Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Community Discussion > The Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-12-2005, 04:34 PM   #1
Ellis
gymnopedist
 
Ellis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hyde Park
Posts: 8,141
Ellis has a spectacular aura aboutEllis has a spectacular aura about
Default Politics are out of control

Why is our country so ignorant?

If politics stay on the course they are now, this country is just going to get worse. Politicians, “republicans”/”democrats”, “liberals”/”conservatives” do not listen to each other. Politicians now days are so caught up in their view and their party, that they blind themselves from what is right for the people of the country.

No one wants to listen to each other. No one wants to be wrong. No one wants to let the other guys win. It is ridiculous. People are so opinionated that no one wants to sit down and think things through with people who see things in a different way. They just want to push their point of view as far as it can go and will not change their views.

Our country needs a moderate, middle of the road guy. We need a guy who will listen to everything and put everything consideration.

Having conservatives and liberals running our country is just splitting the country in half. No one agrees with each other and no one wants what is best for the country. They want what is best for them.

Honestly, the way things are now we could defiantly have a civil war down the road. The country is so divided and so ignorant. We need understanding, middle of the road guys running our country or else nothing is going to change.
Ellis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2005, 06:15 PM   #2
KevinBeane
Sports Virtuoso
 
KevinBeane's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Newark DE/Akron OH
Posts: 3,651
KevinBeane is on a distinguished road
Default

The problem, Ellis, is that "No one agrees with each other and no one wants what is best for the country. They want what is best for them." Is a problem of the human condition rather than just a problem of the U.S. political parties.

And as polarzied as we are right now (very), it was exponentially worse in the fifties (think equal rights marches and police dogs and fire hoses) and the sixties (tons of violent groups, the hippies vs. the man, Kent State), and we did not come near civil war then. So that's a bit of drama on your part, but I understand how you feel.
__________________
SLANT PATTERN
2004 SCMB FANTASY GOLF, NFL POINTSPREAD CHAMPION

"I believe in [a] God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings." -Albert Einstein
KevinBeane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2005, 06:42 PM   #3
jhuerbin88
Sports guy
 
jhuerbin88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,684
jhuerbin88 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Politics are out of control

Quote:
Originally posted by Ellis
Politicians now days are so caught up in their view and their party, that they blind themselves from what is right for the people of the country.
You kind of contradicted yourself because politicians believe that their views are what is right for the people.

And, you can never please everybody.
__________________
Something witty and clever goes here
jhuerbin88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2005, 03:56 PM   #4
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

I would amend j's comment to "some politicians." It is folly and naivete to suggest that politicians with a blanket are interested in what's "right for the people."
Worse, many a politician get to DC feeling one way, and having PAC money "changing" their minds.

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2005, 01:32 AM   #5
ESP0704
All-Star Player
 
ESP0704's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the banks of Connoquenessing Creek
Posts: 379
ESP0704 is on a distinguished road
Default

Part of the problem is that the binary nature of our political system discourages compromise and encourages demonization of the "other."

In 1992, Ross Perot got about one out of every five votes in the presidential election. In almost any other country on the planet, that would have given him enough clout to participate in the process.

Even in the United States, his candidacy might have proved a wake-up call to the two major parties, had it not been for the electoral college. But we have the electoral college and Perot didn't get any electoral votes, so his candidacy doesn't count.

On the legislative level, the problem is just as bad. A candidate can get 50.00000000001 percent of the votes in his district, yet end up with 100 percent of the elected office, effectively disenfranchising nearly half of the district's voters.

We'd probably get better solutions if we had something closer to a parliamentary system, run by state. Each party -- Republican, Democrat, Green, American Nazi, Communist -- would announce a slate of candidates. Then, instead of going to the polls and voting for the candidate, the voters would cast ballots for the party.

In California, which has 53 seats in the House of Representatives, each party would get one seat for every 1.89 percent of the vote it received. If the Greens get five percent, it would get two or three seats.

In presidential election years, the House of Representatives would serve the role currently served by the electoral college. Since neither of the major parties would likely have a majority, it would have to create an alliance with the smaller parties and offer those parties a say in the government.

In such an environment, a third (not to mention fourth or fifth) party would gain a foothold. Also, it would lead to solutions beyond the "Column A" and "Column B" options now available.

It would allow people to cast positive votes, by voting for the candidate or political philosophy they believe in, rather than the current situation, in which people vote for the candidate they dislike the least.
__________________
"I've never been so much as scratched in a duel! My face is as smooth as a baby's bottom, which is more than you can say for my bottom.
-- The Duke of Wellington ("Blackadder")
ESP0704 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2005, 01:39 AM   #6
KevinBeane
Sports Virtuoso
 
KevinBeane's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Newark DE/Akron OH
Posts: 3,651
KevinBeane is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ESP0704


On the legislative level, the problem is just as bad. A candidate can get 50.00000000001 percent of the votes in his district, yet end up with 100 percent of the elected office, effectively disenfranchising nearly half of the district's voters.

Or, in the case of presidential elections, less than 50% and less total votes than another candidate garnered (see 2000) and end up with 100% of the office.

But, the solution you are presenting, while extremely convincing, is nonetheless how they do it in Europe, and we all know Europe is wrong about everything. What're you, some kind of Frenchy?
__________________
SLANT PATTERN
2004 SCMB FANTASY GOLF, NFL POINTSPREAD CHAMPION

"I believe in [a] God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings." -Albert Einstein
KevinBeane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2005, 02:45 AM   #7
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,328
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

ESPO, your idea makes entirely too much sense to be adopted by the people who make the rules in this country. The major parties fear a strong third party. It would cut into their contributions and influence -- precisely why we need one or more of them. Ross Perot had a decent idea, but his ego and arrogance (not to mention his unfriendly disposition) cost him support. America was fed up with both parties in 1992 and his candidacy was a breath of fresh air. By 1996, his act had gotten old. He had not changed with the times. His legacy was left to Jesse Ventura, who did some good things during his term in office in Minnesota. It is very likely that I'd have voted for him had I lived there.
Unfortunately, the Reform Party was taken over by Pat Buchannan, a man who is less likeable than Perot was and more arrogant. His appeal was very narrow and the party lost nearly all of its momentum.
The Green Party is tied to the idea of the "environmentalist wacko" fringe. It has some good ideas, and some that are somewhat less good.
As I said, this country needs a third party to energize voters to vote FOR something and not against something or someone.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2005, 01:10 PM   #8
Billy D
Alternative View
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: i move a lot
Posts: 1,299
Billy D is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ESP0704
In 1992, Ross Perot got about one out of every five votes in the presidential election. In almost any other country on the planet, that would have given him enough clout to participate in the process.

Even in the United States, his candidacy might have proved a wake-up call to the two major parties, had it not been for the electoral college.
Actually, Perot was a wake-up call to the two major parties. Realizing that the debates helped Perot and hurt Bush/Clinton, the major parties created a debate commission which made a rule that debates would only include candidates who polled at 15% or higher several months before the election (even Perot did not meet this requirement... his numbers did not rise until too late). Effectively, they shut out future Perots
Billy D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2005, 07:36 PM   #9
Richard the Lionheart
Krenzel/Owen Wilson 2008
 
Richard the Lionheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,869
Richard the Lionheart will become famous soon enoughRichard the Lionheart will become famous soon enough
Default

Its kind of a stretch to say that Parliamentary governments represent the populace any better than the Democratic Republican style we have here. I don't see any evidence of that, if you have any to present I would love to see it.
__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows...
Richard the Lionheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2005, 07:42 PM   #10
davematthews3
Fast Food Brother #3
 
davematthews3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sussex NJ
Posts: 2,305
davematthews3 is on a distinguished road
Default

Politics are also so condradictary also the Republican party opposes abortion but favors the death penlty I mean yea there is diffrences but it is still human life. That is what I think the biggest problem is whith our politics they are always flip flooping.
__________________
Danny:I haven't even told my father I'm not gonna get that scholarship. I'm gonna end up working in a lumberyard the rest of my life.
Ty:What's wrong with lumber? I own two lumberyards
Danny: notice you don't spend too much time there
Ty:I'm not quite sure where they are
davematthews3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2005, 08:05 PM   #11
jhuerbin88
Sports guy
 
jhuerbin88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,684
jhuerbin88 is on a distinguished road
Default

The main difference between abortion and death penalty is that abortion is killing a person before they were even given a chance to be somebody. In the death penalty, people were given a chance and "blew it" - for lack of a better words and because I don't feel like typing a lot of stuff.
__________________
Something witty and clever goes here
jhuerbin88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2005, 10:16 PM   #12
Richard the Lionheart
Krenzel/Owen Wilson 2008
 
Richard the Lionheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,869
Richard the Lionheart will become famous soon enoughRichard the Lionheart will become famous soon enough
Default

I agree with the distinction jhuerbin88 pointed out, however I also agree with davemathews3's main point. I feel it is contradictory to favor higher financial freedoms, but oppose more social freedoms as the Republicans tend to do, or vice versa as the Democrats do. That's why I consider myself to be largely a Libertarian thinker--more freedom for everyone for everything. That is, afterall, the eventual destiny of humankind anyway, why fight it?
__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows...
Richard the Lionheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2005, 12:16 AM   #13
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,328
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

The difference between being pro-death penalty and anti-abortion is not a contradiction at all. In death penalty cases, the convicted person is given due process, allowing him/her to present evidence of innocence or reason to not face the death penalty. In abortion, the convicted person is not given any consideration whatsoever.
Like I said previously, both major parties fear a viable alternative to their control.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:48 AM.