Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

To all those pining away for 3rd parties: Europe is ready for just 2.

Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:20 pm
Posted by cokebottleag
I’m a Santos Republican
Member since Aug 2011
24028 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:20 pm
WSJ

quote:

ROME—When the votes are counted in Italy’s election in March, the winner is likely to be the same that emerged from a number of 2017 ballots in Europe: No one.

From Germany to the Netherlands, voters have abandoned mainstream parties and thrown their support to upstart groups, making for a political landscape so fragmented that it becomes difficult to create new governments.

That is leaving many European countries with an unpalatable choice: assemble minority governments that will struggle to make bold policy choices, or form cross-party coalitions of mainstream groups that feed resentment toward those parties.


quote:

The result: Weak, patchwork coalitions that have typically had short lives. A decade ago, a government under Prime Minister Romano Prodi included nine parties. To accommodate all the groups’ demands, the government had more than 100 ministers and undersecretaries. It lasted less than two years.

Italy’s departing legislature has lived up to that tradition. At its inauguration in 2013, it counted 15 parties. It is ending with 23, including five single-person parties.

The new electoral law that governs the March ballot favors groups that run as coalitions, thus encouraging the creation of myriad new splinter groups.

Other countries are looking more like Italy, as upstart parties steal voters away from legacy groups. The result is a wave of minority governments.

In the Netherlands, it took Prime Minister Mark Rutte seven months to assemble a government, which is now supported by an unprecedented four-party alliance. Ireland, Portugal and the U.K. all have minority governments.


quote:

According to current polls, the antiestablishment 5 Star Movement could emerge as the largest single party with just short of 30% of votes. As a result, many lawmakers and party leaders expect March’s election to produce a hung parliament.


Bottom line: Micro parties like the EU is experiencing wreck 'winner take all' systems like our presidential election. Get everyone their own party, and eventually what usually happens is everyone else splinters into tiny groups, and the socialists and their hive mind take 20%, and win.
Posted by SCLibertarian
Conway, South Carolina
Member since Aug 2013
35950 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:38 pm to
We have 1 party in the United States on most of the important issues of our time. The idea that there is this wide substantive chasm between Republicans and Democrats is hilarious.

War? Bipartisan. Interventionist foreign policy? Bipartisan. Fiat currency? Bipartisan. Deficit spending? Bipartisan. Mass surveillance? Bipartisan. Media blackout of any and all third-parties and issues that confront or challenge American political orthodoxy? Bipartisan.

Multiple political parties not only liven political debate about a multitude of issues that are ignored by the Uniparty, they actually would make Republicans and Democrats more ideologically honest. Hillary Clinton would have never been the Democratic nominee with a viable Green Party. Mitt Romney or John McCain would have never been the Republican nominee if there was a viable Libertarian, Reform or Constitution Party.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112410 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:42 pm to
Yeah, no difference. All bipartisan. That's why when Obamacare passed the GOP vote was ZERO. That's why when the tax cut passed the DEM vote was ZERO.

That's why all political analysts say we are in the LEAST bipartisan era ever.
Posted by cokebottleag
I’m a Santos Republican
Member since Aug 2011
24028 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:42 pm to
quote:


Multiple political parties not only liven political debate about a multitude of issues that are ignored by the Uniparty, they actually would make Republicans and Democrats more ideologically honest. Hillary Clinton would have never been the Democratic nominee with a viable Green Party. Mitt Romney or John McCain would have never been the Republican nominee if there was a viable Libertarian, Reform or Constitution Party.


That was my point.

Your libertarian self would much more likely be looking at election results of:

Green Party 5%
Socialist Party (Bernie Sanders) 33%
Democrat Party 21%
BullMoose Party (trump) 19%
Libertarian Party 7%
Republican Party 15%.

Congrats! You now have a socialist party in power.
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
134843 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:43 pm to
I'm trying to figure out if this is good or bad.

