For better or worse, we have proved over two centuries that our form of government works most efficiently as a 2-party system. We have had more at particular periods of our history, Whigs, Know-Nothings, Greens, Libertarians, etc. Eventually, these were absorbed into the big two, although sometimes the remnants have endured for decades after any relevance has vanished. Unfortunately, we now have 5 distinct political groups, all of which are influential enough to actively block most attempts by any of the other groups to govern at the federal level.
Conservative Party: Although grouped with the old Republican party, this group is currently best represented by the "Tea Party" label. (It also contains The "Alt-Right", a variation with such few numbers that it is immaterial nationally.) Obvious beliefs include a smaller federal government, a strong military, and conservative social policies that are often based on Western/Christian values and beliefs. However, there are not sufficient numbers of conservatives to move their agenda without the votes of the ...
Republican Party: Labeled by the conservatives as RINO's (Republican in Name Only), this is actually the most centrist group of the five. However, in order to get elected, they must get conservative votes, which means that they lie about, or at least hide, their true political values. At best, they are the "go along to get along" party. Their obvious dilemma is that saying one thing and doing another will eventually get you unelected, a real problem when their one obvious value is getting re-elected.
Democratic Party: I will use this label for what is left of the "Southern" or "Reagan" democrats. This is the group that was mostly ignored by Ms. Clinton, thereby electing Mr. Trump. It is mostly working class ("blue collar" to use an older phrase) people whose first concern is their personal economic well-being. They are the ones most likely to ask the question, "Am I better off now then before" when going to vote. They tend to lean towards the conservatives on cultural and social issues. There are very few of them in positions of power or influence at the federal level.
Liberal Party: This is now the mainstream for people with a (D) after their name. Obvious beliefs are a powerful and expensive central government, and a complete social engineering agenda. This is the group now in charge of most of the mainstream media and most of our public institutions. It is also the group that is increasingly being rejected by the voters, especially at local levels. The public face of this group is almost completely secular and viewed as being anti-religious. Their current models for good government are the social-democracies of Europe. The label "Progressive" applies to the more activist members of this party and to the members of the ...
Far Left Party: Small in numbers but have shown that their willingness to use violence as a political tool can intimidate the liberal party into silence and capitulation when it comes to institutional practices and democratic (small d) policies. This group would completely tear down our system of government and replace it with a complete socialist economic and political system.
These descriptions are all generalities with numerous exceptions, but the labels provide a starting point for discussion. Take any issue of the day, look at all five party's position and actions concerning that issue, and tell me how we can possibly govern in our usual (and historically successful) manner.
lorddwarf wrote:
For better or worse, we have proved over two centuries that our form of government works most efficiently as a 2-party system. We have had more at particular periods of our history, Whigs, Know-Nothings, Greens, Libertarians, etc. Eventually, these were absorbed into the big two, although sometimes the remnants have endured for decades after any relevance has vanished. Unfortunately, we now have 5 distinct political groups, all of which are influential enough to actively block most attempts by any of the other groups to govern at the federal level.
Conservative Party: Although grouped with the old Republican party, this group is currently best represented by the "Tea Party" label. (It also contains The "Alt-Right", a variation with such few numbers that it is immaterial nationally.) Obvious beliefs include a smaller federal government, a strong military, and conservative social policies that are often based on Western/Christian values and beliefs. However, there are not sufficient numbers of conservatives to move their agenda without the votes of the ...
Republican Party: Labeled by the conservatives as RINO's (Republican in Name Only), this is actually the most centrist group of the five. However, in order to get elected, they must get conservative votes, which means that they lie about, or at least hide, their true political values. At best, they are the "go along to get along" party. Their obvious dilemma is that saying one thing and doing another will eventually get you unelected, a real problem when their one obvious value is getting re-elected.
Democratic Party: I will use this label for what is left of the "Southern" or "Reagan" democrats. This is the group that was mostly ignored by Ms. Clinton, thereby electing Mr. Trump. It is mostly working class ("blue collar" to use an older phrase) people whose first concern is their personal economic well-being. They are the ones most likely to ask the question, "Am I better off now then before" when going to vote. They tend to lean towards the conservatives on cultural and social issues. There are very few of them in positions of power or influence at the federal level.
Liberal Party: This is now the mainstream for people with a (D) after their name. Obvious beliefs are a powerful and expensive central government, and a complete social engineering agenda. This is the group now in charge of most of the mainstream media and most of our public institutions. It is also the group that is increasingly being rejected by the voters, especially at local levels. The public face of this group is almost completely secular and viewed as being anti-religious. Their current models for good government are the social-democracies of Europe. The label "Progressive" applies to the more activist members of this party and to the members of the ...
Far Left Party: Small in numbers but have shown that their willingness to use violence as a political tool can intimidate the liberal party into silence and capitulation when it comes to institutional practices and democratic (small d) policies. This group would completely tear down our system of government and replace it with a complete socialist economic and political system.
These descriptions are all generalities with numerous exceptions, but the labels provide a starting point for discussion. Take any issue of the day, look at all five party's position and actions concerning that issue, and tell me how we can possibly govern in our usual (and historically successful) manner.
For better or worse, we have proved over two centu... (
show quote)
Jefferson warned us to"beware of factionalism", but, I'm starting to think that as bad as gridlock is, either party unrestrained is more dangerous.
Curios. Which of the five you listed do you most identify with?
lorddwarf wrote:
For better or worse, we have proved over two centuries that our form of government works most efficiently as a 2-party system. We have had more at particular periods of our history, Whigs, Know-Nothings, Greens, Libertarians, etc. Eventually, these were absorbed into the big two, although sometimes the remnants have endured for decades after any relevance has vanished. Unfortunately, we now have 5 distinct political groups, all of which are influential enough to actively block most attempts by any of the other groups to govern at the federal level.
Conservative Party: Although grouped with the old Republican party, this group is currently best represented by the "Tea Party" label. (It also contains The "Alt-Right", a variation with such few numbers that it is immaterial nationally.) Obvious beliefs include a smaller federal government, a strong military, and conservative social policies that are often based on Western/Christian values and beliefs. However, there are not sufficient numbers of conservatives to move their agenda without the votes of the ...
Republican Party: Labeled by the conservatives as RINO's (Republican in Name Only), this is actually the most centrist group of the five. However, in order to get elected, they must get conservative votes, which means that they lie about, or at least hide, their true political values. At best, they are the "go along to get along" party. Their obvious dilemma is that saying one thing and doing another will eventually get you unelected, a real problem when their one obvious value is getting re-elected.
Democratic Party: I will use this label for what is left of the "Southern" or "Reagan" democrats. This is the group that was mostly ignored by Ms. Clinton, thereby electing Mr. Trump. It is mostly working class ("blue collar" to use an older phrase) people whose first concern is their personal economic well-being. They are the ones most likely to ask the question, "Am I better off now then before" when going to vote. They tend to lean towards the conservatives on cultural and social issues. There are very few of them in positions of power or influence at the federal level.
Liberal Party: This is now the mainstream for people with a (D) after their name. Obvious beliefs are a powerful and expensive central government, and a complete social engineering agenda. This is the group now in charge of most of the mainstream media and most of our public institutions. It is also the group that is increasingly being rejected by the voters, especially at local levels. The public face of this group is almost completely secular and viewed as being anti-religious. Their current models for good government are the social-democracies of Europe. The label "Progressive" applies to the more activist members of this party and to the members of the ...
Far Left Party: Small in numbers but have shown that their willingness to use violence as a political tool can intimidate the liberal party into silence and capitulation when it comes to institutional practices and democratic (small d) policies. This group would completely tear down our system of government and replace it with a complete socialist economic and political system.
These descriptions are all generalities with numerous exceptions, but the labels provide a starting point for discussion. Take any issue of the day, look at all five party's position and actions concerning that issue, and tell me how we can possibly govern in our usual (and historically successful) manner.
For better or worse, we have proved over two centu... (
show quote)
Must be a "fair and balanced" article if you have to ask.
Careful. That's what Bill O'Reilly said.
lorddwarf wrote:
Must be a "fair and balanced" article if you have to ask.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.