Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[10ebbor10]

I'm afraid that either of those will just result in a single party system.

But yeah, it's hard to push through changes when the only party in position to make said changes benefits from not doing so.

[Sergarr]

What would need to happen to the US system in order to develop a multi-party system?

Dissection of the country into independent states.

[Darvi]

Overhaul of the FPTP-system, actually.

[10ebbor10]

Dividing won't solve it. It just means that in non battleground states one of the 2 parties will have to change, but the two party system will remain.

[Descan]

What would need to happen to the US system in order to develop a multi-party system?

Any element that makes either a voter say "I have to vote for Repub/Demos or else my vote won't count" and any element that makes a would-be politician say "I have to align with Demos/Repubs or I won't stand a chance" need to go. Hence, first past the post (Strategic voting is a huge issue, and in the recent Ontario election, the liberals got 1% more vote than they did last time but won a majority and got 55 (out of 107) seats. Greens got 5% vote and no seats. Not very democratic) and election funding by big-ass corporations need to go. Gerrymandering is... well, obvious that it needs to leave.

Getting rid of the electoral college would probably help too, since that means no matter where you are, your vote matters as much as anyone elses vote.

[Frumple]

Getting rid of the electoral college would probably help too, since that means no matter where you are, your vote matters as much as anyone elses vote.

Yeesssss... functionally disenfranchise those dirty rural plebeians. Only the cities will ever matterrrrr, ahahahahahahaaaa!

[RedKing]

Getting rid of the electoral college would probably help too, since that means no matter where you are, your vote matters as much as anyone elses vote.

Yeesssss... functionally disenfranchise those dirty rural plebeians. Only the cities will ever matterrrrr, ahahahahahahaaaa!

Considering those rural plebians are at the core of why we have a functionally insane Congress.....

[Frumple]

Hey, as a dirty rural pleb I readily welcome favoritism for my fellows being excised from the democratic system. It's probably overdue. Some kind of check might be nice to keep our clueless city dwelling overlords from legislatively wrecking the entire non-urban countryside, but other than that maybe some parity would be nice for a generation or two.

[Bauglir]

Getting rid of the electoral college would probably help too, since that means no matter where you are, your vote matters as much as anyone elses vote.

Yeesssss... functionally disenfranchise those dirty rural plebeians. Only the cities will ever matterrrrr, ahahahahahahaaaa!

I mean, first you'll have to convince me why their votes should matter more.

[Frumple]

I want to say the modern reasoning (well, beyond partisan party bullshit) is something along the lines of throwing them a bone so they're somewhat more content with being poor backwoods drunkards,* instead of being poor backwoods drunkards blowing up the local infrastructure. Also to give some more weight to folks actually on the ground for the non-urban areas, which make up a lot more of the country geographically. I couldn't say how well this has actually been working out (though I could guess that the answer is "poorly to the point of being farcical").

*Not 100% representative of the rural population. Maybe 90% representative, but anyway. Yes, as a poor rural pleb having been surrounded by drunk poor rural plebs for most of my life, my perceptions are slightly colored by the general practices of north florida's particular brand of swamp dweller.

[10ebbor10]

Generally, I think the reasoning is that it's harder for a minority to repressed if they're represented beyond their number.

[Descan]

Getting rid of the electoral college would probably help too, since that means no matter where you are, your vote matters as much as anyone elses vote.

Yeesssss... functionally disenfranchise those dirty rural plebeians. Only the cities will ever matterrrrr, ahahahahahahaaaa!

Well, considering the vast majority of voters *are* urban... Why the fuck are Rural people so special that they can hold a strangle-hold on a democracy, purely because of where they live and what they do?

Edit: I don't really care how this sounds. :V

[Lord Shonus]

Maybe because, if urban voters carelessly wreck rural areas through legislation, the entire world starves. Isn't that farfetched when you've seen literally hundreds of business ruined because "It smells bad!" or "I don't want to hear those engines running until 10:00 AM!"

[Sergarr]

Maybe because, if urban voters carelessly wreck rural areas through legislation, the entire world starves. Isn't that farfetched when you've seen literally hundreds of business ruined because "It smells bad!" or "I don't want to hear those engines running until 10:00 AM!"

"the entire world"?

[Lord Shonus]

An exagerration, but not as much of one as I would like, given the huge percentage of the world food supply that's held up directly or indirectly by US grain. Taking 20 or 30 percent out of the equation would result in massive famine.