OT - Politics doesn't make sense to me

[Lurker]

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Yeah, no...they'd stick said president in gridlock so he had no chance of getting a second term, creating a disastorous presidency and thus poisoning the idea of an independent president ever being elected again.

Idealism is nice, but reality is reality

And the reality is that we have been stuck in gridlock since the 2006 congressional elections.  So let's all vote for the status quo.  YEA!

The reality also is your driving off a cliff.  So do you try to change course or just stick with what you have always done...drive straight ahead.

The reality is other people are driving off the cliff (politicians) and the regular people are in the trunk tied up, unable to fully grab the steering wheel to move it right away.  As much as there is wrong it is not exactly easy for the average person to change things.  Average people tried to change things in 2004 and yet strings were pulled behind the scenes to put everyone back in their place...as consumers.  Not people who should have a REAL say so in the government.

That (voters in the trunk) is very true.  But in my case I would rather fight to get out than to spend my life as ballast.  And to continue to vote for only Democrats or Republicans because "voting for another party is a waste" is closing your eyes and accepting the inevitable (that you will be found at the bottom of a cliff in a compacted vehicle).

[westkoast]

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Yeah, no...they'd stick said president in gridlock so he had no chance of getting a second term, creating a disastorous presidency and thus poisoning the idea of an independent president ever being elected again.

Idealism is nice, but reality is reality

And the reality is that we have been stuck in gridlock since the 2006 congressional elections.  So let's all vote for the status quo.  YEA!

The reality also is your driving off a cliff.  So do you try to change course or just stick with what you have always done...drive straight ahead.

The reality is other people are driving off the cliff (politicians) and the regular people are in the trunk tied up, unable to fully grab the steering wheel to move it right away.  As much as there is wrong it is not exactly easy for the average person to change things.  Average people tried to change things in 2004 and yet strings were pulled behind the scenes to put everyone back in their place...as consumers.  Not people who should have a REAL say so in the government.

That (voters in the trunk) is very true.  But in my case I would rather fight to get out than to spend my life as ballast.  And to continue to vote for only Democrats or Republicans because "voting for another party is a waste" is closing your eyes and accepting the inevitable (that you will be found at the bottom of a cliff in a compacted vehicle).

Personally I don't have a problem voting for a 3rd party especially the people who are running under the Green party ticket this year.  The "your vote doesn't count if you don't vote for a major party" doesn't even apply.  I think it's a bad excuse people use.  If you are a republican voting in New York technically your vote doesn't count right?  The state is going to go to the dems anyways.  If you vote dem in Texas, does it matter?  The electoral votes are going Republican. 

Besides...last time I voted in a major election my vote didn't count anyways!!

[JoMal]

And that would be different than the past 2 years because...

          

Who said anything about it being different? That is the whole, entire point.

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Who are you saying would force bipartisanship on Congress?

Who would be forced to draft veto-proof bills?

Who doesnt' get how the political system is designed to thwart exactly that from happening?

[JoMal]

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Yeah, no...they'd stick said president in gridlock so he had no chance of getting a second term, creating a disastorous presidency and thus poisoning the idea of an independent president ever being elected again.

Idealism is nice, but reality is reality

And the reality is that we have been stuck in gridlock since the 2006 congressional elections.  So let's all vote for the status quo.  YEA!

The reality also is your driving off a cliff.  So do you try to change course or just stick with what you have always done...drive straight ahead.

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

[WayOutWest]

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

Exactly.

Lurker you are suggesting the type of change that would be the equivalent of chosing between driving off the North facing side of the cliff or the West facing side of the cliff.  IMO you are suggesting we light ourselves on fire before going off the cliff of OUR chosing, just to be different.

[westkoast]

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Yeah, no...they'd stick said president in gridlock so he had no chance of getting a second term, creating a disastorous presidency and thus poisoning the idea of an independent president ever being elected again.

Idealism is nice, but reality is reality

And the reality is that we have been stuck in gridlock since the 2006 congressional elections.  So let's all vote for the status quo.  YEA!

The reality also is your driving off a cliff.  So do you try to change course or just stick with what you have always done...drive straight ahead.

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

Castro is that you?!

[JoMal]

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Yeah, no...they'd stick said president in gridlock so he had no chance of getting a second term, creating a disastorous presidency and thus poisoning the idea of an independent president ever being elected again.

Idealism is nice, but reality is reality

And the reality is that we have been stuck in gridlock since the 2006 congressional elections.  So let's all vote for the status quo.  YEA!

The reality also is your driving off a cliff.  So do you try to change course or just stick with what you have always done...drive straight ahead.

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

Castro is that you?!

Actually, Castro is a perfect example.

He had virtually no followers. He "invaded" his country with about thirty guys and the feds killed 28 of them, with him escaping by the skin of his teeth. He came back and the timing could not have been better for him. The people - nearly the entire population outside the major cities - rose up in support of Castro. Suddenly, his revolution put him in power. He really did not expect that - going from the outsider trying to cause havoc to the guy in power of the real havoc. 

If you notice, Cuba is just about the same as it was in 1960. Talk about no change.

[Lurker]

And that would be different than the past 2 years because...

          

Who said anything about it being different? That is the whole, entire point.

The whole point is that you are satisfied with the status quo in government? 

My point is that it will never change if no one cares about trying to change it.  I am not saying that the changes have to be instantaneous.  I am saying that our current two party system is broken and we should work to fix it.  Voting for 3rd parties is one way...not the only way...because our system is designed to throw government money towards any party that achieves at least a minimum amount of votes.  (sidenote - what an ingenous way to keep those with the power in power).

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Who are you saying would force bipartisanship on Congress?

Who would be forced to draft veto-proof bills?

Right now we are basically under that system.  If the current congress cannot pass a bill that is:1) exactly what Bush wants, or 2) veto proof then no bills are passed.  If there were a true independent who had the gonads to stand up for the country as a whole then Congress would have to band together (bipartisanship) to make bills that the president would sign.  Or they would have to pass bills with enough of a majority to be penalty proof.  Sounds like the spot we are in now so I guess you are right we should all become ostrichs

Who doesnt' get how the political system is designed to thwart exactly that from happening?

The current administration.

[Lurker]

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

No what I am suggesting is that we try something besides blindly following a broken 2 party system. 

Another way would be to throw out all political party affiliations.  Let everyone run as an independent and try to get elected on the merits of thier stands on issues instead of whichever party can finance the most mudslinging.

[Lurker]

Or a true independent in the White House would force bipartisanship onto Congress as they would have to draft bills that would be veto proof.

Yeah, no...they'd stick said president in gridlock so he had no chance of getting a second term, creating a disastorous presidency and thus poisoning the idea of an independent president ever being elected again.

Idealism is nice, but reality is reality

And the reality is that we have been stuck in gridlock since the 2006 congressional elections.  So let's all vote for the status quo.  YEA!

The reality also is your driving off a cliff.  So do you try to change course or just stick with what you have always done...drive straight ahead.

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

So the reality is that we currently driving into a brick wall.  OK.  So what do you want to do besides blame the driver?

[Lurker]

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

Exactly.

Lurker you are suggesting the type of change that would be the equivalent of chosing between driving off the North facing side of the cliff or the West facing side of the cliff.  IMO you are suggesting we light ourselves on fire before going off the cliff of OUR chosing, just to be different.

So enjoy the ride.  I will continue to look for another driver or another path.  I would prefer my country stay on top of the cliff.

[WayOutWest]

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

Exactly.

Lurker you are suggesting the type of change that would be the equivalent of chosing between driving off the North facing side of the cliff or the West facing side of the cliff.  IMO you are suggesting we light ourselves on fire before going off the cliff of OUR chosing, just to be different.

So enjoy the ride.  I will continue to look for another driver or another path.  I would prefer my country stay on top of the cliff.

Lurker, I'm not saying that's how I want things, we are saying that is how things are, all you are doing with your want of change by doing something as insignifact as voting independant is just lighting yourself on fire because there is NO WAY you are going to avoid driving off the cliff.  Voting independant is a very good idea and manner in which to show your unhappiness with the current system but the reality is it only wastes your vote. 

I am not completely disregarding your opinion since it was possible to break the PRI hold on the absolutely currupt country of Mexico then maybe it's possible for us to do the same (it was done non-violently/no revolution but it was a revolutionary change).  Unfortunately the results of that revolutionary change have not been worth noting, I fear the same "going over the cliff in flames" will happen here.  The other problem is the US "system" is smart enough to not take their corruption too far as to incite revolutionary ideas.  They cheat us just enough to stay fat but not enough for us to quit the game or change the rules.

[Lurker]

Lurker, I'm not saying that's how I want things, we are saying that is how things are, all you are doing with your want of change by doing something as insignifact as voting independant is just lighting yourself on fire because there is NO WAY you are going to avoid driving off the cliff.  Voting independant is a very good idea and manner in which to show your unhappiness with the current system but the reality is it only wastes your vote. 

I am not completely disregarding your opinion since it was possible to break the PRI hold on the absolutely currupt country of Mexico then maybe it's possible for us to do the same (it was done non-violently/no revolution but it was a revolutionary change).  Unfortunately the results of that revolutionary change have not been worth noting, I fear the same "going over the cliff in flames" will happen here.  The other problem is the US "system" is smart enough to not take their corruption too far as to incite revolutionary ideas.  They cheat us just enough to stay fat but not enough for us to quit the game or change the rules.

I guess that I don't feel my vote for a third party is a waste.  In fact I feel if more people were to sit up and say "I am frickkin tired of the status quo" then maybe they wouldn't just pull the party lever.  (another side note - anyone who just votes a straight party ticket either has no brain or is too lazy).  My argument isn't that my ideals are necessarily the best but that without anyone to call for changes then change can never happen.

Voting Republican or Democrat is no guarantee that your vote will count any more than mine.  As koast alluded to earlier, in Texas a Democratic vote is pretty much a wasted vote.  Ever since Delay engineered one of the craftiest redistricting plans ever after the 2000 election Texas will be hard pressed to elect any Democrat to a statewide or national office (excluding a few representatives who are elected by district).

And to go with your Mexico example...do you think that voting out the PRI was done overnight?  Or do you think there were grass roots pepole who were working...possibly for years...to convince others that it is possible to change course?

[JoMal]

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

No what I am suggesting is that we try something besides blindly following a broken 2 party system. 

Another way would be to throw out all political party affiliations.  Let everyone run as an independent and try to get elected on the merits of thier stands on issues instead of whichever party can finance the most mudslinging.

This is where you are suggesting anarchy to replace complacency. Italy has multiple parties and for years their government has spun itself silly.

If you want to do something about the two party system, suggest replacing it with something that might work instead of weakening an already sagging America even further.

Do you even have a clue as to how many separate issues multiple party affiliations would generate? Look at the number of special interest groups that exist today who are trying to manipulate their agendas using the EXISTING two party system.

And what you would like to see is each one of these special, independent, issues have its own party to work within?

We certainly would not need a revolution to change things at that point, but I would move to Iceland and hope the sh*t that this would cause does not land there.

[Lurker]

Lurker, what you are suggesting is more like driving into a brick wall. While certainly different, the results are about the same. True difference - the type of difference you are suggesting - only comes about with revolution.

No what I am suggesting is that we try something besides blindly following a broken 2 party system. 

Another way would be to throw out all political party affiliations.  Let everyone run as an independent and try to get elected on the merits of thier stands on issues instead of whichever party can finance the most mudslinging.

This is where you are suggesting anarchy to replace complacency. Italy has multiple parties and for years their government has spun itself silly.

If you want to do something about the two party system, suggest replacing it with something that might work instead of weakening an already sagging America even further.

Do you even have a clue as to how many separate issues multiple party affiliations would generate? Look at the number of special interest groups that exist today who are trying to manipulate their agendas using the EXISTING two party system.

And what you would like to see is each one of these special, independent, issues have its own party to work within?

We certainly would not need a revolution to change things at that point, but I would move to Iceland and hope the sh*t that this would cause does not land there.

Maybe if each special interest group had it own party then they would figure out how to compromise and work out what is best for the country as a whole.  Now all they have to do is get one party to buy into their agenda and voila it becomes law no matter how bad for the country when that party achieves control.  I would go as far as to say the 2 party system encourages these special interest groups.

So instead of decrying how poorly thought out my alternative is maybe you could come up with another.  Unless you believe that what we are doing is working.  And as the world traveler that you are I find it difficult to believe that you think our current system is working.  And with basically our entire government getting approval ratings below 25% I would hazard a guess that many Americans aren't real enamored with the current system either.  It is just IMO most are to complacent to try to do anything about it.

And now what I am sensing is that when one does speak out the lemmings stand together to shout: NO! NO! That can't work!  But without open discussion about how to improve the system then there never will be any change.