4 ms·

You think the US two party, first-past-the-post system is better?! Why would normal citizens vote for the president? There are only two possible outcomes of t

You think the US two party, first-past-the-post system is better?! Why would normal citizens vote for the president? There are only two possible outcomes of that: a president gets selected who basically blocks what the rest of the government wants (this is how it works in the US and exactly what the FF wanted) or the people pick a president who would work with the government but would have been picked with your current system.

walshemj 13y ago
Yes its is it makes for a stronger government and reduces the influenced of extremists holding the country to ransom.
- betterunix 13y ago
  "Yes its is it makes for a stronger government and reduces the influenced of extremists holding the country to ransom." The problem is that there is no real choice here; you have a right-wing party and a slightly more right-wing party, and then a bunch of powerless minor parties. Nobody is holding the country ransom because there is no real disagreement. Occasionally the parties clash over the budget (as they did recently), but on the whole the country has generally followed the same path for decades now.
  - walshemj 13y ago
    Dumping Nuclear power in a hurry to keep the greens on side? Remind me again how the large German cost line suffers regular tsunamis :-)
    - flyinRyan 13y ago
      So you're upset because you're losing nuclear power (admittedly, that's a mistake)? You could be having indefinite detention, constant wars on ideals (as opposed to tangible entities), a failing school system, a system where the balance is tipped so far in favor of corporations (as opposed to labor) that it's practically a vertical line, and on and on but you're concerned about having less efficient power? The mind boggles.
      - walshemj 13y ago
        I don't live in Germany or the USA :-) and having access to affordable stable power is quite an important thing in having a nice society to live in. As your so keen on improving the lot of "labor" you are of course a union member and actively recruit and improve workers living conditions? I got over 1000 of my members a better deal on their pensions and helped in gaining recognition for a bargaining unit in the UK.
        flyinRyan 13y ago
        >and having access to affordable stable power is quite an important thing in having a nice society to live in Not nearly as important as avoiding having a bunch of lunatic extremists as two-party systems seem to devolve to. I find the European governments of many parties all having a say in the government the best and closest to actual representation. I find the idea that the entirety of opinion in the whole US, all 350 million citizens, can be resolved to either Red or Blue absolutely idiotic. Of course that doesn't happen, the parties both span the whole political spectrum, including complete overlap. I.e. the party name can be meaningless. It also means you can't be sure where a politician stands by his party alone. Contrast this with a european government where you stand with your party or you switch party. It's much easier to work out where someone stands. >you are of course a union member I certainly would be in a union but firms have been really good at keeping unionization out of IT entirely. But even better would be a government who recognized the power imbalance between corporations and labor and took steps to make things better on their own.
        walshemj 13y ago
        Like golden dawn in greece and of course italy and belgium have proved the point that PR is wonderful NOT
- flyinRyan 13y ago
  I hope this sentence was sarcastic.
  - walshemj 13y ago
    No it wasn't you maybe need to read Mathew 7:3 and reflect on it. You do know that other 1st world democracys look at the sclerotic nature of the US system and shake their heads. One member of the US legislature commented on the BBC that the house of lords was more Democratic than they where in a lot of ways :-) And don't get me started on the obsession with Barak's race and the fact that the GOP the party of Lincon Seward et al has been taken over by the "swivel eyed nutters"
    - flyinRyan 13y ago
      I'm sorry, I don't have a clue what you're trying to say. You initially seemed to say that a two party system makes for a stronger government and avoid extremism. The US proves the exact opposite. Now what's this about a beam in my own eye? And now you seem to be bashing how bad the US government is, yet we would be in agreement on this. Color me confused.

walshemj 13y ago

Yes its is it makes for a stronger government and reduces the influenced of extremists holding the country to ransom.

betterunix 13y ago
"Yes its is it makes for a stronger government and reduces the influenced of extremists holding the country to ransom." The problem is that there is no real choice here; you have a right-wing party and a slightly more right-wing party, and then a bunch of powerless minor parties. Nobody is holding the country ransom because there is no real disagreement. Occasionally the parties clash over the budget (as they did recently), but on the whole the country has generally followed the same path for decades now.
- walshemj 13y ago
  Dumping Nuclear power in a hurry to keep the greens on side? Remind me again how the large German cost line suffers regular tsunamis :-)
  - flyinRyan 13y ago
    So you're upset because you're losing nuclear power (admittedly, that's a mistake)? You could be having indefinite detention, constant wars on ideals (as opposed to tangible entities), a failing school system, a system where the balance is tipped so far in favor of corporations (as opposed to labor) that it's practically a vertical line, and on and on but you're concerned about having less efficient power? The mind boggles.
    - walshemj 13y ago
      I don't live in Germany or the USA :-) and having access to affordable stable power is quite an important thing in having a nice society to live in. As your so keen on improving the lot of "labor" you are of course a union member and actively recruit and improve workers living conditions? I got over 1000 of my members a better deal on their pensions and helped in gaining recognition for a bargaining unit in the UK.
      - flyinRyan 13y ago
        >and having access to affordable stable power is quite an important thing in having a nice society to live in Not nearly as important as avoiding having a bunch of lunatic extremists as two-party systems seem to devolve to. I find the European governments of many parties all having a say in the government the best and closest to actual representation. I find the idea that the entirety of opinion in the whole US, all 350 million citizens, can be resolved to either Red or Blue absolutely idiotic. Of course that doesn't happen, the parties both span the whole political spectrum, including complete overlap. I.e. the party name can be meaningless. It also means you can't be sure where a politician stands by his party alone. Contrast this with a european government where you stand with your party or you switch party. It's much easier to work out where someone stands. >you are of course a union member I certainly would be in a union but firms have been really good at keeping unionization out of IT entirely. But even better would be a government who recognized the power imbalance between corporations and labor and took steps to make things better on their own.
        walshemj 13y ago
        Like golden dawn in greece and of course italy and belgium have proved the point that PR is wonderful NOT
flyinRyan 13y ago
I hope this sentence was sarcastic.
- walshemj 13y ago
  No it wasn't you maybe need to read Mathew 7:3 and reflect on it. You do know that other 1st world democracys look at the sclerotic nature of the US system and shake their heads. One member of the US legislature commented on the BBC that the house of lords was more Democratic than they where in a lot of ways :-) And don't get me started on the obsession with Barak's race and the fact that the GOP the party of Lincon Seward et al has been taken over by the "swivel eyed nutters"
  - flyinRyan 13y ago
    I'm sorry, I don't have a clue what you're trying to say. You initially seemed to say that a two party system makes for a stronger government and avoid extremism. The US proves the exact opposite. Now what's this about a beam in my own eye? And now you seem to be bashing how bad the US government is, yet we would be in agreement on this. Color me confused.