Jump to content
270soft Forum
vcczar

270Soft US Parliament Thought Game

Recommended Posts

Here's our results on the ideology thread. These are the top 10 ideologies. I've used the votes to determine the % of the parliament membership. 

Question #1: How do you think these ideologies will combine to create a working majority? 

Here's our leading ideologies (using the US left-right spectrum) at this points:

  • Representative Democracy Party (centrist) -- 15% of parliament
  • Social Democratic Party (Left) -- 12%
  • Democratic Socialist Party (Left to Far-Left) -- 12%
  • Green Democratic Party (Left) - 10%
  • The Democratic Party (Center-Left) - 10%
  • Social Anarchist Party (Far Left) -- 9%
  • Market Socialist Party (Left) - 9%
  • Direct Democracy (Populist and ideologically random) - 9%
  • One-Nation Conservatism (Center to Center-Right) - 7%
  • Neoconservatism (Center-Right to Right) - 7%

Question #2: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for the World?

Question #3: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for the US?

Question #4: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for you?

vcczar @Reagan04 @Actinguy @Patine @Conservative Elector 2 @TheMiddlePolitical @WVProgressive @SilentLiberty @pilight @admin_270 @Hestia11 @Herbert Hoover @mlcorcoran @Leuser @upandaway @jvikings1 @Rodja @Edouard @jnewt @Nentomat @Kingthero @Sunnymentoaddict @RFK/JFKfan @Mr.Blood @Zenobiyl @Wiw @MBDemSoc @ThePotatoWalrus @Alxeu @Allyn @Cenzonico @CentristGuy @Ishan @billay @wolves @RI Democrat @lizarraba @lizphairphreak @TheLiberalKitten @MysteryKnight @avatarmushi @servo75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most logic coalition I see :

Progressive coalition (53%)

The Democratic Party (Center-Left) - 10%

Social Democratic Party (Left) -- 12%

Democratic Socialist Party (Left to Far-Left) -- 12%

Green Democratic Party (Left) - 10%

Market Socialist Party (Left) - 9%

 

+ Representative Democracy Party (centrist) -- 15% of parliament potential partner of coalition (if Dem Socialist Party refuses)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for others questions :

Question #2: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for the World?

Not forcelly, the majority system is productive to pass reforms quicker but it is less democratic (Germany has a center-right CDU thanks to coalition systems).

Question #3: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for the US?

Probably because the 2 party system is a speciality in the US.

Question #4: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for you?

It could be but it would be a very left parliament, it does not look like an actual IRL parliament would be that left, the right would be stronger (even if I would not vote for a right-wing party I have to admit it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, vcczar said:

Here's our results on the ideology thread. These are the top 10 ideologies. I've used the votes to determine the % of the parliament membership. 

Question #1: How do you think these ideologies will combine to create a working majority? 

Here's our leading ideologies (using the US left-right spectrum) at this points:

  • Representative Democracy Party (centrist) -- 15% of parliament
  • Social Democratic Party (Left) -- 12%
  • Democratic Socialist Party (Left to Far-Left) -- 12%
  • Green Democratic Party (Left) - 10%
  • The Democratic Party (Center-Left) - 10%
  • Social Anarchist Party (Far Left) -- 9%
  • Market Socialist Party (Left) - 9%
  • Direct Democracy (Populist and ideologically random) - 9%
  • One-Nation Conservatism (Center to Center-Right) - 7%
  • Neoconservatism (Center-Right to Right) - 7%

Question #2: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for the World?

Question #3: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for the US?

Question #4: Would a US Parliament looking like this be better for you?

vcczar @Reagan04 @Actinguy @Patine @Conservative Elector 2 @TheMiddlePolitical @WVProgressive @SilentLiberty @pilight @admin_270 @Hestia11 @Herbert Hoover @mlcorcoran @Leuser @upandaway @jvikings1 @Rodja @Edouard @jnewt @Nentomat @Kingthero @Sunnymentoaddict @RFK/JFKfan @Mr.Blood @Zenobiyl @Wiw @MBDemSoc @ThePotatoWalrus @Alxeu @Allyn @Cenzonico @CentristGuy @Ishan @billay @wolves @RI Democrat @lizarraba @lizphairphreak @TheLiberalKitten @MysteryKnight @avatarmushi @servo75

1. The Social Democrats, Democratic Socialists, Green Democrats, and Market Socialists have 43% of the vote. I'd imagine they would band together and work with the Democrats or the Social Anarchists (along with some of the direct democracy folks and maybe a few democratic-republicans) depending on the issue being addressed.

2. Heck no!

3. Heck no!

4. Heck no!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

1. The Social Democrats, Democratic Socialists, Green Democrats, and Market Socialists have 43% of the vote. I'd imagine they would band together and work with the Democrats or the Social Anarchists (along with some of the direct democracy folks and maybe a few democratic-republicans) depending on the issue being addressed.

