Jump to content
270soft Forum
vcczar

Most Popular Party for American Citizen-Taxpayers of the 21st Century

21st Century Democratic Reform  

17 members have voted

  1. 1. Did You read the entire first post?

    • Yes
    • No, I prefer to be uneducated.
  2. 2. Which Party has been more popular with the most American Citizen-Taxpayers?

    • Democrats
    • Republicans
    • The facts are wrong, neither party has been more popular than the other overall in election cycles in the 21st century
  3. 3. Which of the following do you believe?

    • Our current election systems are not friendly to Democracy.
    • Expanding Democracy with reform will better reflect the will of the people.
    • The electoral college should be abolished.
    • The electoral college should be kept, but the EVs per state should be recalculated to better reflect population.
    • The fact a Wyoming citizen-taxpayer is worth 4x a California citizen-taxpayer is not fair to a citizen-taxpayer in California
    • The US House should be expanded to 1,000 US Reps
    • US House districts should be redistricted along the lines of the non-partisan US Census districts.
    • US Senate should be abolished, making the US House more like Parliament in a way
    • US Territories and non-states (like DC) should be given 1 US Senator (2 upon statehood) if their citizens are comprised mostly of US Citizen-Taxpayers. No Taxation without Representation!
    • State legislative districts should be redistricted along the lines of the non-partisan US Census districts.
    • The president should face a recall election if he is below either 35 or 30% approval within the last month before midterms. The VP would take over until the next election.
    • The 60% votes needed to confirm a judge should be made permanent. No nuclear option.
    • SC Judges should be term limited to 10 years, but can be reappointed by the incumbent president upon reaching that term limit.
    • SC Judges should have an age requirement (Either a retirement age, minimum appointment age, or both).
    • Should a SC Justice nominee be blocked, the Sen Maj leader present a list of 100 acceptable federal judges of the president's party or that are known independents.
    • Any other reform suggested by you that would both loosen the restrictions on the will of the majority of American citizen-taxpayers and make a positive impact on the success of the country as a whole.


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

The US has a free press, and one of the disadvantages of such being that you can't force them to cover 100 parties that you want because we live in a Democracy, if other parties can't be successful on their own it makes zero sense to cover them and lose ratings.

The electoral system favors no party, it favors the candidate who has a better strategy.

Literally all it would take for a third party would be for a respectable member of Government (a former gov, like Gary Johnson) to become a Libertarian or Green Party member and be consistent with their ideology to make their loser supporters get out and vote (Johnson polled at 11%, but then had like 10 gaffes, didn't know one of the most strategic ISIS strongpoints, faked a heart attack, etc.) and got over 3%. It would be so easy for him to have gotten to 5%, and then with federal funding they can afford media time and stuff and do even better. Ez.

You don't live in a Democracy. You live in a Corporatist Plutocratic Oligarchy. It's time for a wake-up call. The U.S. Constitution has already been thoroughly upended, but not by Fascists or Communists, like so many feared, but by the ultra-wealthy who have BOUGHT the loyalties of most significant executive, legislative, and judicial figures, made bribery legal with the act of treason by the Supreme Court called the "Citizen's United" ruling, demand - and get - laws passed and wars made on their demand, and the citizens get lied to or ignored about the issue, and all tax, labour, regulation, privatization, consumer goods and services standards, and environmental laws serve only them, but the lie that serves the majority of the people of the nation is told overtly - and believed by many. No, your nation's form of government is NOT what are told or what you believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Patine said:

You don't live in a Democracy. You live in a Corporatist Plutocratic Oligarchy. It's time for a wake-up call. The U.S. Constitution has already been thoroughly upended, but not by Fascists or Communists, like so many feared, but by the ultra-wealthy who have BOUGHT the loyalties of most significant executive, legislative, and judicial figures, made bribery legal with the act of treason by the Supreme Court called the "Citizen's United" ruling, demand - and get - laws passed and wars made on their demand, and the citizens get lied to or ignored about the issue, and all tax, labour, regulation, privatization, consumer goods and services standards, and environmental laws serve only them, but the lie that serves the majority of the people of the nation is told overtly - and believed by many. No, your nation's form of government is NOT what are told or what you believe. 

