solutions here but working within the system to fix the system seems like a moot point. I loved Ron Paul but even he had to work through the Republican machinery to get heard (couldn't really do it through the Libertarian Party, poor Gary Johnson). Even Trump won't revolutionize everything though he'll shake it up, to what extent remains to be seen.
    Killing it
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,394

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZNP-TBA View Post
    I support the idea of more options. My skepticism is concerning how big, powerful, and rich the two dominant parties are. Not to mention all the special interests entrenched with both. Someone running on a third party ticket could easily be sidelined and made irrelevant by the corporate media unless they have the charisma and resources to overcome that. Also, a third party person can be bought off by the larger party in exchange for some kind of seat or position if they are making too much noise. Being third, forth, or other party option doesn't automatically make someone incorruptible.

    Yeah I'm not giving solutions here but working within the system to fix the system seems like a moot point. I loved Ron Paul but even he had to work through the Republican machinery to get heard (couldn't really do it through the Libertarian Party, poor Gary Johnson). Even Trump won't revolutionize everything though he'll shake it up, to what extent remains to be seen.
    You have some good points here. Mainly that more parties won't necessarily stem the tide of what is viewed as corrupt policies. What we are talking about here isn't governed by the Constitution or Congress but each party. Each party sets their own rules of how superdelegate votes (I mention superdelegates because it seems to be at the forefront of controversy about reform) are counted and what the procedure is for that.

    Well, if that is the case you would have to have the government intervene and set regulation guidelines for each party (including third) and be as fair to all. Right now, it is set by the parties themselves. Since the majority is split within two parties, this is going to reflect a "power" that each have. Yes. The Dems and Reps have great power to set their own tones! Imagine that! You want the third parties to have a say? Is this what kind of reform we want? To have the third party have a bigger voice? Ok. If yes....

    Who is going to police the other two parties and force them to adhere to a more fair structure?

    The federal government? (This would be unpopular for a lot of people!)

    How much can public outcry change this?

    These are really good questions that seem to me to get lost in all this.
    Likes ZNP-TBA liked this post

  9. #19
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/so
    Socionics
    EIE Fe
    Posts
    8,632

    Default

    I do not believe elections are rigged. A lot of people cry this when things don't go the way they want or expected. It often feels like it, but that's simply not the case. Rigged implies that someone is actively working within the system to boost someone, and sink another. If a group of people were doing this, or if it were an individual, we'd find out quickly due to anomolies that would appear in the system.

    The closest thing I could consider something rigged this system is the issue with primary registrations. Considering though it's effected people across the aisle, it's difficult to claim it as rigging the system.

    What is going on though is a flawed system is being used. With the advent of modern technology, there are absolutely no excuses for the country to be using the methods seen in primary and caucses. We could do much much better that allows for more streamlined and efficient methods of voting. Further, one that encourages and enables as many people to vote as possible. Elections are "rigged" insofar as gerrymandering sections off demographics to increase the likelyhood of either side to win.

    Electoral processes simply need massive overhauling. They are pointlessly complex, and a large portion of it has failed to modernize and holds onto traditional methods simply because they are traditional.
    Likes ChocolateMoose123, tinker683 liked this post

  10. #20
    Privileged Sh!tlord ZNP-TBA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx
    Socionics
    ILE Ti
    Posts
    3,071

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard View Post
    I do not believe elections are rigged. A lot of people cry this when things don't go the way they want or expected. It often feels like it, but that's simply not the case. Rigged implies that someone is actively working within the system to boost someone, and sink another. If a group of people were doing this, or if it were an individual, we'd find out quickly due to anomolies that would appear in the system.
    Hillary, Bernie, superdelagates, ad-hoc rules at a convention...

    Your statement of faith above is admirable.

Similar Threads

  1. What political party do you identify with?
    By Ozones in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 06-03-2014, 03:31 AM
  2. Political Parties and Groupthink
    By MacGuffin in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 06-30-2012, 11:59 PM
  3. MBTI Types and Political Parties
    By DJAchtundvierzig in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-15-2010, 11:59 AM
  4. Political Party?
    By wyrdsister in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 08-04-2009, 08:09 PM
  5. Political Parties
    By Kiddo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 11-30-2007, 02:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO