How Do We Eradicate Partisanship From American Politics?

[frigidweirdo]

If we wish to retain a free society, there will always be partisanship. Freedom entails people with different agendas competing with each other.

Nonpartisanship is what Totalitarians promote: one must submit to the party.

There's a difference between different agendas coming together and competing and compromising or attack, and partisanship. We're talking two teams who don't bother with politics, but play silly fuckers all the time and destroy everything.

Do you see the difference.

In Germany you still have left and right, you still have far left and far right, you still have different views. However when the voters go to the booths they don't feel they only have two choices. They feel like they have more. They can choose DIFFERENT types of left wing or right wing politics.

The Tea Party has tapped into something, but can't get anywhere because it feels the need to be like a tic on a dog in order to get out of the woods.

 

[daws101]

Partisanship is done and gone. We are two separate people with nothing in common.

Snicker!
Nothing in common ?
How about the language, the culture , food .
Walmart ?
You are a stupid *****.

Yes, we have become two separate people: Civilized Folks and Vulgar Cretins such as you.

Distinction without a difference!

 

[Synthaholic]

How Do We Eradicate Partisanship From American Politics?

• Bring back the Fairness Doctrine
• Re-regulate media companies

• Eliminate Gerrymandering.
• Government funded elections.
• Tighten slander/libel laws to prevent outright lies about elected officials.
• Strengthen House/Senate Ethics & Rules Committees.

 

[Unkotare]

Partisanship is done and gone. We are two separate people with nothing in common.

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[daws101]

Partisanship is done and gone. We are two separate people with nothing in common.

What the hell are you talking about?

Capt Morgan. ..

 

[Kondor3]

...Peasants are running the castles everywhere.

Peasants (The People) are the reason that parties, and government, exist in the first place.

To serve the Will of the People.

Both government and our political parties are the SERVANTS of The People.

The People are merely serving-up a reminder and 'market correction', to those who have long-since accorded themselves the power to speak on their behalf.

Stand with The People, or stand aside, or be swept aside.

You're not understanding. An article was published this past week by The Atlantic. I'll see if I can find it again. The main premise is that our politics has gone into chaos because "we the people" have made it impossible for political leaders to actually lead. We've taken away all of their tools for doing so. And now the result is that our politicians are a collection of individuals who only follow their own interests.

The "peasants" I am referring to aren't "we the people." It's the incompetent, unqualified rabble of elected officials we have all over the country nowadays. It's people like Obama, Hillary, Trump, and Cruz. People who aren't suited to be anything more than a follower, but who are now free to nakedly pursue their personal self interests because we the people have made it impossible for true leaders to do what makes them effective.

It seems you don't understand what the word "peasant" means.

Nor you the word "metaphor."

You keep ducking and weaving and failing to convince anyone that your intended use of the word 'peasant' was directed at anyone other than Average Americans.

Peasants are not running our political parties.

Elites are running our political parties.

Elites are not peasants.

Your original usage of 'peasants' within this thread was perceived as a denigration of The People (the American common citizen).

You have, since being called-out on the subject, been unsuccessfully trying to dodge that particular bullet.

And, in light of present-day Populist Revolts on both sides of the aisle, you are failing to convince anyone.

Even if you originally intended to denigrate the Ruling Party Elites by calling them 'peasants' (a truly foolish and nonsensical usage)..

It is clear that, while you may understand the principle of 'metaphor', you fail, miserably, in practical application of that principle, in actual use...

Do yourself a favor...

Repeat after me...

"OK, enough, yeah, you caught me on that one. I was trying to slam the Populists who have taken over both parties, but, in retrospect, it was (quite understandably) perceived as an elitist slam at 'The People', which is not being received well. I 'fess up - on reflection, I really didn't mean it that way, and I'll try to remember not to go down that road again."

See?

All better.

Credibility reestablished.

Your turn.

 

[kaz]

It's a known fact that the country has been steadily getting more and more partisan as far as politics are concerned.

Republicans are forever bemoaning that fact w/the meme "such and such is dividing", whenever referring to a Democrat politician of course.

Nevermind that Republicans vowed to not do anything that would benefit President Elect Obama on the night of his swearing in. They obstructed him at every turn, to the point that this has been the most do-nothing Congress since they've been keeping track of their approval rate, with percentages as low as 9% approval.

It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter what the issue is, everything is seen through purely partisan political lenses, where "your guy" is the devil incarnate, and "my guy" can simply do no wrong. Leaving the American People suffering as the result.

So how do you propose we get rid of partisan politics and get down to the business of The People?

Anyone?

Well, you could start by not writing idiotic partisan bigoted crap like this. But to do that, you would have to ... think

 

[daws101]

It's a known fact that the country has been steadily getting more and more partisan as far as politics are concerned.

Republicans are forever bemoaning that fact w/the meme "such and such is dividing", whenever referring to a Democrat politician of course.

Nevermind that Republicans vowed to not do anything that would benefit President Elect Obama on the night of his swearing in. They obstructed him at every turn, to the point that this has been the most do-nothing Congress since they've been keeping track of their approval rate, with percentages as low as 9% approval.

It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter what the issue is, everything is seen through purely partisan political lenses, where "your guy" is the devil incarnate, and "my guy" can simply do no wrong. Leaving the American People suffering as the result.

So how do you propose we get rid of partisan politics and get down to the business of The People?

Anyone?

Well, you could start by not writing idiotic partisan bigoted crap like this. But to do that, you would have to ... think

What's the biggest contradiction ever?
A conservative accusing everyone else of partisanship.

 

[CowboyTed]

Interesting - while I also agree that we need to get money out of politics at every possible level, I'm not sure I see a straight line from partisanship to campaign finance. But your thought does have me wondering.

The corporate financing of re-election campaigns puts the politicians in the corporate pockets. To protect their man they use their influence among other bought politicians to gerrymander the mans seat to protect him from being defeated by an outraged public.

Also the partisanship is part of a ruse. At election time the politicians make promises and demonize their opponents using the worst hyperbole to scare their base from voting for any competitor promising to reform DC. So the extreme rhetoric is a function of distraction from and obscuring the facts during elections.

Yeah, good stuff, I can see that.

The way I look at it is that these people would clearly behave differently if they weren't having to worry about fundraising and re-election. Also, if they had term limits, they wouldn't be spending damn near half of every term running for office.

Toss the elements of partisanship into it, and you have a situation so distorted and mangled that I don't really see it resembling the intent of the system...
.

Term limits are red herrings and increase the influence of the party machines... To be able to run you will not be able to organise an election so rely on the party machine to get you elected...

But the simple reason is that other countries don't have these problems and don't have term limits...

 

[Kosh]

It's a known fact that the country has been steadily getting more and more partisan as far as politics are concerned.

Republicans are forever bemoaning that fact w/the meme "such and such is dividing", whenever referring to a Democrat politician of course.

Nevermind that Republicans vowed to not do anything that would benefit President Elect Obama on the night of his swearing in. They obstructed him at every turn, to the point that this has been the most do-nothing Congress since they've been keeping track of their approval rate, with percentages as low as 9% approval.

It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter what the issue is, everything is seen through purely partisan political lenses, where "your guy" is the devil incarnate, and "my guy" can simply do no wrong. Leaving the American People suffering as the result.

So how do you propose we get rid of partisan politics and get down to the business of The People?

Anyone?

So a far left drone that will vote for worse than Bush in 2016, Hilary. is preaching a bout other being partisan?

Seriously you can not make this stuff up!

 

[daws101]

It's a known fact that the country has been steadily getting more and more partisan as far as politics are concerned.

Republicans are forever bemoaning that fact w/the meme "such and such is dividing", whenever referring to a Democrat politician of course.

Nevermind that Republicans vowed to not do anything that would benefit President Elect Obama on the night of his swearing in. They obstructed him at every turn, to the point that this has been the most do-nothing Congress since they've been keeping track of their approval rate, with percentages as low as 9% approval.

It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter what the issue is, everything is seen through purely partisan political lenses, where "your guy" is the devil incarnate, and "my guy" can simply do no wrong. Leaving the American People suffering as the result.

So how do you propose we get rid of partisan politics and get down to the business of The People?

Anyone?

So a far left drone that will vote for worse than Bush in 2016, Hilary. is preaching a bout other being partisan?

Seriously you can not make this stuff up!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

 

[CowboyTed]

It's a known fact that the country has been steadily getting more and more partisan as far as politics are concerned.

Republicans are forever bemoaning that fact w/the meme "such and such is dividing", whenever referring to a Democrat politician of course.

Nevermind that Republicans vowed to not do anything that would benefit President Elect Obama on the night of his swearing in. They obstructed him at every turn, to the point that this has been the most do-nothing Congress since they've been keeping track of their approval rate, with percentages as low as 9% approval.

It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter what the issue is, everything is seen through purely partisan political lenses, where "your guy" is the devil incarnate, and "my guy" can simply do no wrong. Leaving the American People suffering as the result.

So how do you propose we get rid of partisan politics and get down to the business of The People?

Anyone?

The first thing is in the way people vote. If you don't change that then you'll never get rid of the two parties controlling everything.

The Germans have a great system, it still leads to left v. right, however there's actual choice.

You can vote for the Conservative CDU/CSU or you can vote for the FPD or other parties. And you can do so knowing that 5% will get you members of parliament. Also there's a FPTP to complement the PR side to it, so in your area, if you vote for a guy, they become a member of parliament regardless of the PR vote.

This would lead to Americans feeling they can vote for whichever side they like. Because no party is going to get enough votes to form government on their own, so they have to form coalitions which them mean cooperation is needed and more sensible government.

For president a similar system to the French system where people can vote for whoever they like in the first round, and then choose between two in the final round.

However with the German system, this will open up other parties in the first place, so people are more likely to choose a different option for president anyway.

frigid,

Bang on... The voting style is obsolete... I personally a PR STV (Proportional Representation Single Transfer vote), I find it quick and fair..

Proportional Representation: It allows for multi seat constituencies, this makes gerrymandering and district drawing a lot harder to rig and impossible in a lot of cases.

Single Transfer Vote: This allows that you vote in accordance to your preference... ie. 1,2,3... for your 1st, 2nd, 3rd... preference candidate... Your vote will be transferred from candidates as they are eliminated to your next preference... So as long as you keep going down the card your vote will count to towards your favorite candidate who is still in...
This means you are going to vote for the candidate who closely matches your ideals not the one you think is going to get elected... Now a Tea Partier can vote for the Tea Party guy and put a GOP guy second... So when they starting counting the Tea Party guy might get eliminated but his voters votes don't...
The result is GOP guy and the Tea Party guy aren't trying to kick seven levels of crap out of each other, they want each others transfers...

This would engender multiple smaller parties (competition is good) who are more focused on achieving their objectives. The big tent thing is gone and parties are more transparent in their dealings (far from completely but you can see swaps more clearly than internal backscrathing)..

All this mean deals have to be made, no longer will the red and blue team thing become that massively important but who gets things done matters most...

But the big thing is this type of government or alternatives on the same theme is what is used by a vast majority of democracies and version of this was set up by US in Iraq...

Hmmm, so you believe the European style multiple small party system gets more done with less bickering? I call bull. The two parties here make deals all the time, too often really. What we need to do is get rid of the riders placed on bills where it passes or fails based on who gets what special interest involved. Strict up or down voting on the issues, no pork.

As far as getting along the left doesn't like to compromise on shit, we reach harmony when we agree 100% with them. 99% is backwards and hateful.

I didn't say there is no bickering but the style of government is quite different... You must remember Europeans have less pork barrel projects and have to have a lot more fiscal responsibility than the US.

The deal making generally happens at the start of government been voted... That program of government lasts for length of the government (5 years max)... A lot less messing, parties actually have unity, pork is unheard of because parties have to defend all pork..

