Trump 2016

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
AnOminous said:
Plurality electoral systems like we have invariably lead to two parties.
Click to expand...

Took the words right out of my mouth. If the Republican party did disappear (I don't think Trump could actually do this, but let's suppose) another party would appear, and frankly it's hard to imagine how it could be worse than the Republicans.

Ultimately the electoral system determines the party system, and an FPP system like the USA's is always going to produce two large parties.

Although, in a partial defense of one-party states, while they are not ideal, they are not necessarily as horrible as the term implies. Japan and Sweden were both effectively single-party states for decades (although in both cases the system broke down) and I wouldn't say their political systems were any worse then America's two-party system.

TL:DR, any democracy that relies on the existence of the G.O.P. to be viable is a pretty shoddy democracy
 
Donald Trump just has one thing he wants to do.

Say "You're fired!" To Obama.
 
Holdek said:
Yet Canada and the UK have FPP systems and have three or more parties.
Click to expand...

Canada and the UK's other major parties are generally territorial, like the Bloc Quebecois or the Scottish Nationalist Party. They can fairly reliably win locally. Things like the Greens are still basically fucked, though.
 
AnOminous said:
Canada and the UK's other major parties are generally territorial, like the Bloc Quebecois or the Scottish Nationalist Party. They can fairly reliably win locally. Things like the Greens are still basically fucked, though.
Click to expand...
Nah, Canada has the Conservatives, NDP, and Liberals, and the UK has the Conservatives, Labour, and Lib-Dems.
 
Better have a single trump than dozens of then in our parliament here.
Shit is fucked here,we basically become a parliamentary system,our president is isolated and the head of the chamber of deputies has become a unofficial prime minister.
 
Dudeofteenage said:
Took the words right out of my mouth. If the Republican party did disappear (I don't think Trump could actually do this, but let's suppose) another party would appear, and frankly it's hard to imagine how it could be worse than the Republicans.

Ultimately the electoral system determines the party system, and an FPP system like the USA's is always going to produce two large parties.

Although, in a partial defense of one-party states, while they are not ideal, they are not necessarily as horrible as the term implies. Japan and Sweden were both effectively single-party states for decades (although in both cases the system broke down) and I wouldn't say their political systems were any worse then America's two-party system.

TL:biggrin:R, any democracy that relies on the existence of the G.O.P. to be viable is a pretty shoddy democracy
Click to expand...

We've been having people vote for what they think is "the lesser of two evils" for decades, and I just feel like it hasn't been working out. A viable third party would be nice to have, but it's not likely to happen at least for the foreseeable future.

To be honest, though, I usually avoid discussing politics in general, because I always walk away wondering which party I dislike more. But Americans treat politics like they treat sports, and nothing good ever comes of it.
 
Holdek said:
Yet Canada and the UK have FPP systems and have three or more parties.
Click to expand...

Canada is in transition between a two party system where the Liberals are the party on the left and a two party system where the NPD is the party on the left. A two party system isn't one where literally only two parties exist or can win seats, it's one where only two parties have a realistic chance of forming a government.

The UK is a weaker example of a two party system than it used to be, but given the Liberals' recent collapse and the Scottish Nationalists inability to get any bigger than they are now (since they're not gonna win any votes outside Scotland) there are still no realistic challenges to the dominance of the Conservatives and Labour. So, again, basically a two party system.

Duke Nukem said:
A viable third party would be nice to have, but it's not likely to happen at least for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Well, I always say the same thing to Americans who want a third party - don't campaign for a party, campaign for a change in the electoral system. Oddly though even people who are not at all attached to any other aspect of the American political consensus seem very attached to FPP.
 
Holdek said:
Nah, Canada has the Conservatives, NDP, and Liberals, and the UK has the Conservatives, Labour, and Lib-Dems.
Click to expand...

Even the U.S. has had periods where third parties have had significant influence, whether it's the Bull Moose Republicans or the Whigs, or the more common situation where the third party is a pure spoiler. Generally, these parties either become ascendant when one of the two dominant parties fail, or eventually get folded into that party. Or they're based on some silly single issue that doesn't ultimately make long-term sense (like the aptly-nicknamed Know-Nothings).
 
Trump, and to a lesser degree Sanders, are a visceral backlash against everyone trying to shove Bush and Clinton down the country's throats. The media spent months insisting Bush is the Republican frontrunner and all of the major cable news networks (Fox in particular) were hammering away at the idea that a Bush v. Clinton contest was a foregone conclusion.

Don't bother trying to nitpick Trump's policy platforms or past positions because none of that matters to the people saying they are going to vote for him right now. Trump isn't a traditional candidate as much as a force of nature, a manifestation of disgust at the handful of Washington consultants and talking heads trying to foist Jeb! on everyone even though no one really seems to want him. People are flocking to the candidate who is the furthest from Bush's temperament and denouncing him the most loudly.

There isn't much point in getting mad about him. The odds of him being the Republican nominee are slim to none. He is a protest candidate who will very likely withdraw from the race after he is satisfied he has torched the Bush campaign.
 
The Donald says that going to a military school gave him more training than actually joining the military:

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/tru...-training-than-actual-service-members-report/

VG1pPN5.gif
 
Last edited:
You know who Trump should insult next?

Jesus.
 
3fAw7oZ.jpg

Don't even care if this has been posted before, it deserves another spot in this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom