Posted on 12/03/2014 7:45:59 AM PST by C19fan
Sweden's minority, center-left government teetered on the brink of collapse on Tuesday after just two months in office when a far-right party announced it would vote against the 2015 budget, effectively dooming it to defeat.
The anti-immigration Sweden Democrat party, which holds the balance of power in parliament, said it would support an alternative budget proposed by the center-right Alliance opposition bloc, leaving the government isolated.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Is that really like saying more than zero
?
“center-left” vs. “far right”
Does the media know a “left” that isn’t “center-left”?
Does the media know a “right” that isn’t “far right”?
If The Mombasa MF had been a PM rather than a POTUS, he would have been out on his keester before the end of his first term. The parliamentary system also has many features that make it unattractive (or unworkable) here, for example, proportional representation. One of them for example: if the Gay Global Warming PETA Commie Party got 2% of the national vote, they might get a seat or two in a parliament.
Our founders voted for a stable, four-year executive (The Confederates, six), never dreaming that Presidents would become tyrants, or that the sovereign states would be so reduced in power as to have '0' to say in the Federal Government.
Sweden will hold a new election on the 22nd of March. That was announced by Prime Minister Stefan Löfven on Wednesday.
The announcedment came after the government’s budget failed a vote in parliament, when the Sweden Democrats decided to vote for the opposition Alliance budget.
http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6036110
What they really never foresaw was the rise of a media---which really didn't exist in its modern form in 1787---that would be able to cow and intimidate ALL those checks and balances branches into submission. The powers still exist. We just have no one who will use any of them.
You are right, though, that the horrible weakness of proportional representation is that it allows fruitcake parties like the Greens or Nazis to obtain real power through . . . intimidation and threatening government shutdowns if they don't get their way.
You’re wrong about that.
The USSC invented that power themselves.
~Does the media know a “left” that isn’t “center-left”?
Does the media know a “right” that isn’t “far right”?~
In Europe it is a whole lot different.
Ultraconservatives are actually hard-liberal to light-socialist on economic issues though they are culturally anti-Semitic and racists.
Center-left are full-blown socialists and the left are Stalinist commies.
I think Boehner is trying to push through a budget in the lame duck session to avoid just this sort of situation in the new congress.
He doesn’t want the freshmen congressmen to ally with the old TEA party congressmen to push for a smaller budget or defunding of immigration and ObamaCare.
This “far-right” party got 18% of the vote. And come the next election, they will get more.
That is highly, and I emphasize, highly debated even among conservative constitutional scholars. Madison in an unguarded moment once observed that ultimately the Court would have that power. He should know, since he wrote the thing.
For an "isolated" party, they are having the decisive say in how the government operates and the budget. We will have a similar party in the US if the GOP fails to stop amnesty.
The Sweden Democrats party is not comprised of Nazis. This is a canard of the left, especially in Europe, to discredit any party that is conservative (relatively) and supports the preservation of language and culture and a reduction in immigration.
I didn’t say they were. I said that there is an undeniable propensity of proportional representation to allow fruitcake parties SUCH AS THE NAZIS to gain power.
And it’s not a “canard” if it’s true. And it’s just as true about fruitbat lefty parties as the Nazis.
From your lips to God’s ears.
We have two major parties that are increasingly become two wings of the same party. Both have abandoned the American worker and embrace crony capitalism and protecting the rights of the corporate elites. When parties lose connection with the people they represent, other parties emerge, It is easier in parliamentary democracies to form parties that represent a greater diversity of views and have those views affect government.
In the US, there are definite, inherent advantages that favor a two party system. Yes, we have third parties but they are usually unable to impact our electoral system. And any third party with substantial support will morph into one of the two major parties like the Republicans did with the Whigs. And failing that, the ideas of a third party that gain traction with the public will likely be adopted by one or both of the major parties.
If the Reps fail to confront Obama on amnesty, I can see a third party forming around the protection of the rights of the American worker.
The UK arrived at a political consensus on reduced immigration under the slogan, "British jobs for British workers." It was started by the BNP and eventually adopted by the Tories, Labour, and the Liberal Democrats. But mere words did not solve the problem, hence the meteoric rise of UKIP, which its detractors like to label as far-right and racist. In fact, recent polls asking the question, "Which party best supports the British worker?", UKIP got the most votes even more than Labour.
This May we may see an historic change in British politics. UKIP could very well become a "major" political party replacing, more than likely, the Liberal Democrats. The main issues will be immigration and the related issue of staying in the EU. Some may consider UKIP to be Nazis, but the reality is that the immigration issue is changing the electoral landscape throughout Europe. And I see the same thing happening in the US.
Brits are pretty much a two party system, though not for the same reasons we are. So if a UKIP rises, it will likely come out of the conservatives membership. They would still be a two-party system, unlike France or Germany in 1928-32, or many other Euro countries, where (and I keep saying this) parties LIKE the 1932 Nazis or the 1980s Green in Germany can get power they otherwise would never get.
The two-party system is a miracle of stability. It’s a fragmented parliament that leads to the Nazi Party or it’s modern equivalent the Greens gaining control. They’re minority parties that don’t deserve power ever.
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.