 

[CowboyTed]

It's a known fact that the country has been steadily getting more and more partisan as far as politics are concerned.

Republicans are forever bemoaning that fact w/the meme "such and such is dividing", whenever referring to a Democrat politician of course.

Nevermind that Republicans vowed to not do anything that would benefit President Elect Obama on the night of his swearing in. They obstructed him at every turn, to the point that this has been the most do-nothing Congress since they've been keeping track of their approval rate, with percentages as low as 9% approval.

It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter what the issue is, everything is seen through purely partisan political lenses, where "your guy" is the devil incarnate, and "my guy" can simply do no wrong. Leaving the American People suffering as the result.

So how do you propose we get rid of partisan politics and get down to the business of The People?

Anyone?

The first thing is in the way people vote. If you don't change that then you'll never get rid of the two parties controlling everything.

The Germans have a great system, it still leads to left v. right, however there's actual choice.

You can vote for the Conservative CDU/CSU or you can vote for the FPD or other parties. And you can do so knowing that 5% will get you members of parliament. Also there's a FPTP to complement the PR side to it, so in your area, if you vote for a guy, they become a member of parliament regardless of the PR vote.

This would lead to Americans feeling they can vote for whichever side they like. Because no party is going to get enough votes to form government on their own, so they have to form coalitions which them mean cooperation is needed and more sensible government.

For president a similar system to the French system where people can vote for whoever they like in the first round, and then choose between two in the final round.

However with the German system, this will open up other parties in the first place, so people are more likely to choose a different option for president anyway.

frigid,

Bang on... The voting style is obsolete... I personally a PR STV (Proportional Representation Single Transfer vote), I find it quick and fair..

Proportional Representation: It allows for multi seat constituencies, this makes gerrymandering and district drawing a lot harder to rig and impossible in a lot of cases.

Single Transfer Vote: This allows that you vote in accordance to your preference... ie. 1,2,3... for your 1st, 2nd, 3rd... preference candidate... Your vote will be transferred from candidates as they are eliminated to your next preference... So as long as you keep going down the card your vote will count to towards your favorite candidate who is still in...
This means you are going to vote for the candidate who closely matches your ideals not the one you think is going to get elected... Now a Tea Partier can vote for the Tea Party guy and put a GOP guy second... So when they starting counting the Tea Party guy might get eliminated but his voters votes don't...
The result is GOP guy and the Tea Party guy aren't trying to kick seven levels of crap out of each other, they want each others transfers...

This would engender multiple smaller parties (competition is good) who are more focused on achieving their objectives. The big tent thing is gone and parties are more transparent in their dealings (far from completely but you can see swaps more clearly than internal backscrathing)..

All this mean deals have to be made, no longer will the red and blue team thing become that massively important but who gets things done matters most...

But the big thing is this type of government or alternatives on the same theme is what is used by a vast majority of democracies and version of this was set up by US in Iraq...

Not going to happen.

Agree on that... Turkeys don't vote for Christmas...

 

[Synthaholic]

Actually the Founding Fathers mostly opposed the idea of legal political parties, as I understand it.

Let's always keep in mind that the Founders were twentysomethings.

 

[Synthaholic]

Partisanship is done and gone. We are two separate people with nothing in common.

Snicker!
Nothing in common ?
How about the language, the culture , food .
Walmart ?
You are a stupid *****.

Yes, we have become two separate people: Civilized Folks and Vulgar Cretins such as you.

Yet, you're the one supporting the vulgar, thrice-married, tax-cheating, deadbeat businessman who is under allegations of rape. #ConservativeValues

 

[westwall]

It's a known fact that the country has been steadily getting more and more partisan as far as politics are concerned.

Republicans are forever bemoaning that fact w/the meme "such and such is dividing", whenever referring to a Democrat politician of course.

Nevermind that Republicans vowed to not do anything that would benefit President Elect Obama on the night of his swearing in. They obstructed him at every turn, to the point that this has been the most do-nothing Congress since they've been keeping track of their approval rate, with percentages as low as 9% approval.

