• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Palin for Prez in 2012 likely suicide for GOP

Canada has more than two major parties and a first past the post system. And they are yet to have a political crisis (today).
 
CFLarsen said:
Lots of things can happen in 4 years.
Click to expand...

Abolishing the electoral college would take a constitutional ammendment which requires 2/3 of both houses (or in theory 2/3 of the state legislatures) and then 3/4 of the state legislatures.

Replacing the way the states vote for president would probably then take additional reforms in all or almost all of the 50 states (this might require legislative changes or state wide ballots).

Even then there would still need to be a catalyst for the two dominant parties to splinter or to be usurped by new parties.

So I am prepared to bet that the 2012 election will be between a Republican and a Democrat.
 
I will say that it does create an unfortunate catch-22 though. Because the other parties attract only fringe canddates, people with mainstream views who want to get elected tend to flock to the Dems or Repubs, which leaves the other parties with only fanatics, loons and Idealogues. This strengthens their reputation as havens for fringe lunatics, which in turn makes more mainstream candidates even less likely to consider them, and so on. It's a vicous circle.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
You also have the occasional fringe party candidate managing to get enough support from the extreme wings of either party to switch to the mainstream party and win a seat in congress, although they tend to be ignored by the party at large.
Ron Paul for the GOP and Kucninich for the Dems come to mind. In fact, Paul was the Libertarian candidate for President in 1988 before he switched.
The only way I see a third party with any clout emerging is if a sizable group breaks off from one of the major parties, or it can attract disgruntled people from both parties.
 
WildCat said:
No.

Most voters who used to lean Republican stopped voting for them after the Christian Right began to take over the party in the 90s. In fact, the Christian Right wasn't even a factor until Reagan courted them in the 80s as a swing group. problem was, somehow the swing group got control over policy and this has led to the downfall of the party.

There are far more voters who want fiscal responsibility, smaller government, and less intrusive government than who want the government trying to impose some moral code on the nation, as well as the truly ridiculous crap like teaching creationism in science classes.
Click to expand...

I agree, but my own feeling is that a lot of the powers that be in the GOP still have not learned that lesson, and the Religous Right will manage to control the party in 2012, and go down in flames.
The sad fact is a lot of people in the GOP have spent thier whole careers catering to the Religious Right, and it takes a long time for an old dog to learn a new trick.
It generally takes two or three elections after a huge defeat like the GOP had in November (coming after a huge defeat in the 2006 midterm elections) for a party to come back.
 
Nyarlathotep said:
Plus it isn't as if our system forbids any parties beyond the two. In fact there are in fct several parties beyondthe big two. Its just that there are only two that have any realistic chance of getting their candidates elected. But there is nothing to stop people for voting for the Libertarians, Greens, Socialists, etc. Just nobody seriously expects them to win, so they tend to get ignored by the press and public alike.
Click to expand...

The system is designed so that two major parties are the way to the most political power. The winner take all nature of every election means that any time the vote gets split the party that had the most in common with the new party looses.

Third parties can be helpful to get policy changes effected by getting a major party to try to grab those votes. That is why there is not a Christian party and a economic conservative party. The republicans appeal to both enough to get them to vote for them.
 
gtc said:
Abolishing the electoral college would take a constitutional ammendment which requires 2/3 of both houses (or in theory 2/3 of the state legislatures) and then 3/4 of the state legislatures.
Click to expand...

Put it another way, it would require the Democrats and Republicans intentionally disbursing the power of their own parties.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Put it another way, it would require the Democrats and Republicans intentionally disbursing the power of their own parties.
Click to expand...

And if there's one thing the Dems and the GOP agree on its that a two-party system works in their favour.
 
gtc said:
And if there's one thing the Dems and the GOP agree on its that a two-party system works in their favour.
Click to expand...
That is true. A simple system (I understand they use it in Australia) would fix the problem so that multi-party systems could thrive. Simply let people vote for their first, second and third choices. If your first vote is not in the top three, your second vote counts. If they are not in the top two, your third vote counts. You could then cast your first vote for whatever party you liked and not worry that your final vote was going to waste.

Obviously a simple solution like this will never get passed because... well because of what gtc says.
 
I think it can be done at a state level, since IIRC each state may use its own rules to determine how to elect its candidates for national office.

You're referring basically to Instant-Runoff voting, which I support. IRV could theoretically pass without legislative cooperation in states that allow voter initiatives.

In Florida where i live, a petition drive would need to get it on the ballot as a state constitutional amendment.
 
WildCat said:
No.

Most voters who used to lean Republican stopped voting for them after the Christian Right began to take over the party in the 90s. In fact, the Christian Right wasn't even a factor until Reagan courted them in the 80s as a swing group. problem was, somehow the swing group got control over policy and this has led to the downfall of the party.

There are far more voters who want fiscal responsibility, smaller government, and less intrusive government than who want the government trying to impose some moral code on the nation, as well as the truly ridiculous crap like teaching creationism in science classes.
Click to expand...


The problems in the Republican Party go deeper then that I’m afraid. The Republican created image of Reagan as a hero and icon is ultimately a game breaker for fiscal conservatives, even if they don’t realize it.

The whole “do like Reagan did it” thing is a problem because Reagan rang up the largest debt growth (relative to GDP growth) of just about any US president in history. Any attempt to emulate him will inevitably run afoul of a true fiscal conservative.

Consider this. Republican untouchable programs like defense, the war on terror and homeland security make up 60% of the US discretionary budget. You would need to cut every dime from every other discretionary program just to balance the US budget with cuts yet the party line is still “lets make government smaller to pay for tax cuts”. I.E. to balance the US budget by “making government smaller” without touching defense you would need to completely eliminate the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Education, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Foreign aid, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture, Department of Justice, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Department of the Treasury, Department of Transportation, Department of the Interior, Department of Labor, Social Security Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, National Science Foundation, United States federal courts, Army Corps of Engineers

One you get past the campaign slogans the Republican Party in action is going to fall completely flat with real fiscal conservatives. Increasingly the true fiscal conservatives are finding a home in the right wing of the Democratic Party and so far the Republicans have been content to hand the real policy issues to them. Painting the Democrats as “leftists” is only going to go so far as the completely untenable position of Republican dogma becomes more and more apparent.
 
lomiller said:
The problems in the Republican Party go deeper then that I’m afraid. The Republican created image of Reagan as a hero and icon is ultimately a game breaker for fiscal conservatives, even if they don’t realize it.
Click to expand...

I thought renaming everything after Reagan was just a way for the GOP to annoy the Democrats by making it appear that he was as worthy of immortalisation as JFK.

:)
 
CFLarsen said:
If Palin runs for President in 2012..

..where's the problem?

If Palin running for President in 2012 means suicide for GOP..

..where's the problem?
Click to expand...

I suppose the problem is that, from my POV, I'd like to see the GOP become more moderate and reasonable. I believe it would just be better in general for the United States to have such a major political party not being run by wingnuts.
 
CFLarsen said:
I find it interesting to see that it is accepted as a given that there has to be a two-party system in the US. There simply can't be a multiple-party system. How quaint.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If I had my druthers, the Greens, Libertarians, and even (shudder) the Constitution Party would have a bigger place at the political table. I, for one, would welcome more variety in our political system - it's why I voted Reform Party in both 1992 and 1996.

At least here in Illinois the Greens are starting to get a slightly bigger slice of the political pie...
 
CFLarsen said:
Elect more parties.

Works for other countries.
Click to expand...

Not really. Most superpowers have tended to be single party or at most duel party (wigs and tories, Democracts and Republicans).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom