What's new
By:

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

TheGoldStandard said:
There is a good reason why many are becoming independent:
news.gallup.com

Independent Party ID Tied for High; Democratic ID at New Low

In 2023, 43% of U.S. adults identified as independents, tying the record high from 2014. Meanwhile, Democratic identification fell to a new low of 27%.
news.gallup.com news.gallup.com
Click to expand...
There are many reasons why distrust of institutions, including political parties, is happening across western democracies. And studies show that while people might claim to be “independent”, they tend to vote as block one way or another.
 
Those of you wanting third parties to become relevant in America better work to abolish the electoral college, embrace ranked choice voting, and look for different ways to distribute House representatives and Senators. You can’t create a parliamentary system in America without a serious overhaul of the existing “winner take all” constitutional system. Claiming to desire a third party without subsequent actions means you’re just a complaining and cynical voter that’s just going to bitch but ultimately do nothing to fix the system.

Personally, I like big strong political parties. So I feel the opposite. I don’t want third parties. I want a strong political party that can vet bad candidates. Bring back the dark smoky rooms over the low info “duh elites globalist cabal” morons who feel like politics should be a substitute for religious practice, entertainment, and overall be reality tv.
 
The Thriller said:
True, in 1860, complete abolition was not a goal of the GOP. But have you read the Emancipation Proclamation? By 1863, it most definitely was the primary goal of not only the GOP but Union forces in the civil war. By 1863, it was crystal clear what Lincoln and northern soldiers were fighting for and what it would potentially mean for the confederacy.

I think we see the north put on a pedestal, firstly, because history is nuanced and most people can’t handle nuance. Secondly, because of the Lost Cause myth that became thee primary narrative out of the civil war. Today we put the north on a figurative pedestal because for decades descendants of enslavers literally put the worst Americans of the 19th century on literal pedestals.

www.archives.gov

The Emancipation Proclamation

Enlarge The Emancipation Proclamation (page 1) Record Group 11 General Records of the United States View in National Archives Catalog Español President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, as the nation approached its third year of bloody civil war. The...
www.archives.gov www.archives.gov
Click to expand...
Of course, I know the full history behind it. I was just speaking about what caused the war. As I said above, abolition became a movement of the party 2 years in...
 
TheGoldStandard said:
Of course, I know the full history behind it. I was just speaking about what caused the war. As I said above, abolition became a movement of the party 2 years in...
Click to expand...
Yes, and as someone in higher education who has taught this subject many times, I too know that abolitionism was a small (but growing) movement within the Republican Party in 1860. I’ve read and have had students read the alternative proposals. Some even embraced by Lincoln. It’s important though to not discount what those fighting for the union ultimately were fighting for by 1863. It was crystal clear. It’s why the confederacy went to such great lengths to resist. They knew! Which is why the reelection of Lincoln was such a pivotal election.
 
The Thriller said:
Those of you wanting third parties to become relevant in America better work to abolish the electoral college, embrace ranked choice voting, and look for different ways to distribute House representatives and Senators. You can’t create a parliamentary system in America without a serious overhaul of the existing “winner take all” constitutional system. Claiming to desire a third party without subsequent actions means you’re just a complaining and cynical voter that’s just going to bitch but ultimately do nothing to fix the system.

Personally, I like big strong political parties. So I feel the opposite. I don’t want third parties. I want a strong political party that can vet bad candidates. Bring back the dark smoky rooms over the low info “duh elites globalist cabal” morons who feel like politics should be a substitute for religious practice, entertainment, and overall be reality tv.
Click to expand...
The recent speaker of the house debacle makes crystal clear to me that our system is not compatible with more than two parties because even with two parties, when one of those parties is divided our system can be brought to it's knees and not be able to do the business to keep our country running. Add a third party to the mix and this would be the norm.
 
Sardines said:
The recent speaker of the house debacle makes crystal clear to me that our system is not compatible with more than two parties because even with two parties, when one of those parties is divided our system can be brought to it's knees and not be able to do the business to keep our country running. Add a third party to the mix and this would be the norm.
Click to expand...
Great post. 100 percent

I actually hadn’t made that connection before but it’s dead on
 
Sardines said:
The recent speaker of the house debacle makes crystal clear to me that our system is not compatible with more than two parties because even with two parties, when one of those parties is divided our system can be brought to it's knees and not be able to do the business to keep our country running. Add a third party to the mix and this would be the norm.
Click to expand...
Maybe if the middle ground party gets the most seats there will be some sanity. Otherwise I agree with you.
 
TheGoldStandard said:
Maybe if the middle ground party gets the most seats there will be some sanity. Otherwise I agree with you.
Click to expand...
If the middle ground got 49% of the seats we'd NEVER have a speaker of the house. Would not be able to bring anything to a vote other than who the speaker of the house should be.
 
Sardines said:
**** me
Click to expand...
The perfect and only response after watching those videos.

Someone needs to save us from this **** show. What the **** are doing as a country? ****

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
One Brow said:

Confederacy denialism

Denialism seems to always come from political motivations. For one example, back in the 1960s, after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, R...
lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com

The early activities by both the North and the South indicate that slavery was the primary concern.
Click to expand...
The gigantic problem with these types of arguments is that it ignores, and by necessity it has to ignore, the single biggest piece of evidence. When the Civil War started it was NOT between the Union and all slave holding states. A number of slave holding states fought on the side of the Union. The Civil War was between the anti-secession and the secession states. The primary issue was secession

It is a good thing the Civil War resulted in the end of chattel slavery in the United States. Chattel slavery is evil, and the United States at its founding was steeped in it. As a country we need to believe the lie that we fought the Civil War at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives to right that wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top