"One Party Rule"

[Correll]

I keep seeing this coming from the Right -- the notion that the Democrats are bad because they want "One Party Rule".

So, I'm curious: Does this mean the GOP does not want one-party rule, with them in charge of the White House, House and Senate?

If so, which one of those three would you be fine having the Democrats running?

Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

One party rule is what we have now where they claim their are 2 parties but the are the flip side of the same coin, Both taking us int communism but the Democrats are the express lane.

Batshit crazy. Communism. You might as well just scream WITCHES!!!

BLM's leadership are admitted Marxist. Antifa doesn't talk, but they are obviously commies too.


And your side loves them.


So, talking about communism, is completely valid.

 

[Lesh]

BLM's leadership are admitted Marxist. Antifa doesn't talk, but they are obviously commies too.

ONE local BLM leader said that. She was NOT speaking for all of BLM. Not that you care about accuracy. You're just yelling WITCHES!

So, talking about communism, is completely valid.

No...it's not. It's stupid and cynical

 

[Desperado]

What we need are politician that put country above party and follow the constitution. Neither party does that now.

 

[Correll]

BLM's leadership are admitted Marxist. Antifa doesn't talk, but they are obviously commies too.

ONE local BLM leader said that. She was NOT speaking for all of BLM. Not that you care about accuracy. You're just yelling WITCHES!

So, talking about communism, is completely valid.

No...it's not. It's stupid and cynical

She made a claim about herself and her co-founders.

Are you claiming she was lying? Can you show me links where her co-founders responded with shock and horror at the idea of being linked to an ideology of genocide and totalitarian oppression?


COmmunism is alive and well in our society. Far more so that ws.

 

[Lesh]

She made a claim about herself and her co-founders.

SHE...one person...a local organizer. Not a national leader. Not speaking for the movement as a whole. WITCHES !!!!

COmmunism is alive and well in our society.

It's alive and well in your fucked up head

 

[Correll]

She made a claim about herself and her co-founders.

SHE...one person...a local organizer. Not a national leader. Not speaking for the movement as a whole. WITCHES !!!!

COmmunism is alive and well in our society.

It's alive and well in your fucked up head

how did the national leaders, respond to a local chapter being led by admitted genocidal totalitarians?

Shock and horror? Warm welcome? NO comment because it is completely normal as tehy are all commies who want mass murder and totalitarian oppression?

 

[j-mac]

I prefer "No Party Rule". Outlaw all political parties. Have a primary to narrow the field down to the top 2 or 3 candidates. And be done with this constant bickering and battling between parties. It does nothing good for the nation or the people. The focus should be on other things besides destroying the opposing parties.

How Communist of you! You need to get right on that Constitutional amendment to rid yourself of all those troublesome rights we have.

No need to change the constitution. Change the election rules to make it one primary for all candidates and change the campaign finance laws to prevent contributions to anyone other than the candidate's campaign. No more multiple primaries. And no more soft money going to parties rather than candidates.

So you want elections to be run federally?

 

[Mac1958]

I keep seeing this coming from the Right -- the notion that the Democrats are bad because they want "One Party Rule".

So, I'm curious: Does this mean the GOP does not want one-party rule, with them in charge of the White House, House and Senate?

If so, which one of those three would you be fine having the Democrats running?

Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

One party rule is what we have now where they claim their are 2 parties but the are the flip side of the same coin, Both taking us int communism but the Democrats are the express lane.

Batshit crazy. Communism. You might as well just scream WITCHES!!!

Should I have said socialism? that is just communism lite!

So Sweden is communism lite? Hardly

They've latched onto the word now, so that's that.

Words essentially mean nothing at this point, and that's a real problem.

 

[dblack]

What we need are politician that put country above party and follow the constitution. Neither party does that now.

The problem is structural. Our system promotes partisanship and division. That won't change until we change the system.

 

[j-mac]

I keep seeing this coming from the Right -- the notion that the Democrats are bad because they want "One Party Rule".

So, I'm curious: Does this mean the GOP does not want one-party rule, with them in charge of the White House, House and Senate?

If so, which one of those three would you be fine having the Democrats running?

Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

One party rule is what we have now where they claim their are 2 parties but the are the flip side of the same coin, Both taking us int communism but the Democrats are the express lane.

Batshit crazy. Communism. You might as well just scream WITCHES!!!

Should I have said socialism? that is just communism lite!

So Sweden is communism lite? Hardly

They've latched onto the word now, so that's that.

Words essentially mean nothing at this point, and that's a real problem.

Well, your words mean very little, I can attest to that....

 

[j-mac]

What we need are politician that put country above party and follow the constitution. Neither party does that now.

The problem is structural. Our system promotes partisanship and division. That won't change until we change the system.

To what?

 

[dblack]

I prefer "No Party Rule". Outlaw all political parties. Have a primary to narrow the field down to the top 2 or 3 candidates. And be done with this constant bickering and battling between parties. It does nothing good for the nation or the people. The focus should be on other things besides destroying the opposing parties.

“Outlaw all political parties.”

Actually, that would be un-Constitutional – a violation of the right to freedom of association.

Ok, then don't have separate primaries. Allow only political contributions to individual candidates.

When it's comes to addressing the dysfunction of the "two party system", ranked choice voting is the most promising reform on the horizon.

Anything that facilitates cheating will be acceptable.

Why do you want to cheat?

#StopTheSqueal

 

[Correll]

I keep seeing this coming from the Right -- the notion that the Democrats are bad because they want "One Party Rule".

So, I'm curious: Does this mean the GOP does not want one-party rule, with them in charge of the White House, House and Senate?

If so, which one of those three would you be fine having the Democrats running?

Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

One party rule is what we have now where they claim their are 2 parties but the are the flip side of the same coin, Both taking us int communism but the Democrats are the express lane.

Batshit crazy. Communism. You might as well just scream WITCHES!!!

Should I have said socialism? that is just communism lite!

So Sweden is communism lite? Hardly

They've latched onto the word now, so that's that.

Words essentially mean nothing at this point, and that's a real problem.

Speak for yourself. When I say communism, I mean communism.

 

[dblack]

What we need are politician that put country above party and follow the constitution. Neither party does that now.

The problem is structural. Our system promotes partisanship and division. That won't change until we change the system.

To what?

The two most promising reforms on the horizon are ranked-choice voting and multi-representative districts. The former does away with "lesser-of-two-evils" and the latter, gerrymandering.

 

[j-mac]

What we need are politician that put country above party and follow the constitution. Neither party does that now.

The problem is structural. Our system promotes partisanship and division. That won't change until we change the system.

To what?

The two most promising reforms on the horizon are ranked-choice voting and multi-representative districts. The former does away with "lesser-of-two-evils" and the latter, gerrymandering.

So, you really want more than one person, one vote....

 

[dblack]

What we need are politician that put country above party and follow the constitution. Neither party does that now.

The problem is structural. Our system promotes partisanship and division. That won't change until we change the system.

To what?

The two most promising reforms on the horizon are ranked-choice voting and multi-representative districts. The former does away with "lesser-of-two-evils" and the latter, gerrymandering.

So, you really want more than one person, one vote....

Fuck you.

 

[dblack]

Seriously j-mac - the reforms I'm talking about would undermine the partisan twattery that you wallow in. You will always oppose it because you love the partisanship. So, you know - fuck off and die. You're a traitor to your nation.

 

[Crepitus]

I keep seeing this coming from the Right -- the notion that the Democrats are bad because they want "One Party Rule".

So, I'm curious: Does this mean the GOP does not want one-party rule, with them in charge of the White House, House and Senate?

If so, which one of those three would you be fine having the Democrats running?

Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

I'm thinking they're gonna have a rough time answering that one.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm thinking they're gonna have a rough time answering that one.

From what I can tell, they equate "one party rule" with commie-nism. Evidently the two are interchangeable.

That's their big focus, and they cram pretty much everything into that little box.

Sometimes I forget to view things through their hyper-paranoid worldview. Dang it.

 

[Crepitus]

I'm thinking they're gonna have a rough time answering that one.

From what I can tell, they equate "one party rule" with commie-nism. Evidently the two are interchangeable.

That's their big focus, and they cram pretty much everything into that little box.

Sometimes I forget to view things through their hyper-paranoid worldview. Dang it.

Just for the record I'm fine with one party rule as long as it's my party. Yes, I'm partisan and admit it.

I'm not against one party rule of republicans because it's one party rule, but because they will do things I don't agree with.