Posted by MSMHater
Houston
Member since Oct 2008
22774 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:44 pm to
quote:

War? Bipartisan. Interventionist foreign policy? Bipartisan. Fiat currency? Bipartisan. Deficit spending? Bipartisan. Mass surveillance? Bipartisan. Media blackout of any and all third-parties and issues that confront or challenge American political orthodoxy? Bipartisan.


Have an upvote
Posted by Machine
Earth
Member since May 2011
6001 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:49 pm to
3 or 4 major parties would be great

Left (D)
Center Left (G)
Center Right (L)
Right (R)
Posted by TigerBait1971
PTC GA
Member since Oct 2014
14865 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:53 pm to
2 parties:

Taxpayers

Non-Taxpayers
Posted by SCLibertarian
Conway, South Carolina
Member since Aug 2013
35950 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 3:55 pm to
The media in this country doesn't even address the issues I posted about. They'd rather convince people like you everyone is so partisan because of a healthcare vote and a tax vote.

We are $20 trillion in debt and addicted to spending. Is there any candidate outside of the Paul's who wants to actually cut spending? No. Is there any candidate outside of the Paul's who talk about the connection between fiat currency, our current monetary policy and deficit spending.? No. We have been at war since 2001, costing us thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. These wars have been conducted by both parties. Is there any candidate who wants us to drastically shift our foreign policy to one of non-intervention? We are losing our civil liberties at an alarming rate and have spy agencies collecting our data with virtually zero transparency or accountability. The establishment of both parties support this.

Look at the big picture. Our republic is an empire, propped up by war and currency manipulation. Our politicians are milking the tit for as long as they can, and they use their lemmings in the media to convince people like you there's a difference.
Posted by cokebottleag
I’m a Santos Republican
Member since Aug 2011
24028 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 4:06 pm to
quote:

I'm trying to figure out if this is good or bad.



It's the difference between small change/status quo and stability, or radical swing shifts every time one of the far right or far left parties edges up a few percent to crest 25/30%.
Posted by Boatshoes
Member since Dec 2017
6775 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 4:39 pm to
We have three parties in the US: Bernie Sanders Communist/Socialists, Clinton/Bush Corporatist Progressives, and Tea Party/Trump borders/language/culture warrors.
Posted by chalmetteowl
Chalmette
Member since Jan 2008
47472 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 5:17 pm to
quote:

Clinton/Bush Corporatist Progressives
ain't nothing progressive about Clinton and Bush people...
Posted by TeLeFaWx
Dallas, TX
Member since Aug 2011
29177 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 5:31 pm to
I like our two party system. The parties are far more fluid than many would like to believe, especially if there is involvement.

The current GOP is a blend of populism and libertarians. They probably care about social conservatism but don't want to waste time on it. Essentially 90s Dixiecrats.

The current Democratic Party is full of cultural marxists. A shite show if there ever was one.

Compare that to ten years ago.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 5:33 pm to
quote:


That's why all political analysts say we are in the LEAST bipartisan era ever.



All because a black man was elected president
Posted by Tiguar
Montana
Member since Mar 2012
33131 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 5:33 pm to
Yeah it actually sounds awesome.

Weak government that can't pass any new laws
Posted by Tiguar
Montana
Member since Mar 2012
33131 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 5:34 pm to
quote:

That's why all (((political analysts))) say we are in the LEAST bipartisan era ever. 
Posted by chalmetteowl
Chalmette
Member since Jan 2008
47472 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 6:08 pm to
quote:

Green Party 5%
Socialist Party (Bernie Sanders) 33%
Democrat Party 21%
BullMoose Party (trump) 19%
Libertarian Party 7%
Republican Party 15%.

Congrats! You now have a socialist party in power.


yes, a moderated socialist party bc of the need to pull half of "Democrats" to their side. that Green Party 5% becomes 0.2% if ever Bernie Sanders ran again...
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 1/3/18 at 6:12 pm to
quote:

All because a black man was elected president



who coincidentally was painfully unqualified

What was his foreign policy anyway?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram