Support NeoGAF

[Stumpokapow]

I don't get this. I was going to say as a member of UKGAF, but then I look at the Labor party here and I realise this is a similar story playing out here and I don't get it that either.

Party division is becoming a real problem, something that could be sorted out if you disbanded the 2 party system in the US and the three party system in the UK. (I am aware that it's not really a three party system in the UK, but aside from the the Big 3, you don't have much choice.) Put a cap on the amount of members in any party. Split them. Seems like the easiest solutions. Someone more informed please tell me reasons as to why this is bad idea?

Well, for one thing, there's one Presidency, so only one party can have it at once, so under your system, there'd just be a Democrats 1, Democrats 2, Democrats 3, Democrats 4, etc. which would all support the Democratic presidential nominee. Mathematically, under the spatial voting assumptions, if there are three parties, then the two closest parties to one another undermine each other. This scales. The game theoretic optimal approach in a winner-take-all situation is to have two competitors. Presidencies are not parliamentary systems.

The reason a third party can exist in the UK (or in Canada or...) is because parliamentary systems are not winner take all. In these systems, each constituency is incentivized to be a two-party constituency (which is the case: how many Scottish constituencies have Labour, SNP, and the Tories all being competitive?) So FPTP creates local incentives to be two-party but can sustain regionally strong third parties for a while.

You can look up Duverger's law to read more. And while there have been reasonable criticisms of Duverger's law, none of them disagree with the above.

Setting aside game theoretic concerns, it's also obviously unconstitutional. A breach of free association and free assembly. And it would not be sustained as a minimally intrusive way of achieving a public policy outcome.

 

[andycapps]

It infuriates me when any modern-day Republican invokes Teddy Roosevelt.

T.R. was a powerful voice in favor of expanding government for the public good - a man born of privilege who was nevertheless committed to helping those less fortunate than him. Modern-day Republicans think the federal government is inherently evil and look to dismantle it at every opportunity.

Totally agree with all this.

This is what living on the Fox News bubble has done to people. It makes them believe everything GOP politicians tell them on the campaign trail.

There's no difference between the GOP and the Tea Party. They are one in the same.

I think there is a difference, this whole article is showing that. There's a very vocal, sizeable minority of the party that is far right and wants to defund Planned Parenthood, block Syrian immigration, etc.

What I get out of this article is that I see one of two things happening. 1) The more centrist (at least in comparison to the Freedom Caucus folks) will leave the Republican party and become Democrats, or 2) the Freedom Caucus folks will leave and form their own third party. The chaos described in the article is either going to destroy the party completely and something new will rise in it's wake, or it will splinter.

 

[Crosseyes]

Wow, this is some sad fucking shit right here.

Yeah, although its kinda even more sad in that the thing the money holding members cant throw enough money at is quieting the 'kill the muslims, deport the mexicans, oppress the blacks' side of their party.

 

[Vagabundo]

At one point, Ryan tried to commiserate by pointing out how angry members were when Boehner bypassed the Ways and Means Committee, which Ryan chaired, on a crucial piece of Medicare legislation. There was an uncomfortable silence. Mulvaney said he put his hand on Ryan’s shoulder and explained, “Paul, none of us are on Ways and Means.” It was a turning point. “That was the moment that we realized there was a little bit of us in Paul, and Paul realized we weren’t as crazy as everybody tried to make us out to be.”

This bit cracked me up. Goddam i'm so juvenile... :s

 

[LosDaddie]

I think there is a difference, this whole article is showing that. There's a very vocal, sizeable minority of the party that is far right and wants to defund Planned Parenthood, block Syrian immigration, etc.

What I get out of this article is that I see one of two things happening. 1) The more centrist (at least in comparison to the Freedom Caucus folks) will leave the Republican party and become Democrats, or 2) the Freedom Caucus folks will leave and form their own third party. The chaos described in the article is either going to destroy the party completely and something new will rise in it's wake, or it will splinter.

Speaking from experience (anecdotes & all, I know), I've never met a Repub/conservative who didn't also believe/side with the Tea Party on 99% of things. I just don't see many, if any, switching to Dem voters.

 

[andycapps]

Speaking from experience (anecdotes & all, I know), I've never met a Repub/conservative who didn't also believe/side with the Tea Party on 99% of things. I just don't see many, if any, switching to Dem voters.

I'm talking about establishment Republican politicians potentially switching from Repub to Dem. As you read in the article, they're already siding with Dems on a lot of votes in order to get things done. I don't see the party staying how it is, so I see one of the two sides leaving.

 

[Stinkles]

lol, nice analogy.

EDIT:
Uhhh, why'd Stinkles get the hammer? Not finding anything objectionable in his post history.

My account was briefly hacked, the "hacker" went on a racist tirade and got nuked (including the offending posts). I saw this happen to another account a couple of days ago. Good reminder to update passwords tho.

 

[Square2015]

Yeah, although its kinda even more sad in that the thing the money holding members cant throw enough money at is quieting the 'kill the muslims, deport the mexicans, oppress the blacks' side of their party.

Who the hell is saying kill the muslims, oppress the blacks in the party?

 

[KenzinFive]

It is pretty scary how smart and cunning Cruz. If he wasn't so divisive in his rhetoric and positions I'd be worried about his chances of winning the general election.

If he ever becomes the frontrunner, I imagine that it will be like that little window before the 2012 election where Newt Gingrich was in the lead, and people from both sides basically came out and reminded everyone why people disliked Newt in the first place.

Only WAY worse, since Gingrich was Speaker of the House and is historically important for his Contract with America in the 1990s. Cruz is just an all-around piece of shit that nobody likes.

 

[leroidys]

My account was briefly hacked, the "hacker" went on a racist tirade and got nuked (including the offending posts). I saw this happen to another account a couple of days ago. Good reminder to update passwords tho.

Oh, weird. Well, welcome back. I think I'll update my password now.

 

[fredrancour]

It infuriates me when any modern-day Republican invokes Teddy Roosevelt.

T.R. was a powerful voice in favor of expanding government for the public good - a man born of privilege who was nevertheless committed to helping those less fortunate than him. Modern-day Republicans think the federal government is inherently evil and look to dismantle it at every opportunity.

I paused mid-read of the article to come post something like this. Teddy Roosevelt would be viewed as satan by the republicans of today if he were a currently-active politician, and it's nauseating to hear tea party narcissists invoke quotes from him as if he would actually support their ideology of institutionalized vanity and cruelty.