BREAKING: Local Canadian figures out entire US political system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

BREAKING: Local Canadian figures out entire US political system

That would never be the headline let alone in the headlines or a news story because it's not about Guns, Sex, Trump, or the Democratic party. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

BREAKING: Local Canadian figures out entire US political system

Oh, there's Americans who are well aware of it, too. They just suffer either having their platforms to get their message across pulled, they suffer massive ridicule and slander campaigns from corporate media (like you buy into like candy, right along with your braindead, stupid memes), and have Americans who are, in truth, being screwed over, cheated, disempowered, poisoned (through laxer environmental and product control laws), over-worked and underpaid, and lied to thoroughly by these big corporation actually so programmed they'll step up to bat to defend the engines of commerce, believing that all that America stands for is under attack and criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

Oh, there's Americans who are well aware of it, too. They just suffer either have their platforms to get their message across pulled, they suffer massive ridicule and slander campaigns from corporate media (like you buy into like candy, right along with your braindead, stupid memes), and have Americans who are, in truth, being screwed over, cheated, disempowered, poisoned (through laxer environmental and product control laws), over-worked and underpaid, and lied to thoroughly by these big corporation actually so programmed they'll step up to bat to defend the engines of commerce, believing that all that America is under attack and criticism.

I thought you were gonna ignore Potato anyway so I'm not sure why this is happening right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SilentLiberty said:

I thought you were gonna ignore Potato anyway so I'm not sure why this is happening right now

You know, you're absolutely correct. I forget to stick him on my list yesterday. Thank-you for reminding me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patine said:

It has a de facto two party system, where the media, the electoral system, the registration rules, and other institutional elements that SHOULD be non-partisan so immensely favour the two main parties, in a way that can be called corruption, rigging, and criminal electoral malpractice, that marginalizes all other parties to make them non-competitive because the whole engine of the electoral is weighed against them like a mountain, NOT just because they happen to be "Third Parties and Independents," by that quality alone and in and of itself. The electoral system is damned racket, and is CONTROLLED, top-to-bottom, by the two main parties, even in areas where virtually all other First World Nations demand strictly non-partisan, by law, control of.

 

1 hour ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

The US has a free press, and one of the disadvantages of such being that you can't force them to cover 100 parties that you want because we live in a Democracy, if other parties can't be successful on their own it makes zero sense to cover them and lose ratings.

The electoral system favors no party, it favors the candidate who has a better strategy.

Literally all it would take for a third party would be for a respectable member of Government (a former gov, like Gary Johnson) to become a Libertarian or Green Party member and be consistent with their ideology to make their loser supporters get out and vote (Johnson polled at 11%, but then had like 10 gaffes, didn't know one of the most strategic ISIS strongpoints, faked a heart attack, etc.) and got over 3%. It would be so easy for him to have gotten to 5%, and then with federal funding they can afford media time and stuff and do even better. Ez.

i agree with you , basically the usa are "biparty" because the know's 3rd partys are a joke libertarians and greens don't have much offer to attrack people to get voters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish Wikipedia would have the PV for every election year for US Reps, US Senators, Gov elections because then I'd do this going back to 1788 just to see how 21st century parties margins compare to other centuries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patine said:

You know, you're absolutely correct. I forget to stick him on my list yesterday. Thank-you for reminding me.

ok tankie

DeepFryer_20190901_211050.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure @ThePotatoWalrus made another braindead and stupid retort, because he seems incapable of educated or sensible ones, with his low-grade-media-rotted brain. Too bad I'm ignoring him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SilentLiberty said:

so I'm not sure why this is happening right now

This is how I feel about the supermajority of exchanges that include Patine and/or Potato with the occasional guest stars vcczar and victor. Stay tuned for the surprise villain, koneke!

1 hour ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

ok tankie

DeepFryer_20190901_211050.jpg

Ok I laughed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reagan04 said:

This is how I feel about the supermajority of exchanges that include Patine and/or Potato with the occasional guest stars vcczar and victor. Stay tuned for the surprise villain, koneke!

