|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Where's your head at. part 1 politics
Posted: 11/2/2009 7:32:10 PM | Canada has had three or four national parties for years.
After three elections, Prime Minister Harper still can't ram things through. It's good thing.
We have a minority government which could fall at any time. Maybe they could work to advance everybody's agendas and stay in power.
Compromise is a good thing. | |
|
| Where's your head at. part 1 politics
Posted: 11/2/2009 8:20:30 PM | Hmm ? all this splintering and posturing that going on ~ Might well create a stronger third party.
The right man or woman need only stand up and be counted!
Such men and women come to us in time of need. ~ Seemly out of nowhere.
Our short history is full of such great men and women. Truman, Linclon, Washington, Franklin, Jackson, Jefferson, Grant, Travis, Crockett, Bowie, Henry, Houston, Patton, Reagan, Nixon, Davis, Kissinger, Kennedy , Swartzkoff ~ all the right man for the right job at the right time.
It could easily happen again. We've been lucky like that. ~ Just don't expect them to be perfect! because they never are! They are just men with a mission and purpose and a great sense of duty.
It you look for something wrong with them ~ it'll be easy to find.
Dance | |
|
| Where's your head at. part 1 politics
Posted: 11/19/2009 2:13:49 PM | I'm hearing Palin/ Beck for 2012 ~ now wouldn't that be a line up!
I think it would be a good thing ~ Something there for everyone.
If people with a history of Glen Beck's can run for president , I'd say just about anyone can.
I wonder who'd be VP? ~ Guess they could draw straws or rock, paper sissors.
Anyone read Beck's Bio? He's seems to be rough on "mother's" and just about everyone he's around really.
They are both singing each others praises with Rush's blessing.
Her book went on sale yesterday, I not read it. Most I hear about it, it's light of substance. Much like the last GOP campaign I suppose, not bothering with the "silly issue" but about character!
I'm not sure why, but some people loved it and loved Palin and they still do! But they can't tell you why either. She's their kind of woman or so it appears. And I must admit , there is littles doubt Todd got his hand full. about one day as Todd and I'd be done.
As for myself, for a presidential choice, "liking" is just a small part of what I'm looking for. I like Evil Knievel , Alice Cooper, and Tiny Tim.
I met a girl on POF , met out last Sunday, she's from Mexico City, been here 11 years. She a big Palin / Beck fan. ~~ and hates the rest. ~ yet can't tell you really why either.
It seems these two people inspire and fills some people "void" in their understanding of the world they live in and politics.
Dance | |
|
| |
| Where's your head at. part 1 politics
Posted: 11/19/2009 5:56:51 PM | We are not likely to see a 'third party' with a realistic chance of suplanting either of the others. This is not because the desire for something other than the D's and R's offer isn't rampant, rather it's because of how the two BIG parties long ago learned to do in response to the desire for change.
What happens year to year, is the big parties study the nation at large, identify as many significant subgroups as they can, and then craft a political program designed to cater just enough to what they think will make for a majority cluster. When they get knocked out of power, they usually wrestle amongst themselves for a bit (as we see the Republicans doing now), and reform the SAME party with just enough changes to try again for that magic 51%.
Case in point, the Republicans built the majority they just finished squandering, by appealing to the religious conservatives for what they feared, combined with the growing Libertarians, who feared or opposed the "political correctness" of the left, the military they had courted for so long, and the small but powerful core of business people who simply wanted lower taxes on themselves and their friends. This provided majorities to elect Reagan twice, Bush Sr once, and Bush Jr twice. By the time of Bush Jr, they had forgotten entirely how to do what Reagan did (ie, choose positions all of their segments COULD support, without outright catering to any of them). They let the Libertarians down so many times, I can't figure out how any of them voted for them more than once, but that just shows that libertarians are as self-blinding as everyone else is at times. They let the conservative Christians down by ignoring and/or covering up the sexual transgressions of their own members, while publicly decrying the foibles of the opposition. Then they let down the military, by cutting the budget for Veterans, misusing them in Iraq (the 'stop-loss' policies), and by limiting their support to grand speeches (no proper care for the wounded). Finally, they even let down the businessmen, by cateriing blindly to the anti-regulatory crowd until the economy went south.
What you'll see now, is a gradual shift, in both parties, as each tries to build a new hegemony. Just as Clinton got elected twice by playing to financial conservatives (by working to balance the budget), and spoke supportively (but did nothing actually) in favor of just enough liberal causes to get them to tow the line. The Republicans have not yet shown that they know how they need to change to realign things. Right now, they are copying the Democrats' strategy used during the Bush Jr. terms: DON'T come up with any new solutions, just watch and wait for the guy on top to make mistakes, and then yell about them.
The best chance we would have for the kind of REAL change you seem to yearn for, would be if both parties broke apart in squables, and reformed again from each others pieces. I personally can't see any signs that might happen soon, since both groups are still creeping around, more afraid to upset one of their subgroups than to take a stand. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
