Will America experience another realignment?

[Kelinfort]

Wiki Defintion

A common aspect in political science is the notion of a realigning election. This basically represents a shift in political viewpoints in major parties and their perception by the people. Between these elections exist so called "party systems"; that is, the general atmosphere of the political climate between realignments. For instance, the 1896 presidential election brought Republicans closer to pro business conservatism, while the Democratic Party shifted towards liberalism. The fourth party system was dominated by conservatism and Republican presidents. The 1932 presidential represented another realigning election, as the nation moved closer to modern liberalism. This ushered in a period of labour union growth and a general shift towards economic regulation and social liberalism. The sixth party system began between 1968/1980. Many political scientists debate whether either of these can be considered realigning elections, but I do consider the 1980 election to be a defining realigning election for American Conservatism. This period is (or was) dominated by supply side economics and a rebirth of social conservatism.

It is of much debate when or if another realigning election will occur again. Personally, I believe the sixth party system will crumble within the next two or three election cycles. The national atmosphere has begun to splinter, so it appears such a shift will occur yet again.

So, NSG, what do you think? Are American politics doomed to be dominated by the sixth party system? Or will yet another system arise soon?

[Soselo]

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

[Wisconsin9]

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

You just said that it couldn't get any worse, which means that we're now completely and totally fucked.

[Kelinfort]

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

Erm, the past shows otherwise. All it means is a new coalition in politics develops.

[MERIZoC]

Socialism will prevail. At some point. I think.

# of people not realizing my irony: plenty.

[Karlom-Teravanyia]

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

Considering we used to have legal slavery, yes. Yes we can.

[Karlom-Teravanyia]

Socialism will prevail. At some point. I think.

Like all the other times it 'prevailed'?

[Seaxeland]

Socialism will prevail. At some point. I think.

You think Socialism can work? That's adorable.

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

Yes, actually, it can. Have you seen North Korea? Imagine the US as North Korea.

[Benuty]

Socialism will prevail. At some point. I think.

You think Socialism can work? That's adorable.

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

Yes, actually, it can. Have you seen North Korea? Imagine the US as North Korea.

Anything is better than Fascism.

[Wisconsin9]

Socialism will prevail. At some point. I think.

You think Socialism can work? That's adorable.

Said the fascist.

[MERIZoC]

Socialism will prevail. At some point. I think.

You think Socialism can work? That's adorable.

I love being told this by a fascist.

[Arlenton]

Wiki Defintion

A common aspect in political science is the notion of a realigning election. This basically represents a shift in political viewpoints in major parties and their perception by the people. Between these elections exist so called "party systems"; that is, the general atmosphere of the political climate between realignments. For instance, the 1896 presidential election brought Republicans closer to pro business conservatism, while the Democratic Party shifted towards liberalism. The fourth party system was dominated by conservatism and Republican presidents. The 1932 presidential represented another realigning election, as the nation moved closer to modern liberalism. This ushered in a period of labour union growth and a general shift towards economic regulation and social liberalism. The sixth party system began between 1968/1980. Many political scientists debate whether either of these can be considered realigning elections, but I do consider the 1980 election to be a defining realigning election for American Conservatism. This period is (or was) dominated by supply side economics and a rebirth of social conservatism.

It is of much debate when or if another realigning election will occur again. Personally, I believe the sixth party system will crumble within the next two or three election cycles. The national atmosphere has begun to splinter, so it appears such a shift will occur yet again.

So, NSG, what do you think? Are American politics doomed to be dominated by the sixth party system? Or will yet another system arise soon?

Finally, someone else who pays attention to this!
I agree we are still in the 6th Party system, but in the electoral scene we are stuck in some sort of super polarized system, and it seems to be intensifying. Notice how since 2000 every presidential election has been for the most part pretty close? 2000 was about as close as you can get, 2004 was also impressively close, 2008 is what I want to make my point on, throughout history when a party messes up/gets unpopular (weather or not it was their fault) the opposing party subsequently wins the next election in a massive landslide, but that wasn't the case in 2008, most red states stayed loyal to the part that was blamed for the recession/wars/everything. Sure McCain lost by about 10 million in the popular vote, but he carried 22 states, even with Obama's 50 state strategy. That's almost half, in the past McCain would have won at most 10 states and that's pushing it. And 2012 was fairly close too. 2016 will also be close, even with a Ted Cruz vs Clinton, Cruz will carry at least 18 states.