Ok I laughed.

I didn't. And it seems, now that you've quoted, he believes that I'm saying the ONLY way for a nation to stand up to corrupt, powerful, and sociopathic mega-corporations from bribing the government to do it's bidding completely, ignoring or lying to the people thoroughly, to completely rig and criminally interfere with it's electoral system to weed out candidate it absolutely does not want to have any chance of winning, to run labour, environmental, and goods and services standards laws into the dust and drastically lower taxation for mega-corporation and the ultra-rich - polices that ONLY benefit the ultra-rich and detriment EVERYONE else, and having criminal and civil justice be equally applicable against these ultra-wealthy oligarchs and their political cronies as it against everyone else - that apparently the ONLY possible solution to this untenable attack and assault on the American Constitution and style and concept of governance is to adopt an all-out Socialist government. That there is no possible way Americans can defend themselves against exploitative corporate authoritarianism and the upending of their Constitution otherwise. I stand by my claim that his brain (with this stellar IQ he always brags about) has been rotted and programmed by low-grade media (which is all big corporate owned).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

The electoral system favors no party, it favors the candidate who has a better strategy.

Gary Johnson was probably one of the best candidates for the Libertarian party in awhile, but *the problem with the Libertarian party is their views aren't held by many people.*

Effectively, the 2 main parties in the U.S. are coalitions. It is like what happens in various other countries (in particular in Europe) where the coalitions occur after the election. In the U.S., they happen before the election. This is why you get significant disagreements between parts of a party (they are not ideologically 'pure'), and why the primaries are so important.

Basically, the primaries are where the many virtual parties within the main 2 have their 'own' candidates, and the general is a run-off election between the top two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Gary Johnson was probably one of the best candidates for the Libertarian party in awhile, but *the problem with the Libertarian party is their views aren't held by many people.*

Effectively, the 2 main parties in the U.S. are coalitions. It is like what happens in various other countries (in particular in Europe) where the coalitions occur after the election. In the U.S., they happen before the election. This is why you get significant disagreements between parts of a party (they are not ideologically 'pure'), and why the primaries are so important.

Basically, the primaries are where the many virtual parties within the main 2 have their 'own' candidates, and the general is a run-off election between the top two.

I agree with you regarding Johnson. Prior to his Aleppo blunder, I think only Ron Paul purists (like @jvikings1 ) thought Johnson was a bad candidate for Libertarians. Their party has really expanded their tent, which will help them in the event of a GOP collapse. Meanwhile, the Green Party is still a purist party, and won't make much of a gain in the even of a Dem collapse. 

Johnson/Weld was a powerful 3rd party ticket on paper. I had major respect for this ticket. Both were good governors. I would have preferred Weld to be at the top of my ticket. He's one of my favorite recent Conservatives of all time, along with Huntsman, Baker, Hogan, Kasich, Martinez, Schwarzenegger, and a few other integrity-focused and/or socially moderate-to-liberal conservatives. 

The one thing I don't like about the wing of the Democrats that I most identify with (Sanders-Warren-OcasioCortez wing) is that they are tent-restricting rather than tent-expanding. However, strangely, Sanders has at least used rhetoric that shows that he knows that you have to be welcoming to party members with different views. Strange, because he's not even officially a Democrats. Warren, I think, will expand in the general and at Convention. She might lose some purists in the process. I don't think OcasioCortez will expand; she's stubborn. 

However, to contradict this, Trump wasn't really a tent-expander either in the primary, but he became one by the general by adopting more socially conservative views--like anti-abortion (he was pro-choice), and by pretending to be deeply religious. How anyone legitimately believes he's really religious is beyond me. I don't think he thinks about God except as a tool to get ahead with people that are easily influence by the use of God's name and messages in rhetoric. I'd wager half of our presidents were really religious for political reasons only. That is not to say that more than half weren't spiritual. For instance, Lincoln was spiritual, but he probably wasn't religious. Most of our early presidents were Deist, Unitarian, or both, which are versions of Christianity that many Christians don't except as true Christianity --- Washington, J Adams, Jefferson, JQ Adams. Anyway, there's that tangent. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, vcczar said:

The one thing I don't like about the wing of the Democrats that I most identify with (Sanders-Warren-OcasioCortez wing) is that they are tent-restricting rather than tent-expanding.

