"One Party Rule"

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.


Well obviously for conservatives one party rule under republicans would be preferable than one party rule under democrats and the opposite is true for you... unless you're still pretending to be impartial?
 
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.


Well obviously for conservatives one party rule under republicans would be preferable than one party rule under democrats and the opposite is true for you... unless you're still pretending to be impartial?
I've never pretended to be impartial.

That's just something you concocted in your mind. Sorry.
 
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?

For federal elections? It wouldn't bother me at all. Both of the parties are nationally run. The Federal Campaign Finance Act is the basis for the campaign finance laws.
 
I noticed that "One Party Rule" started getting used on this forum by multiple posters at the exact same time. This appears to indicate that they all got this from some conservative talk radio host.
Yep. That's how the alternative universe operates. I know Limbaugh uses it. There are several everyday words & phrases that they use from that source.

Well that explains it.
 
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.

This was the goal of the Gingrich Delay Axis. Has they succeeded we would look like Mexico and much of South America today. Consider conservative policies for the past 50 years: 10% of the wealthy and 90% living in poverty.
 
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 believe you are taking past comments about "one party rule" out of context.
I pretty sure its meant to be implied that Dems want "one party rule" as the results for every future election.

If Democrats truly wanted one party rule, they would just allow the Republican Party to continue destroying itself.

Donald Trump is busy or going after members of his own party then he’s going after Democrats. Absolute loyalty to Trump is a prerequisite.

The USA needs a strong, sane, and reasonable GOP. Trumps Republican cult of personality is not and will never be a strong, sane or reasonable opposition.
 
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.
Your democrat ass would ask this retarded question.

Do you want Dem 1-party rule, you commie fuck?
 
Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

Single party rule is bad because it does away with the need for consensus.
We have one party rule now masquerading as two party rule, but few Americans know it. Thanks to a media that purposely divides them.
The voting system itself divides them as well. We need ranked choice voting.

Ranked choice voting is sort of stupid.

America went to war TWICE against England and TWICE against Germany to protect our precious 2 party system.

We get up to 2 valid choices in every election, or if you want to, you can throw your vote away on a 3rd party.

Nothing could be fairer.
 
Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

Single party rule is bad because it does away with the need for consensus.
We have one party rule now masquerading as two party rule, but few Americans know it. Thanks to a media that purposely divides them.
The voting system itself divides them as well. We need ranked choice voting.

Ranked choice voting is sort of stupid.

America went to war TWICE against England and TWICE against Germany to protect our precious 2 party system.

We get up to 2 valid choices in every election, or if you want to, you can throw your vote away on a 3rd party.

Nothing could be fairer.
What a crock. We never went to war to protect the two party system. We went to war to protect democracy
 
Please explain why you're pointing at this as a bad thing.

Single party rule is bad because it does away with the need for consensus.
We have one party rule now masquerading as two party rule, but few Americans know it. Thanks to a media that purposely divides them.
The voting system itself divides them as well. We need ranked choice voting.

Ranked choice voting is sort of stupid.

America went to war TWICE against England and TWICE against Germany to protect our precious 2 party system.

We get up to 2 valid choices in every election, or if you want to, you can throw your vote away on a 3rd party.

Nothing could be fairer.

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

Single party rule is bad because it does away with the need for consensus.
We have one party rule now masquerading as two party rule, but few Americans know it. Thanks to a media that purposely divides them.
The voting system itself divides them as well. We need ranked choice voting.

Ranked choice voting is sort of stupid.

America went to war TWICE against England and TWICE against Germany to protect our precious 2 party system.

We get up to 2 valid choices in every election, or if you want to, you can throw your vote away on a 3rd party.

Nothing could be fairer.
We went to war to protect our precious two party system? What? Do you think our precious two party system is ensconced in the Constitution?

LMFAO!
 

Forum List

Back
Top