What is the problem with American politics?

[Equalium]

I don't see a member of the Socialist or Green party.

[Death Metal]

I don't see a member of the Socialist or Green party.

Socialist party will never thrive, because of, well, their name.

Green Party, fuck those guys. Agrarianism for the lose.

EDIT- Unless you're somehow saying they're the problem, which is silly, because they're not relevant enough to be a problem in the first place.

[Alien Space Bats]

<sidetrack>

Well, sure, so long as they are getting additional compensation for losing their coverage, which is certainly not going to happen unless you've got a very generous employer or you are in an industry short of workers, neither of which are very common these days.

I myself would not be very happy paying an additional $700/month for health insurance, which is what my firm currently pays for my high-deductible plan, nor will I enjoy the inevitable massive premium increases that will result from PPACA.

The idea would be that your employer would pay you their current cost for that insurance (IOW, that $700/month would end up in your pocket and not theirs); since all employers would be paying their employees whatever amounts they're currently paying for employer-sponsored insurance (with the tax tables adjusted accordingly so that the extra pay would end up being tax-free [eg., if the average employer contribution towards health care is $400/month for a single individual and $700/month for a couple, then the standard deduction goes up by $1300 and the individual exemption goes up by $3900, so that the average net pay after FICA withholding covers those costs]), you would then have the money to buy health insurance for yourself (or, under the French or German systems, pay a tax sufficient to cover the cost of government furnishing said coverage for you).

I'm not advocating that people should lose their employer-sponsored health insurance without compensation, and that they then be required to pick up the cost of protecting themselves from ill health out of pocket. By now most everyone here should now know that I'm not an advocate of race-to-the-bottom policies whose fundamental effect is to beggar everyone by the top 1-5% of society.

</sidetrack>

[New-Westland]

this is the problem
the media and politicians make an oligarchy

[AiliailiA]

It's not that bad really.

The main problem is the lack of minor parties. It's annoying that both major parties can't even find a candidate for some districts ... it messes with the figures.

[Conservative Conservationists]

It's not that bad really.

The main problem is the lack of minor parties. It's annoying that both major parties can't even find a candidate for some districts ... it messes with the figures.

Without preferential voting, combined with extremely high campaign costs, there is no chance that a minor party will rise.

The American system of giving all seats in one state based on a slim majority of first past the post votes is effectively dictation by majority.
Yet it is not even this because if there there two people with essentially the same policies and believing that each other would be the most suitable if they did not get in and both of them secured 33% of the vote each, a person with 34% could still get in as a minority although almost twice as many people would prefer one of the other two.

You could also have numerous candidates getting 5% each with one getting 6% whom believes in separation that no other candidate does.

It can even be dictation by minority.

The US should start over. Its debt ridden government for millionaire campaigners only is not representative and is also such a non-diverse group that new ideas have no real chance of being implemented to succeed in changing with the world.

[Shilya]

Green Party, fuck those guys. Agrarianism for the lose.

This is what people believe the green party is about? That explains a whole lot.

[The New Sea Territory]

IT exists. Therefore, it continues to be evil, just as all government does. It just does in a less effective fashion then...say...the EU, Soviet Union, China or the Nazis.

[Duvniask]

IT exists. Therefore, it continues to be evil, just as all government does. It just does in a less effective fashion then...say...the EU, Soviet Union, China or the Nazis.

Your solution? Get rid of it?

[Death Metal]

IT exists. Therefore, it continues to be evil, just as all government does. It just does in a less effective fashion then...say...the EU, Soviet Union, China or the Nazis.

Nope.

[Death Metal]

Green Party, fuck those guys. Agrarianism for the lose.

This is what people believe the green party is about?

It's part of what they're about. If you actually follow their platform sometime you'll notice they have a lot of agrarian policies. They're also heavily anti-business, zealously so.

[Zottistan]

I'd put it mostly down to a lack of third parties.

[Alien Space Bats]

I don't see a member of the Socialist or Green party.

What would having Socialists or Greens in Congress do? Unless there were quite a lot of them, they'd end up caucusing with the Democrats, which would take us back to where we are right now. I mean, it's not like the votes to put those Socialists or Greens are going to come from the right side of the aisle; the conservative bloc in America isn't going to be any weaker just to give minor parties on the left a little more representation.

Which really brings us back to the whole difference between the American political system and those of other countries; in America, third Parties get their platforms co-opted by the two main Parties. Libertarians don't HAVE to elect 100 Representatives to the House, or 20 Senators, or a President; as Libertarianism has become more popular (and today it's WAY more popular than it was 35 years ago, when the LP first got organized), the Republican Party has begun to adopt more and more of its platform. Mind you, the Libertarian movement has also changed, making the LP more and more "Republican" in character. For example, when it first emerged, Libertarians as a group were very much in favor of reproductive rights (i.e., a woman's right to abortion on demand and a person's right to use contraception without limitation); today, with the rise of paleolibertarianism to prominence within the broader Libertarian movement, Libertarians as a group are much more likely to sympathize with the Republican Party and its social conservatism than the Democrats and their "permissiveness".

This is not a new phenomenon: At various times in American political history third Parties have emerged, only to have their ideas coopted by one or both major Parties; this usually happens long before said outside movement reaches the point at which it would otherwise have the strength to begin electing large numbers (or sometimes even modest numbers) of officeholders, either locally or Nationally. When a major Party coopts an outside political movement in this way, it does not represent a failure on the part of the outside movement; rather, it represents a success. After all, what does it matter which Party advances an idea, so long as it gets advanced in the end?

[Alien Space Bats]

The American system of giving all seats in one state based on a slim majority of first past the post votes is effectively dictation by majority.

We only do that in with Electoral Votes, in the course of electing a President. House members are elected by district, with each district representing approximately 750,000 voters.

Its debt ridden government for millionaire campaigners only is not representative and is also such a non-diverse group that new ideas have no real chance of being implemented to succeed in changing with the world.

Horseshit on two counts: First, there are real differences between our two major Parties, and most elections for local or Statewide seats (which includes Representatives and Senators) offer genuine choices.

Second, there are many other countries that are deeper in debt than we are. If you think our principle problem is debt, then you lack any real understanding of economics.

[Conservative Conservationists]

The American system of giving all seats in one state based on a slim majority of first past the post votes is effectively dictation by majority.

We only do that in with Electoral Votes, in the course of electing a President. House members are elected by district, with each district representing approximately 750,000 voters.

For president, you have a very long, drawn out and expensive process that ultimately results in two people giving the exact same lines for the exact same voters. Hardly better.

So says a country which needed to close national buildings because of the debt limit needing to be increased and no agreement found. The result was a decision to continue to borrow without a firm plan to get rid of debt only after the tourism industry and local companies took a hit that it will take ages to recover from. It may be the elected officials that have little understanding of economics, or at least no willingness to find an economic solution.

[Death Metal]

We only do that in with Electoral Votes, in the course of electing a President. House members are elected by district, with each district representing approximately 750,000 voters.

So says a country which needed to close national buildings because of the debt limit needing to be increased and no agreement found.

No, the problem there was having a debt limit in the first place. There's no rational reason for it.

[Alien Space Bats]

We only do that in with Electoral Votes, in the course of electing a President. House members are elected by district, with each district representing approximately 750,000 voters.

So says a country which needed to close national buildings because of the debt limit needing to be increased and no agreement found. The result was a decision to continue to borrow without a firm plan to get rid of debt only after the tourism industry and local companies took a hit that it will take ages to recover from. It may be the elected officials that have little understanding of economics, or at least no willingness to find an economic solution.

Has anyone ever told you that non-sequiturs are not your friends?

No, the problem there was having a debt limit in the first place. There's no rational reason for it.

That's only partly true. All new debt must be approved by Congress, one way or another.

For my part, of course, I'd prefer the Gephardt Rule.

[Blakk Metal]

For example, when it first emerged, Libertarians as a group were very much in favor of reproductive rights (i.e., a woman's right to abortion on demand and a person's right to use contraception without limitation); today, with the rise of paleolibertarianism to prominence within the broader Libertarian movement, Libertarians as a group are much more likely to sympathize with the Republican Party and its social conservatism than the Democrats and their "permissiveness".

Back when they formed, many Republicans did too.

[KISS Nation]

The problem is that people in there are completely okay with restricting my freedoms and raising my taxes as long as someone in their district is.

[Conscentia]

Green Party, fuck those guys. Agrarianism for the lose.

This is what people believe the green party is about? That explains a whole lot.

The American Green Party is.

Other Green Parties, not necessarily so.

[The Electoral College]

The problem is that people in there are completely okay with restricting my freedoms and raising my taxes as long as someone in their district is.

When has any movement to substantially raise taxes gained traction? Politicians don't have enough political capital precisely because they are overcocerned with their district voters, not the opposite.

[Xsyne]

The problem with American politics is that the Republican Party, as an institution, is fundamentally insane.

[Vistany]

The problem is that people in there are completely okay with restricting my freedoms and raising my taxes as long as someone in their district is.

That's called democracy.

[The Emerald Legion]

I'm rather disappointed by the lack of summary execution of dissenters at town hall meetings.

[Death Metal]

The problem with American politics is that the Republican Party, as an institution, is fundamentally insane.

Not to mention hypocritically ultra-patriotic whilst supporting a platform that goes against everything America was founded on.

GOP: Always At War With Eastasia Since 1984