2. Heck no!

3. Heck no!

4. Heck no!

I see the left-wing coaltion at about 73%, and that's being optimistic (for Conservatives) that those at the center will side with the Neocons and One-Party Conservatives. Regarding question #2, why do you think this parliament would be worse for the world? I can understand an argument for it being worse for the US or for you personally. One would think a less militant, more environmentally friendly US would be best for the world as a whole, including for the planet's health. 

Share this post


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

I see the left-wing coaltion at about 73%, and that's being optimistic (for Conservatives) that those at the center will side with the Neocons and One-Party Conservatives. Regarding question #2, why do you think this parliament would be worse for the world? I can understand an argument for it being worse for the US or for you personally. One would think a less militant, more environmentally friendly US would be best for the world as a whole, including for the planet's health. 

The US economy is a driver of the world economy. If this scenario were to occur, the world's economy would take a major hit and cause a large chunk of the population to fall into greater poverty. Plus this would set up China to take the reigns of the world's super power (both economically and militarily).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

1. The Social Democrats, Democratic Socialists, Green Democrats, and Market Socialists have 43% of the vote. I'd imagine they would band together and work with the Democrats or the Social Anarchists (along with some of the direct democracy folks and maybe a few democratic-republicans) depending on the issue being addressed.

2. Heck no!

3. Heck no!

4. Heck no!

Unfortunately, the current U.S. government system is becoming very inefficient, very corrupt, very unaccountable, very seditiously secretive, very aloof, and very unresponsive to it's common voters (preferring to cater rich corporate donors and moneyed special interest groups, as a higher priority), and is absolutely HOSTILE to binding citizen participation and initiative in government outside of scheduled elections. The two main parties (the only two, de facto, capable of holding Federal government power in the way elections work - which is, in fact, rigged and unrepresentative) both share eagerly in these faults and crimes, and thus neither wants to rock the boat on the issue. The odd primary candidate denounced part, or all, of this system - Kucinich, Gravel, Sanders, and the Pauls, for instance - but somehow, they NEVER get a Presidential nomination, despite sometimes holding great peaks of popular support. The U.S. Federal Government has become an enormity that no longer serves the People or the Constitution of the United States, but only itself, as an edifice, their corrupt plutocratic influencers through blatant bribery and graft, and it's two main party machines, which are almost intertwined with government, as parties, as the Cold War Communist Parties, WW2 Fascist Parties, Emerging Democracy Dominant Parties, and some Post-Soviet States' Parties-of-Party are, and FAR moreso than most First World Nations view as politically healthy or safe for political parties to be directly intertwined with government. You say a Parliamentary system is off the table, reflexively, with a "heck no!," - but don't you see how much of an failure - and a betrayal an act of treason to it's own people - U.S. Federal governance and it's corrupt party Duopoly have already become?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Considering the amount of Left-ist parties in the parliament, It only makes sense for them to make a big coalition, they have a supermajority anyway, so might as well.

2. I imagine the world have mixed feelings to a American legislature that had parties on the left and far-left control over half of it. But in the long-run, I would say no.

3. Considering the make-up of the parliament, no I don't think so. This stems from a ideological stance, but also due to parties on the extreme fringe having more than 50%. I just see it as a recipe for disaster.

4. None of the parties represent my political values so NO, It would not.

Share this post


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

Unfortunately, the current U.S. government system is becoming very inefficient, very corrupt, very unaccountable, very seditiously secretive, very aloof, and very unresponsive to it's common voters (preferring to cater rich corporate donors and moneyed special interest groups, as a higher priority), and is absolutely HOSTILE to binding citizen participation and initiative in government outside of scheduled elections. The two main parties (the only two, de facto, capable of holding Federal government power in the way elections work - which is, in fact, rigged and unrepresentative) both share eagerly in these faults and crimes, and thus neither wants to rock the boat on the issue. The odd primary candidate denounced part, or all, of this system - Kucinich, Gravel, Sanders, and the Pauls, for instance - but somehow, they NEVER get a Presidential nomination, despite sometimes holding great peaks of popular support. The U.S. Federal Government has become an enormity that no longer serves the People or the Constitution of the United States, but only itself, as an edifice, their corrupt plutocratic influencers through blatant bribery and graft, and it's two main party machines, which are almost intertwined with government, as parties, as the Cold War Communist Parties, WW2 Fascist Parties, Emerging Democracy Dominant Parties, and some Post-Soviet States' Parties-of-Party are, and FAR moreso than most First World Nations view as politically healthy or safe for political parties to be directly intertwined with government. You say a Parliamentary system is off the table, reflexively, with a "heck no!," - but don't you see how much of an failure - and a betrayal an act of treason to it's own people - U.S. Federal governance and it's corrupt party Duopoly have already become?

For one, my heck no! was in response to weather a left-wing dominated government would be better for the world, the US, and myself. Though, I would also oppose a parliamentary system because it centralizes power under the legislature (with few checks).

Also, you don't have to lecture me on how terrible the federal government is (or the 2 party system) since I am someone who despises both (and am actively working against both).

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...