[Arlenton]

Socialism will prevail. At some point. I think.

You think Socialism can work? That's adorable.

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

Yes, actually, it can. Have you seen North Korea? Imagine the US as North Korea.

I don't think they are saying it can work, they are just hopeful it will be implemented in the US.

[Kelinfort]

Wiki Defintion

A common aspect in political science is the notion of a realigning election. This basically represents a shift in political viewpoints in major parties and their perception by the people. Between these elections exist so called "party systems"; that is, the general atmosphere of the political climate between realignments. For instance, the 1896 presidential election brought Republicans closer to pro business conservatism, while the Democratic Party shifted towards liberalism. The fourth party system was dominated by conservatism and Republican presidents. The 1932 presidential represented another realigning election, as the nation moved closer to modern liberalism. This ushered in a period of labour union growth and a general shift towards economic regulation and social liberalism. The sixth party system began between 1968/1980. Many political scientists debate whether either of these can be considered realigning elections, but I do consider the 1980 election to be a defining realigning election for American Conservatism. This period is (or was) dominated by supply side economics and a rebirth of social conservatism.

It is of much debate when or if another realigning election will occur again. Personally, I believe the sixth party system will crumble within the next two or three election cycles. The national atmosphere has begun to splinter, so it appears such a shift will occur yet again.

So, NSG, what do you think? Are American politics doomed to be dominated by the sixth party system? Or will yet another system arise soon?

Finally, someone else who pays attention to this!
I agree we are still in the 6th Party system, but in the electoral scene we are stuck in some sort of super polarized system, and it seems to be intensifying. Notice how since 2000 every presidential election has been for the most part pretty close? 2000 was about as close as you can get, 2004 was also impressively close, 2008 is what I want to make my point on, throughout history when a party messes up/gets unpopular (weather or not it was their fault) the opposing party subsequently wins the next election in a massive landslide, but that wasn't the case in 2008, most red states stayed loyal to the part that was blamed for the recession/wars/everything. Sure McCain lost by about 10 million in the popular vote, but he carried 22 states, even with Obama's 50 state strategy. That's almost half, in the past McCain would have won at most 10 states and that's pushing it. And 2012 was fairly close too. 2016 will also be close, even with a Ted Cruz vs Clinton, Cruz will carry at least 18 states.

The way I see it, there will be a major economic clash between the Democratic Party nd the Republican Party in the next three election cycles. Social issues and the greater kulturkampf will largely obviate themselves from the political scene over the next few election cycles. They won't appear on the national stage again for a while.

[SuperFruitland]

Finally, someone else who pays attention to this!
I agree we are still in the 6th Party system, but in the electoral scene we are stuck in some sort of super polarized system, and it seems to be intensifying. Notice how since 2000 every presidential election has been for the most part pretty close? 2000 was about as close as you can get, 2004 was also impressively close, 2008 is what I want to make my point on, throughout history when a party messes up/gets unpopular (weather or not it was their fault) the opposing party subsequently wins the next election in a massive landslide, but that wasn't the case in 2008, most red states stayed loyal to the part that was blamed for the recession/wars/everything. Sure McCain lost by about 10 million in the popular vote, but he carried 22 states, even with Obama's 50 state strategy. That's almost half, in the past McCain would have won at most 10 states and that's pushing it. And 2012 was fairly close too. 2016 will also be close, even with a Ted Cruz vs Clinton, Cruz will carry at least 18 states.

The way I see it, there will be a major economic clash between the Democratic Party nd the Republican Party in the next three election cycles. Social issues and the greater kulturkampf will largely obviate themselves from the political scene over the next few election cycles. They won't appear on the national stage again for a while.

I mean, me and my friends are already making predictions for a Civil War between Democrats-Atheists vs. Republicans-Christians in America in this next half century, based on evidence from Social Studies class and our debates we have on the bus home....

[Estva]

No.

Maybe socially the US will change, but the parties don't really differ all that much on economic grounds. They've been using the social causes like gay marriage, abortion, and occasionally welfare to spar with each other.

[Islamic State of UKIP]

Yes, if the Democrats manage to win the House in 2016 that would be the final nail in the coffin of the current political system. The Tea Party pushed many against the Republicans and Reagan-style conservativism towards a more Democratic style of conservativism. If the Democrats win the 2016, with Hillary at the helm, they will most likely shift to centre or centre-left which will force the Republican to shift to centre-right and possibly even centre.