Ya, one big question I have with Sanders or Warren is whether they will be able to 1. consolidate their 'wing' of the Dem party but then 2. grow beyond it sufficiently to win the general. I'm guessing both would be willing to do this. In many ways, both are actually quite populist and should be able to resonate with large parts of the electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Ya, one big question I have with Sanders or Warren is whether they will be able to 1. consolidate their 'wing' of the Dem party but then 2. grow beyond it sufficiently to win the general. I'm guessing both would be willing to do this. In many ways, both are actually quite populist and should be able to resonate with large parts of the electorate.

Apparently, Democratic establish donors are warming up to Warren, but she needs to inspire voters that are less liberal than Clinton to choose her over Trump. Outwardly she's kind of dorky, so I don't know how she'll do visually at a debate against Trump. I believe she'll be more sincere, and cutting in debate than Clinton was as she was always too scripted/programmed. Warren will take risks that Clinton wouldn't allow.

I'm concerned about three voter groups specifically in regards to Warren and Sanders: 1) African-American voters, 2) independent centrists and center-left voters that often live in suburbs, 3) White men with no college degree. Out of these three, I think Sanders has a shot with winning over the 3rd group, and Warren might appeal with the 2nd group, but she will certainly face the same kind of subconscious misogyny that I think Clinton likely faced. Warren is likely to do better with women voters than Clinton as she's less abrasive and seems less entitled and less focused on making the election about her being a woman. For some reason many women didn't like Clinton focusing on gender as if they were required to vote for her because she is a woman.

Both Sanders and Warren will inspire the youth vote and the base, but I think the bulk of this is outside the states needed to win MI, PA, WI, or switch out one of these for FL, NC, AZ, or TX, assuming Dems hold all states won in 2016. 

If Sanders, Warren, Biden are all still in the race by Super Tuesday, I want the nominee to be whomever is polling better against Trump. I'm friendly to Democratic Socialism, but I'll vote Dementia Joe in a heartbeat if he's polling a landslide against Trump by Super Tuesday and Sanders and Warren are polling +2, even, or worse. 

Biden has a likability factor that Sanders and Warren don't have (although, both of these have an integrity factor that helps them, despite the Pocahontas event). Biden is most likely to hold together a coalition of Democrats, GOP Never Trumps, and Regret-a-Trumps (those that voted Trump in 2016, but voted against him in the 2018 midterms). The two most worry things about Biden are these: 1) Is Biden suffering mental declines, and can he hold himself together by election day. In either case, he needs to pick a VP that can be president on day 1, since he could resign after inauguration. I'll still vote for him over Trump, even if he can't remember his own name. 2) Polls and other research are showing that students on college campuses are not excited about Biden and some are actually quite averse to him. The youth vote is important, considering that WI, MI, OH, FL, PA have a lot of colleges. 

Overall, I think if voter turn out is higher than 2016, then Democrats win. Here are some factors that might hurt Democrats:

  • Weather on Election Day is not good. I think the GOP is usually more determined to vote than many Democrats. But maybe 4 years of Trump will change that. 
  • Sanders takes too long to drop out creating another Bernie or Bust situation. If he drops out early, I think the Bernie or Bust sort of fizzles out by election day. 
  • The economy improves
  • Trump's hurricane response in Florida is spectacular (1,000% better than his poor Puerto Rico response), Trump's continual trips to Mar A Lago, and other focuses on Florida make the state not competitive so Trump can focus more in the Midwest. Regardless, I want Trump's hurricane response to be spectacular, because even one death or one condemned house, or one lost family photograph, or one lost pet animal is too much. 
  • Trump, similar to LBJ, contrives an October Surprise to affect voter opinion. In the 1968 election, LBJ declared a cease-fire in Vietnam with the purpose of getting voters to vote for Humphrey. While, Nixon still own, the election ended up being very competitive. Many think Never Humphrey voters actually cost Dems the election. 
  • Biden is the nominee and he gets a major MeToo scandal or two, or three, or four, etc. Won't effect Trump, but will hurt Biden since he's supposed to be a model politician unlike Trump. 