It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter what the issue is, everything is seen through purely partisan political lenses, where "your guy" is the devil incarnate, and "my guy" can simply do no wrong. Leaving the American People suffering as the result.

So how do you propose we get rid of partisan politics and get down to the business of The People?

Anyone?

This country was DESIGNED by our FOUNDERS to be both partisan and confrontational. They understood that the government that works to closely together very quickly turns totalitarian.

They were a lot smarter than you progressives.

 

[boedicca]

Partisanship is done and gone. We are two separate people with nothing in common.

Snicker!
Nothing in common ?
How about the language, the culture , food .
Walmart ?
You are a stupid *****.

Yes, we have become two separate people: Civilized Folks and Vulgar Cretins such as you.

Yet, you're the one supporting the vulgar, thrice-married, tax-cheating, deadbeat businessman who is under allegations of rape. #ConservativeValues

Silly little floor sweeper. I'm against hiLIARy being President. I haven't decided for whom I plan to vote.

 

[SwimExpert]

...Peasants are running the castles everywhere.

Peasants (The People) are the reason that parties, and government, exist in the first place.

To serve the Will of the People.

Both government and our political parties are the SERVANTS of The People.

The People are merely serving-up a reminder and 'market correction', to those who have long-since accorded themselves the power to speak on their behalf.

Stand with The People, or stand aside, or be swept aside.

You're not understanding. An article was published this past week by The Atlantic. I'll see if I can find it again. The main premise is that our politics has gone into chaos because "we the people" have made it impossible for political leaders to actually lead. We've taken away all of their tools for doing so. And now the result is that our politicians are a collection of individuals who only follow their own interests.

The "peasants" I am referring to aren't "we the people." It's the incompetent, unqualified rabble of elected officials we have all over the country nowadays. It's people like Obama, Hillary, Trump, and Cruz. People who aren't suited to be anything more than a follower, but who are now free to nakedly pursue their personal self interests because we the people have made it impossible for true leaders to do what makes them effective.

It seems you don't understand what the word "peasant" means.

Nor you the word "metaphor."

You keep ducking and weaving and failing to convince anyone that your intended use of the word 'peasant' was directed at anyone other than Average Americans.

Peasants are not running our political parties.

Elites are running our political parties.

Elites are not peasants.

Your original usage of 'peasants' within this thread was perceived as a denigration of The People (the American common citizen).

You have, since being called-out on the subject, been unsuccessfully trying to dodge that particular bullet.

And, in light of present-day Populist Revolts on both sides of the aisle, you are failing to convince anyone.

Even if you originally intended to denigrate the Ruling Party Elites by calling them 'peasants' (a truly foolish and nonsensical usage)..

It is clear that, while you may understand the principle of 'metaphor', you fail, miserably, in practical application of that principle, in actual use...

Do yourself a favor...

Repeat after me...

"OK, enough, yeah, you caught me on that one. I was trying to slam the Populists who have taken over both parties, but, in retrospect, it was (quite understandably) perceived as an elitist slam at 'The People', which is not being received well. I 'fess up - on reflection, I really didn't mean it that way, and I'll try to remember not to go down that road again."

See?

All better.

Credibility reestablished.

Your turn.

Cool story, bro.

 

[Kondor3]

Actually the Founding Fathers mostly opposed the idea of legal political parties, as I understand it.

Let's always keep in mind that the Founders were twentysomethings.

The signers of the Declaration of Independence and the framers of the Constitution were mostly twenty-somethings? Sorry, but I call bullshit.

 

[daws101]

Partisanship is done and gone. We are two separate people with nothing in common.

Snicker!
Nothing in common ?
How about the language, the culture , food .
Walmart ?
You are a stupid *****.

Yes, we have become two separate people: Civilized Folks and Vulgar Cretins such as you.

Yet, you're the one supporting the vulgar, thrice-married, tax-cheating, deadbeat businessman who is under allegations of rape. #ConservativeValues

Silly little floor sweeper. I'm against hiLIARy being President. I haven't decided for whom I plan to vote.

If you vote Trump you will be throwing away your vote.