[Arlenton]

Yes, if the Democrats manage to win the House in 2016 that would be the final nail in the coffin of the current political system. The Tea Party pushed many against the Republicans and Reagan-style conservativism towards a more Democratic style of conservativism. If the Democrats win the 2016, with Hillary at the helm, they will most likely shift to centre or centre-left which will force the Republican to shift to centre-right and possibly even centre.

It's possible, and I think the GOP shifting a bit toward the center would be nice, but you have to consider the "Whoever has the white male vote has congress" Rule. And thr GOP is making huge gains in white males, to the point of neutralizing the latino vote growth in places such as Texas, which is actually more Republican now than ever. The GOP already has an untouchable majority in the House, if Clinton or any Democrat is elected in 2016, they will surely lose what little power they have left in congress by 2018. The Democrats current electoral college edge will only get them so far.
The most likely shift would be a reverse of the Cold war, Republicans would control congress, with a huge majority in the house and with the senate GOP at least 75% of the time, and Democrats would be winning the white house 75% of the time. That is currently what trends are showing.

[Arlenton]

Yes, if the Democrats manage to win the House in 2016 that would be the final nail in the coffin of the current political system. The Tea Party pushed many against the Republicans and Reagan-style conservativism towards a more Democratic style of conservativism. If the Democrats win the 2016, with Hillary at the helm, they will most likely shift to centre or centre-left which will force the Republican to shift to centre-right and possibly even centre.

It's possible, and I think the GOP shifting a bit toward the center would be nice, but you have to consider the "Whoever has the white male vote has congress" Rule. And thr GOP is making huge gains in white males, to the point of neutralizing the latino vote growth in places such as Texas, which is actually more Republican now than ever. The GOP already has an untouchable majority in the House, if Clinton or any Democrat is elected in 2016, they will surely lose what little power they have left in congress by 2018. The Democrats current electoral college edge will only get them so far.
The most likely shift would be a reverse of the Cold war, Republicans would control congress, with a huge majority in the house and with the senate GOP at least 75% of the time, and Democrats would be winning the white house 75% of the time. That is currently what trends are showing.

Come to think of it... that is how it is right now.

[Republic of Wreptzle]

Realignment for America is inevitable, it's happened over and over in our history, so it's practically guaranteed that it'll happen again. Our current splintered government will only tax the people for so long before we've had enough and realign. When it happens, the party that people realign towards will have its chance to assert complete dominance over the other and will have its opportunity to push all of its agendas forwards. Then, they will either bring about a positive change that a majority of Americans prefer and solidify their party's dominance, or they will fail to bring about immediate, positive change and the American population will immediately realign to the other party in the hopes that they can provide the immediate, positive change that we so desire.

In many ways it's like what we do now; go back and forth to parties in the hopes something good will come of it. But the major difference is in the amount of control we give to a party.Eventually, we'll give one party enough control so that it won't be stuck in a divided government. When that finally happens (in the apparent near future), we will see some very exciting events occurring in both Washington and the nation.

All we can do for now is wait and watch for the next coming of the realignment election, patiently waiting for the hope and change we've come to idolize.

[Greater Weselton]

I doubt it will happen again.

[New Stinkonia]

It's not possible to devolve any further than this.

You are wrong about that. Things will get worse before they get better. Currently some organizations are working on a 28th amendment through a constitutional convention, to get money out of politics. I think that's our only hope at this point. Until we have honest elections, we will continue to get future-lobbyists as politicians, doing nothing but the bidding of wealthy interests.

[Republic of Coldwater]

You think Socialism can work? That's adorable.



Yes, actually, it can. Have you seen North Korea? Imagine the US as North Korea.

Anything is better than Fascism.

So you would be fine living in an equally oppressive USSR on the grounds that it isn't Fascist?

[Benuty]

Anything is better than Fascism.

So you would be fine living in an equally oppressive USSR on the grounds that it isn't Fascist?

Given the USSR had a thaw under Khrushchev took over, and began breaking down the negative legacy Stalin had built yest...yes I would be fine.
*In before United Marxist Nation's makes some comment about Stalin*.

Besides, atleast I don't have to worry about my frontal lobe being penetrated with an ice pick thus being turned into a lobotomite in the USSR.

[Olthar]

Sure. I've been saying for about two years now that the Republican party is doomed to fall apart while the Democrats become the new conservative party.