The People's Party? « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Politics

The People's Party?

[25 posts] [12 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 9 months ago by CalebR
Latest reply from berdawn

Tags:

12 Next »

CalebR
Lincoln Village
Login to Send PM

Is it time for a new political party to dominate the senate, house and the presidential desk? It seems that many American are fed up or sick of our government. Many recent articles on CNN have been about "disciplining" or bashing Congress. Obviously Congress isnt listening to us and we need to obviously do something about that. People want change and I don't think Congress knows what they want. Truely I agree with these article writers about how Congress has forgotten there oath.

CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/02/honore.debt.politicians/index.html?hpt=us_mid
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/02/macguineas.debt.deal/index.html?hpt=us_mid
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/02/gergen.debt.deal/index.html?hpt=us_mid
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/02/overheard-on-cnn-com-congress-we%E2%80%99re-not-impressed/?hpt=us_bn1

Dispatch:
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/national_world/2011/08/05/congress-poll-numbers-tank.html

New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/us/politics/05poll.html?_r=1&ref=newyorktimespollwatch

The Hill:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/174963-poll-77-say-obama-congress-acted-like-spoiled-children-in-debt-fight

Obviously people don't like Congress....

Posted 9 months ago #
JayR
OSU
Login to Send PM

This latest debt showdown and other recent events has shown us a few things:

1) Republicans really don't care about fiscal responsibility and are basically panderers to the big business lobbies .

2) Democrats don't have the spine nor negotiating capacity to pass legislation even when they control 2/3rds of the government.

3) President Obama isn't a friend to progressives. In fact it can be said that he is to the right of the center.

I would honestly be all for a new political party but there are problem associated with that. The first being that the parties in power are so entrenched that it would be hard to usurp any of them. Second any progressive political party will take votes away from the democratic party, making it easier for the republicans to win. In two-party system like ours, fragmentation actually hurts a political party. It's this same reason that the Tea Party is still republican in name even though they are far from any semblance of what the modern republican ideology looks like.

Posted 9 months ago #
jimbach
Short North (WP division)
Login to Send PM

CalebR said:
Is it time for a new political party to dominate the senate, house and the presidential desk?
No.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

Posted 9 months ago #
joshlapp
SoHud
Login to Send PM

What we need is redistricting reform so that Moderates actually have the ability to win. In the current system (especially gerrymandering states like Ohio) you end up with the dominate party (the Republicans) creating as many safe seats for themselves as possible, which also creates a few extremely concentrated minority party (the Democrats) seats, so in the end no moderates win. Once all the radicals are in DC (or Columbus for that matter) no compromise can ever be made.

Posted 9 months ago #
Snarf
Dystopia
Login to Send PM

Judge Wapner for President!

Posted 9 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

Posted 9 months ago #
Coremodels
Really close to Explorer's Club.
Login to Send PM

Moderates actually have the ability to win.

This is what I cut out, because this is my dream.

The truth is, the D's are being moved too far left by Pelosi, the R's are being moved too far right by the Tea Party. Obama is still being called a Socialist Muslim Terrorist by the right, while being called Bush Jr. by the left, and really he's just an ineffective guy in the White House at the moment.

I don't see a need for a new party, I just see a need for the fringes of the existing ones to stop being the ruling factor.

Posted 9 months ago #
JayR
OSU
Login to Send PM

jimbach said:
No.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

Exactly

Posted 9 months ago #
JayR
OSU
Login to Send PM

joshlapp said:
What we need is redistricting reform so that Moderates actually have the ability to win. In the current system (especially gerrymandering states like Ohio) you end up with the dominate party (the Republicans) creating as many safe seats for themselves as possible, which also creates a few extremely concentrated minority party (the Democrats) seats, so in the end no moderates win. Once all the radicals are in DC (or Columbus for that matter) no compromise can ever be made.

Wasn't there a website floating around the boards somewhere that is inviting people to redraw the districts themselves?

Posted 9 months ago #
somertimeoh
Harrison West
Login to Send PM

Coremodels said:
I don't see a need for a new party, I just see a need for the fringes of the existing ones to stop being the ruling factor.

This.

Posted 9 months ago #
joshlapp
SoHud
Login to Send PM

JayR said:
Wasn't there a website floating around the boards somewhere that is inviting people to redraw the districts themselves?

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/ReshapeOhio.aspx

I think the League of Women Voters also has a campaign

Posted 9 months ago #
JayR
OSU
Login to Send PM

Here it is the website I was talking about:
http://drawthelinemidwest.org/ohio/

Posted 9 months ago #
CalebR
Lincoln Village
Login to Send PM

Well it seems that the current Congress/ political parties cant do the right thing and actually do what Americans want. George Washington even said that political parties will tear this nation apart.. and so he has been right so far about that...

Posted 9 months ago #
GCrites80s
5xNW
Login to Send PM

I don't like the name; it sounds like something Borat would cook up. "Ohio Sector of People's Party demand more goats!"

Posted 9 months ago #
CalebR
Lincoln Village
Login to Send PM

Well, then what should it be then?

Posted 9 months ago #
CalebR
Lincoln Village
Login to Send PM

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/05/davis.us.trust/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

Here is another article that I just got finished reading. I suggest reading it.

Posted 9 months ago #
CalebR
Lincoln Village
Login to Send PM

So i got really bored last night.. I know Friday night? not possible. But I was, so I made a fake website:

http://www.wix.com/peoplerepublic/1

Posted 9 months ago #
CalebR
Lincoln Village
Login to Send PM

Might I add this to:

Leadership failure :)

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/05/news/economy/downgrade_rumors/index.htm?iref=BN1&hpt=hp_t1

Posted 9 months ago #
BuckeyeShadow
Behind that Buckeye Tree
Login to Send PM

Officially ban all political parties and require political candidates to run as independents in non-partisan elections. You instantly obliterate the worthless left-right, liberal-conservative dichotomy and the acrimonious, ineffectual political-ideological logjam that has rendered the US a global laughingstock for being unable to adequately address its problems and crises. This would also force people to actually THINK and examine candidates for their views, interests, qualifications and objectives as opposed to relying upon simply being able to look for the "Democrat" or "Republican" next to candidates' names. The result would be a meritocracy in which qualified and competent individuals more often than not emerge as political representatives.

Non-partisan elections are actually already in place for municipal judges and school board members. Some small towns also have non-partisan elections for city council and mayor. No one misses smarmy party politics and the endless bickering between political labels and ideological constructs in these places.

Non-partisan elections would also render gerrymandering meaningless with no parties standing to fight and bicker over district lines. Perhaps we could even vote for multiple candidates within one district and choose several to represent the area on city council, within the state legislature, etc.

Would this really be a stretch to do at a state and national level? Likely not, but I'm sure the Ds and Rs would raise a huge ruckus about anything that would put them out of business and force them to stand on something other than vapid nostrums while whoring themselves out to the highest bidding corporate interest. All the more reason to do it.

Posted 9 months ago #
BuckeyeShadow
Behind that Buckeye Tree
Login to Send PM

Put another way, if I am interviewing someone for a job, do I simply hire someone based upon a specific affiliation (e.g. fraternity, association, etc.) that the person has, no further questions asked? Or do I look for specific qualifications up front to narrow the list of candidates and then interview each one to determine whether or not they are the best fit for the job?

Yes I could easily do the former, and it has been done many times. Going on affiliations alone however are no guarantee of success. Yet we take this leap of faith each time we press a button or pull a lever for a candidate based upon their party affiliation. Recent results suggest that a more in-depth approach to choosing our political leaders is necessary if the country is to continue to survive.

Posted 9 months ago #