Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Breaking the Two Party System

Posted on 04/16/2012 11:42:06 AM PDT by Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

1 posted on 04/16/2012 11:42:12 AM PDT by Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

How about staring with having to prove you are a citizen when you vote, and then only being allowed to vote once?


2 posted on 04/16/2012 11:44:25 AM PDT by chrisser (Starve the Monkeys!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

IBTZ


3 posted on 04/16/2012 11:46:01 AM PDT by Upstate NY Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

Why don’t you libs rename your party to reflect your belief system. Can you say “Communist”?


4 posted on 04/16/2012 11:46:43 AM PDT by katwoman5779
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

The Viking kitties will be here soon.


5 posted on 04/16/2012 11:47:08 AM PDT by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

IBTZ !!!!!


6 posted on 04/16/2012 11:47:46 AM PDT by anoldafvet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

That woud effectively end any liberal democrat wins except in the major cities.


7 posted on 04/16/2012 11:49:04 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (Obama 2012: Dozens of MSNBC viewers can't be wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: katwoman5779

AMEN!


8 posted on 04/16/2012 11:49:12 AM PDT by FutureRocketMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
I smell Ozone!!!!


9 posted on 04/16/2012 11:49:22 AM PDT by Thunder90 (Romney barely won in OH with a 12-1 money advantage, he can't beat Obama that way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Upstate NY Guy

Did I make it?


10 posted on 04/16/2012 11:49:32 AM PDT by jonno (Having an opinion is not the same as having the answer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

CPUSA =Progressive.

That what you want?


11 posted on 04/16/2012 11:49:44 AM PDT by wolfcreek (‘closed eye’ mentality is the reason for our current reality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

IBTZ


12 posted on 04/16/2012 11:49:49 AM PDT by rightly_dividing (Newt 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104

Live one here!


13 posted on 04/16/2012 11:50:32 AM PDT by Thunder90 (Romney barely won in OH with a 12-1 money advantage, he can't beat Obama that way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katwoman5779

[ Why don’t you libs rename your party to reflect your belief system. Can you say “Communist”? ]

If they did that the majority of the GOP leadership would have to rename themselves as the “WHIG Progressive party”

But that would be good as a new Conservative party would have to be formed.


14 posted on 04/16/2012 11:52:19 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
Welcome to Free Republic. We hope you enjoy your very short stay.

I notice you just signed up today to say:"I would much rather sign myself onto some progressive party as I feel they would better represent me, my views...

Ba, ba, ba, ba, ba bye bye!

15 posted on 04/16/2012 11:52:34 AM PDT by Upstate NY Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
I would much rather sign myself onto some progressive party....

I think you'd find it more comfortable over in this forum....CPUSA

16 posted on 04/16/2012 11:52:34 AM PDT by OB1kNOb (The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and pay the penalty. - Prov 22:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

While the cyclotron warms up, could you explain why a progressive would have any problems with Obama? He is a radical, so what do you want?


17 posted on 04/16/2012 11:54:17 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

[ -End Gerrymandering ]

This would need to be done as replacing it with a Solid mathematical formula that was immutable and that neither party would want.

And it would have to be done state by state because districts are controlled from a state level.


18 posted on 04/16/2012 11:56:31 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
OK, I'm IBTZ also.

But I did read your post, and did consider your points.

Up to this point I haven't actually laid out any solutions, so I'll just list what I'd like to see in any reform.

-End Gerrymandering

-Replace First Past the Post with some sort of preferential system
 
Sorry, this will not affect any real change. And your post indicates you are a Progressive.
 
Like I said... IBTZ.


19 posted on 04/16/2012 11:56:32 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

Any last words?


20 posted on 04/16/2012 11:57:47 AM PDT by tumblindice (Our new, happy lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

>>I feel they would better represent me, my views

What are your views? Obama is as progressive as he can afford to be in a first term governing a right-of-center nation, with plenty of hints that he will move radically to the left after November.

The only thing more progressive than Obama in this term is a full-bore card-carrying communist.


22 posted on 04/16/2012 12:00:00 PM PDT by Bryanw92 (Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

Also what about making it that no one can EVER run Unopposed?

Also making it so that any incumbent past their second term would have to get 5% more of the vote than last election to win each subsequent race? (so if they won their second term at 51% their next term they would have to win at least 56% to get their next term)

That would be an alternative to term limits, so you would end the “gold olde boys and gals club”.


23 posted on 04/16/2012 12:00:26 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

IBTZ?


24 posted on 04/16/2012 12:01:38 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (FOCUS ON FACTS: 0bamaCare Hated. Worst Recovery. Failed Stimulus. Worst Deficits.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
I don't want it to lessen the voices of conservatives or liberals and I certainly don't want to open up any possibilities of fraud. I just want the Senate and House of Representatives to actually REPRESENT the views Americans have.

Sorry, but if we could eliminate voter fraud the likelihood is that only about 10% of dhimmicrats would ever be elected again.

25 posted on 04/16/2012 12:01:52 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

No?
Dearly beloved .... http://www.ilovewavs.com/Effects/Music/Sound%20Effect%20-%20Funeral%20March.wav


26 posted on 04/16/2012 12:02:16 PM PDT by tumblindice (Our new, happy lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

Democrats, up until Franklin Roosevelt, or possibly Woodrow Wilson, were fairly conservative. Religion (Christianity in particular) was much more respected, politically, up until Roosevelt, and later JFK. After FDR, people started looking towards government for help, and thus born the progressive agenda. In the beginning, the progressive left mantel was held by Pinkos and people like Margaret Sanger. The Democrat party has been hijacked from Dems like Dan Boren, for Dems like Nancy Pelosi. If you really want a party the espouses your views, either join the Green Party, or the Socialist Party, USA. There are plenty of choices for you. As for having a greater voice for your ideals, you have the GD president right now. The Republican party is a conservative Party. that is the fact of the party platform. I am proud to call myself a Republican because we are the patriotic, conservative party. We do have our moderates (those who are “moderate” on social issues shouldn’t be called moderates, rather progressive hecklers), but the base and the majority of the party is conservative, and it will remain that way until the Democrats throw off there progressive wing, rejoin the Repubs on the major social issues, and begin arguing with them about HOW to achieve an end, not what that end should be.


27 posted on 04/16/2012 12:02:39 PM PDT by FutureRocketMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonno

Yup


28 posted on 04/16/2012 12:03:20 PM PDT by Upstate NY Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
This rings a bell ... didn't some noob trot out this zot-fodder already within the past few weeks?
29 posted on 04/16/2012 12:03:42 PM PDT by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: chrisser

[ How about staring with having to prove you are a citizen when you vote, and then only being allowed to vote once? ]

Also how about making Voter Fraud be an act of TREASON?

Especially when it can clearly be proven intent to undermine the electoral system...

Nothing more I would to see but the “Vote often” DIMS to be hanging at the end of a rope for intentionally undermining the republic.


31 posted on 04/16/2012 12:04:29 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
Just to humor you, Lib, how would you propose ending gerrymandering? With what would you replace it, and how would that solve any of the problems you mentioned?

You must recognize the following, becuase it would resolve much of the quandry you feel we're all in.

We live in a Constitutional, representative republic. It's not a democracy, and we won't agree with every vote that our representative makes. We generally want to know their positions before we vote for them because we don't want big surprises, but we generally know what we're getting.

We are supposed to have checks and balances. It is NOT supposed to be easy for laws to pass; legislative efficiency is not what this country is about. This is by design, and is supposed to give us more stability as a country, and more freedoms as a people.

What is it that you're trying to achieve? A Democratic candidate more aligned with you? A third-party candidate more aligned with your views?

32 posted on 04/16/2012 12:06:31 PM PDT by Lou L (The Senate without a filibuster is just a 100-member version of the House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
How about representatives who say what they do, do what they say and follow the law?
That way we get exactly what we vote for. That's democracy.
I'm tired of career politicians who say whatever people want to hear and then change after the election.
I'm tired of reps who think people have to be led and manipulated in giant social experiments.
Why do we let these lying bastards run our country?
We elect them only because we have no other choice available.
Left or right, whatever party, I just want honesty.

33 posted on 04/16/2012 12:06:49 PM PDT by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

Dr. Paul, if you just take your medication, you will feel much better.


34 posted on 04/16/2012 12:07:07 PM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraceG
Iowa has either has a law or tradition to make the districts aim for minimal perimeter and follow current political boundaries where possible. If you look at their current House district map:

you can see the anti-gerrymandered districts.

35 posted on 04/16/2012 12:07:21 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (You only have three billion heartbeats in a lifetime.How many does the government claim as its own?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

We’re far beyond having polite rational conversations with the left. You’re parasites on the nation and we are the cure. Go back to DU you effing parasite.


36 posted on 04/16/2012 12:08:40 PM PDT by RC one (all y'all had to do was vote for Newt but noooooo, he wasn't good enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tzar

[ Maybe they could make every district a rectangle, with allowances for coastlines and other non rectangular features.]

Agreed, or some other system of redistricting that uses an IMMUTABLE mathematical formula that gets the same result every single time based on the input information from the last census with no room for “massaging” the data.


37 posted on 04/16/2012 12:09:49 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

I Like the fact that they follow existing county lines!


38 posted on 04/16/2012 12:11:37 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

While voter fraud is a terible injustice to the principles of our system of government, the Constitution defines treason as an overt act to aid an enemy. Agian, while voter fraud does have a negative affect on this country, it is not an overt act of aiding an enemy, ie aiding foreign communism, Al-Qaeda, Iran, North Korea, etc. Now, whether the president has committed an overt act of treason is a different story. Specifically, broadcasting our war timeline to our enemy is certainly an act that will aid the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and any other enemy who will benefit from the United States leaving the Middle East (iran).