Overall, I'm still fairly optimistic about Democrats's chances. The Midterm elections were a resounding response to Trump's presidency. I don't think he's any more popular now. There is one worrying thing on the map, however, for Democrats. Western PA, outside of Pittsburgh, is becoming more like WV, the most Pro-Trump state. GOP made gains there in in the Midterms. Turn out in Philadelphia, where I live now, needs to be massive. I hope to balance this out by getting people to vote. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, admin_270 said:

Gary Johnson was probably one of the best candidates for the Libertarian party in awhile, but *the problem with the Libertarian party is their views aren't held by many people.*

Effectively, the 2 main parties in the U.S. are coalitions. It is like what happens in various other countries (in particular in Europe) where the coalitions occur after the election. In the U.S., they happen before the election. This is why you get significant disagreements between parts of a party (they are not ideologically 'pure'), and why the primaries are so important.

Basically, the primaries are where the many virtual parties within the main 2 have their 'own' candidates, and the general is a run-off election between the top two.

I think then, if that's the case, the U.S. political system would be healthier if these "coalitions" were allowed to slide apart into the natural fault-line parties that are within. And the relic and dinosaur that is the Electoral College, created a convention of wealthy, elitists who feared the power of their actual citizens deciding their leadership directly as much as similar wealthy elitists who ran the British Parliament feared it in their nation at the same time - and both groups viewed the common voters in condescending and paternalistic, using terms like "tyranny of majority" as a warning word, when "tyranny of the minority" was the only real alternative, and was, in fact, extant at the time, and for a long time thereafter) is the only thing stopping "natural" parties from forming out of forced, unstable, and strange-bedfellow coalitions tearing each other apart from within. In 2016, if it were not for an Electoral College and the (protectionist of incumbent parties') ideal of the outgoing House deciding the next President of no absolute majority is gained, why would Cruz, Paul, (Jeb) Bush, and Kasich just accept Trump's nomination or Sander accept Clinton's, and not each run on their own in the GE? The acrimony, anger, and tensions over those nominations was so high I see other reason it would have been the case. The Electoral College is not a vaunted institution of eternal and universal good and stability that should be praised and enshrined forever because some 18th Century wealthy elitists who were very much men of their time said so. It is one of the biggest enforcers of the U.S.'s absolutely awful political culture and system and why, every Presidential election, a huge chunk of Americans (if not the same huge chunk every election) find no "viable" candidate to represent their values, or even, in some case, be palatable, by the GE, and in cases, even in the Primaries. This is what I mean when I say "cheated voters."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Patine

Ya, perhaps the U.S. would be better off without the E.C. The problem here is that it's a very heavy political maneuver to change it (requires changing the constitution). This is why state-by-state efforts to for intents and purposes change it (having E.C. members who say they will vote for whoever wins the popular vote, say) are a popular way to change the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

@Patine

Ya, perhaps the U.S. would be better off without the E.C. The problem here is that it's a very heavy political maneuver to change it (requires changing the constitution). This is why state-by-state efforts to for intents and purposes change it (having E.C. members who say they will vote for whoever wins the popular vote, say) are a popular way to change the system.

Yes, the wealthy, elitist men of the 18th Century who distrusted the common voters' competence and were very much men of their time I'd mentioned above made sure of that too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should just restart the government at this point, new parties and all.

In all seriousness, I think the U.S. should abolish the Electoral College so that one person equals one vote and adopt a runoff system like they have in France. We don't have to get rid of the Senate, but we should definitely fix it so that Wyoming doesn't have as much power as California. As for the House of Representatives, maybe 300 more seats max.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2019 at 11:12 AM, vcczar said:

she's kind of dorky

Yes, good term.

 

On 9/2/2019 at 11:12 AM, vcczar said:

he needs to pick a VP that can be president on day 1

Good point - the VP pick becomes more important with Biden (or Sanders for that matter).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...