Members +
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Patine last won the day on October 16 2012

Patine had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

35 Excellent

About Patine

  • Rank
    Political Guru

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. Well, both would lead the U.S. gladly to disastrous foreign wars anyways, so...
  2. Parochial nationalism versus flawed forced integration. Either way, a losing scenario.
  3. Ah, the Weimar Republic started the trend. Fascists, hard Communists, Monarchists, regional parrochialists, and a few Christian fundamentalists together outpolled all the sensible parties and candidates combined.
  4. I might have an interest in potentially tackling several Newfoundland and Nova Scotia elections on my queue of future scenarios, though, I will admit, New Brunswick and PEI are far less interesting to me.
  5. He's not truly a Fascist himself, he just had an aggressive, populist, ultranationalist electoral campaign centred on promising easy-sounding and unrealistic solutions to the nation's problems, buying into myths and bad stereotypes, especially about minority demographics, and threatening and encouraging violence by his supporter against political opponents, which, in and of that aspect, was very reminiscent of Hitler's election campaigns in the Weimar Republic in the early '30's. Also, many Trump supporters, especially those who were amongst the ones who gave the Trump campaign it's worse image through their rabble-rousing and hooliganism, and including his original White House strategist, Steve Bannon, belonged to the so-called Alt-Right Movement, which itself has many beliefs that smack of Neo-Naziism or Neo-Fascism. But, admittedly, ideologically and in government style, Trump is not a true Fascist.
  6. It's a real shame that moderation, or even common sense and a sense of proportion, and any willingness for compromise and cooperation with political opponents, are so vilified and considered such sins by the two major U.S. Parties. One of many reasons I would sincerely like to see the U.S. party Duopoly destroyed utterly as a political institution, along with it's iron grip on power.
  7. For example, if I had been able to vote in the 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election, I think I would have voted for Rocky Delafuante. That's how horrid and monstrous (or at least highly unappealing) everyone else running was.
  8. An EXTREME allegiance? Do you even know what the word 'allegiance' means? Or being an actual 'member' of a party? They're a bit more strongly-worded terms than 'usually, but not always, supports more ideas comparatively to what's available otherwise, but not all ideas, in the current zeitgeist of politics, but tempered on a candidate-by-candidate and election-by-election basis nonetheless, with the least-of-all-evils scenario occurring more often than should be (or than the voters deserve) being the case,' which is actually where I DO stand on that issue.
  9. Can you give an example of this please?" Presumably he's talking about abortion, gay marriage etc. Not saying I agree with him or that this thread is going anywhere other than the usual political shtick of "our party was right about everything at all points in history and when anything went wrong it was always the other party's fault (you'd think if one party was clearly better than the other then everyone would be a member of it eh?)" but since the question was asked twice already and I presumably know the answer I thought I'd get it over with. First of all, I don't have a party allegiance, and I'd appreciate not being declared to have one by assumption or default by others. Second, I believe most social engineering and pressures by political groups and organizations to force culture are wrong-headed. My point is, many Republicans have taken a faux "high ground" by saying all such behaviour is a "liberal" trait and openly being in complete denial of doing exactly the same thing.
  10. For instance, many in the Republican Party are revisiting economic policies that, long ago, were of the type that led to the Wall Street Crash of 1929 (as well as the 2008 crash, for that matter) - that is, the naïve and misguided belief that repealing large amounts of corporate regulation can only lead to good things. Also, much in the way of these economic policies are gutting, not only unionized labour, but many protections in the workplace of employees and the guarantee they can actually make a living by working - that is, the prevention of employer exploitation of employees - forgetting that the phenomena so hated and detested by the Republicans and their fiscal ideologues elsewhere in the world, Socialism and Communism, especially in the militant, revolutionary form, was actually, in fact, a reaction to the horrible conditions, exploitation, meagre pay, and lack of empowerment of the common works at the hands of powerful industrialists and the governments who, at the time, completely and solidly all backed them against worker's demands, in the Industrial Era, conditions it seems many Republican ideologues (like, infamously, Scott Walker, but there are others, certainly) seem to wish to move back towards. Although it's a minority opinion, it seems to be mentioned here and there more often and more seriously, and even couched in different terms here and there, that Trickledown, and abysmal failure of the '80's and a joking point of the '90's, may be being considered as an "alternative" to welfare spending, naively hoping it will stimulate the economy enough to eliminate or massively cut down unemployment, not learning the real lessons of when it was actually tried. Also, all Republican tax schemes and new healthcare plans are equally highly plutocratic in their flaws and shortcomings. As for social issues, they main party line, outside the more libertarian branch, like Rand Paul and such, dress up their beliefs, many of which they want to legislate to apply to all, regardless of whether they hold those social beliefs or not, and the justification comes down to, "We're right, you're wrong, and our beliefs will be enforced and paramount, this Bill of Rights notwithstanding," an attitude, I might add, many, many Republicans viciously accuse Democrats of when they should they look in the mirror as well. And, now, the insistence the capital punishment is ESSENTIAL as a deterrent in the judicial system and abandoning it is unthinkable. However, there are quite a few European countries (not France, Germany, or Italy, mind, but others) who have MUCH lower crime rates, but no capital punishment. Conversely, Mexico and Colombia still have capital punishment, but seven of the world's ten murder capitals are in one of those two countries. And, do not think to use the PRC, that executes more people judicially every year than all other nations that still have capital punishment combined in the same year. In China, if you're sentenced to death for a serious crimes, you're LUCKY - you're end will be swift and merciful! Life sentences of hard labour and the sinister, Orwellian institutions of "rehabilitation," and "re-education," are far more dreaded and much greater deterrents to in China than death. Because my fingers are sore, I won't even start on the disaster that is Republican foreign and military policy, and I will get to the point of the Grand Ol' Party's tendency to sacrifice the future for maximal short-term gain in the near future.
  11. I have plans at some point for a quite a few of those, including some Alberta 1917, 1921, 1935, and 1940, British Columbia 2017 (and perhaps others), Manitoba 1870, some NWT ones, both pre-1905 and post 1979, and some Nunavut and Yukon ones, and maybe a few others as well. It is a point of definite interest to me (as I live in Canada). I also have some Federal elections there planned.
  12. TheorySpark games can have weird results.
  13. Conversely, Vladimir Lenin signed the humiliating Treaty of Brest-Litovsk on behalf of Russia (which he hadn't yet even secured total control of yet by that point) and took Russia out of WW1, conceding military defeat to the Central Powers, just as an interesting counter-point.
  14. The Republican Party's current appeal and message is short-term, highly-flawed, short-sighted, regurgitating old talking points many younger voters don't know personally don't work and are grave mistakes, is a desperate reactionary last gasp of death throe of many old social ideas, not a revitalization of them, and the fact they elected a President in 2016 who is very much ideologically and policy-wise still a member of the Reform Party but ONLY took the Republican label for sheer political expediency because a the deck is highly stacked and, I will dare even say the electoral system is practically rigged, against a candidate who doesn't get a nomination from the Duopoly (I believe that is the quintessential motivation for some one who gets the disparaging term "RINO" in fact, even though practically no one calls TRUMP a RINO - in fact, many of his supporters lay the title liberally on long-standing Republican members who refuse to "pledge fealty" to him, like McCain, Murkowsky, and Kasich, as examples, which I find very strange), so I believe the GOP has only a short-lived burst of popularity and appeal to it's message until the tragic flaws of that message became very apparent to all but a fool.