39 posted on 04/16/2012 12:11:58 PM PDT by FutureRocketMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

Lead the way. Socialists could keep the Democratic Party, and all the militant groups that define it, while less radical socialists could form a progressive left party, each with its own candidates and platforms. Since there is already little difference from the Communist Party platform and the Democratic Party platform, the commies could continue doing what they always do, vote Democrat. The latter might be interested in enlisting Romney, and we have some media mutts you can have with him. The thrust could be progressive tax reform, redistribution of wealth and centralized control of the economy and banking. ...There is certainly a crossover aspect to this that could help both of us. Sounds good, but it is probably too late to get into this cycle.


40 posted on 04/16/2012 12:13:19 PM PDT by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
Photobucket
41 posted on 04/16/2012 12:14:22 PM PDT by stylecouncilor (Some minds are like soup in a poor restaurant...better left unstirred.-PG Wodehouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

iBTZ.


42 posted on 04/16/2012 12:14:57 PM PDT by Third Person
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
Freerepublic is here to help Democrats out!!


43 posted on 04/16/2012 12:15:17 PM PDT by Dallas59 (President Robert Gibbs 2009-2011)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
How do we remedy this problem?

A 4 party system probably should be incubated at the state level. A state could reserve a portion of state seats for the top 4 vote getting parties, say each getting 10 seats for a total of 40, which would naturally attract 4 main parties. The portion could be expanded over time leading to a split up of the current Coke vs. Pepsi duopoly we have now. Most democracies have more than 2 viable parties, because having just 2 stinks. Political interests aren't that simple.

44 posted on 04/16/2012 12:17:08 PM PDT by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
"I would much rather sign myself onto some progressive party as I feel they would better represent me,..."

You have two choices then. We who are not "progressives" have the choice of avoiding buying anything that we don't need and becoming more self-sufficient in order to allow your two political parties to fall with their debt regime.


45 posted on 04/16/2012 12:18:41 PM PDT by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

1st - Take all of the money away from Liberals and Conservatives.

....ok, now that we’ve established the imposibility of the task....

After the Romney haters have succeeded in helping Obama on his path to destroy America, some future generation would have to find the motivation and the means to reconstitute such a great nation.


46 posted on 04/16/2012 12:18:59 PM PDT by G Larry (We are NOT obliged to carry the snake in our pocket and then dismiss the bites as natural behavior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NEMDF
The Viking kitties will be here soon.


47 posted on 04/16/2012 12:19:14 PM PDT by Upstate NY Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

No conservative wants an Evangelical party. That is entirely unconstitutional. IBTZ!


48 posted on 04/16/2012 12:22:59 PM PDT by momincombatboots (Back to West by G-d Virginia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

WELCOME TO FREE REPUBLIC!

Thank you for joining, AND for posting a thread right away.

Words of advice here at FR: Follow Jim Robinson’s rules, develop a thick skin quickly, (some of us are still trying to pass Manners 101), and enjoy FR!

Now down to business, you say/write/type “I just want the Senate and House of Representatives to actually REPRESENT the views Americans have.” which is EXACTLY what we here at FR having been trying to do since the inception of FR!

Congress is still a work in progress, I think - - - .

So, kick back, take a deep breath and prepare yourself for this one: WE ARE ALL AMERICANS.

Yep, shocking, but true. Dictator Baby-Doc Barack, ( I have many other names for him, but I thought that I would start with a tribute to a former Dictator of Haiti first), has spent a lot of his energy trying to divide and conquer us.

The Liberal Agenda Media, LAM for short, calls it “class warfare,” but since America does not have Classes of people like Merry Ol’ England does, the LAM spins itself into High Poo-Bah Obama’s well-painted Pinko corner.

Okay! You have joined us, by your own admission have at least one goal in common with us, and hopefully we, as Americans, can work on problems together that we agree that we have in common.

You mentioned “Gerrymandering,” which I agree is a problem that ANYBODY who is not a politician could easily solve.

The second part of your plan/solution “- - - -Replace First Past the Post with some sort of preferential system - - - “ is not at all specific enough to be, (in the infamous words of a former foreign student at Harvard, and now Illegal White House Occupier, Barack “You Lie” Obama), TRANSPARENT.

Please clarify, si vous plait.

BTW, reply often on our various threads, as you are about to have the most fun that is legally allowed in politics!


49 posted on 04/16/2012 12:26:11 PM PDT by Graewoulf ((Dictator Baby-Doc Barack's obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Some Lib on the Wrong Forums

So you admit that you are a leftist, constitution busting treasonous azz, and then offer us a solution to our problem of the Republican party melding with the Democrat Party to work against the constitution. You suggest that we join your “progressive” (Marxist) pals in an independent party as a solution to our problem of the GOP joining the Marxists of the Democrat party?

You are “sure” we want a libertarian or evangelical party?

The libertarians already have an independent party and I am sure they will join you in your “progressive” efforts. You will find many of them at Occupy Wall Street. They have no clue when they are pushing forward your “progressive” agenda of socialism. Just wag gay marriage and State mandated atheism in front of them and they will putting in your slimey hands.


50 posted on 04/16/2012 12:30:06 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson