Hyper-partisanship. The Founding Fathers worst fears now have been realized.

[Twilight Hue]

America Is Now the Divided Republic the Framers Feared

Hyper-partisan set in shockingly quick once the last of the Blue Dog (conservative) Democrats and liberal Republicans have become all but extinct in this country. The gate was intentionally slammed shut by rigging the system to prevent any new third-party from entering, effectively creating an entrenched dictatorship. As a result, we end up with the politicians that are in front of us now, where the people don't make candidate choices, rather we are given candidate choices to vote on.

A trio of questions for this thread to start things off, but by no means limited to those as others will have their own questions and commentary to contribute.


1) Can hyper-partisanship be reversed once it's entrenched?

2) Is it even possible anymore for conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans to resurface and regain a foothold in a hyper-partisan climate?

3) Do moderate political ideologies even have a chance anymore?

In other words, can a Conservative amicably accept Liberal ideas, or can a Liberal amicably accept Conservative ideas without resorting to hyper-partisanship?

 

[taykair]

I don't know if the following will add anything to the discussion or not (probably not).

Someone once told me that 1% of the world is politically left, 1% is politically right, and the other 98% wish that the 2% would just go **** themselves.

I'm not sure if that person was right or not. If he was, then it would seem that I am actually part of a majority for a change.

 

[Left Coast]

America Is Now the Divided Republic the Framers Feared

Hyper-partisan set in shockingly quick once the last of the Blue Dog (conservative) Democrats and liberal Republicans have become all but extinct in this country. The gate was intentionally slammed shut by rigging the system to prevent any new third-party from entering, effectively creating an entrenched dictatorship. As a result, we end up with the politicians that are in front of us now, where the people don't make candidate choices, rather we are given candidate choices to vote on.

A trio of questions for this thread to start things off, but by no means limited to those as others will have their own questions and commentary to contribute.


1) Can hyper-partisanship be reversed once it's entrenched?

2) Is it even possible anymore for conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans to resurface and regain a foothold in a hyper-partisan climate?

3) Do moderate political ideologies even have a chance anymore?

In other words, can a Conservative amicably accept Liberal ideas, or can a Liberal amicably accept Conservative ideas without resorting to hyper-partisanship?

Good thread and link!

I hope that hyper-partisanship can be reversed, but I'm not sure how. It seems to me that for any diverse democracy of our size to function, compromise has to be acceptable to both/all sides. Yet we've gotten to a place where many of us, and our elected officials, are completely unwilling to compromise to allow society to function. I'll be honest, this is one of the things that was the last straw for me back when I was a Republican and the 2010 wave of new GOPers entered Congress. These were people who were so virulently anti-Obamacare they were literally willing to shut down the government to overturn it. That was one of the major turning points that ended my allegiance to the party.

However, in the spirit of ending hyper-partisanship, I will say some things I agree with conservatives about, or where I think compromise is completely reasonable. First, regarding guns - I think gun control can be effective depending on the specifics of the regulation, but I don't think it's as effective as many lefties assume it is. Especially not in a country like ours where there are already so many guns in circulation and gun ownership is baked in the cake of our culture. Law is not going to change culture, and people have a right to defend themselves, especially in a country where so many other people have guns.

Second, regarding trade - this is an area I genuinely don't know enough about, though I wish I did. However, it seems to me that free trade has had many benefits and an overly-protectionist policy is likely to cause more harm than good.

Third, regarding foreign policy - as much as I want us to get the hell out of the Middle East and end all military conflict there, unfortunately, like with guns, I think now that the toothpaste is out of the tube it's not as simple as just bringing the troops home. Our involvement over the last 20 years (and longer, really) has completely shifted the dynamics there and we can't just up and leave without creating a power vacuum that will end all semblance of what genuine democracy has been able to develop there. I don't know enough to be able to say what the exact policy prescription should be, but I think some of the more pacifist folks on the left have too simplistic a vision.

 

[Wandering Monk]

Solution: get off social media. New study found nearly 50% of Twitter posts were from bots.

 

[bobhikes]

America Is Now the Divided Republic the Framers Feared

Hyper-partisan set in shockingly quick once the last of the Blue Dog (conservative) Democrats and liberal Republicans have become all but extinct in this country. The gate was intentionally slammed shut by rigging the system to prevent any new third-party from entering, effectively creating an entrenched dictatorship. As a result, we end up with the politicians that are in front of us now, where the people don't make candidate choices, rather we are given candidate choices to vote on.

A trio of questions for this thread to start things off, but by no means limited to those as others will have their own questions and commentary to contribute.


1) Can hyper-partisanship be reversed once it's entrenched?

2) Is it even possible anymore for conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans to resurface and regain a foothold in a hyper-partisan climate?

3) Do moderate political ideologies even have a chance anymore?

In other words, can a Conservative amicably accept Liberal ideas, or can a Liberal amicably accept Conservative ideas without resorting to hyper-partisanship?

I was thinking about this and the political climate is probably the same as it was just before the civil war. I don't see war coming but major change.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

America Is Now the Divided Republic the Framers Feared

Hyper-partisan set in shockingly quick once the last of the Blue Dog (conservative) Democrats and liberal Republicans have become all but extinct in this country. The gate was intentionally slammed shut by rigging the system to prevent any new third-party from entering, effectively creating an entrenched dictatorship. As a result, we end up with the politicians that are in front of us now, where the people don't make candidate choices, rather we are given candidate choices to vote on.

A trio of questions for this thread to start things off, but by no means limited to those as others will have their own questions and commentary to contribute.


1) Can hyper-partisanship be reversed once it's entrenched?

2) Is it even possible anymore for conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans to resurface and regain a foothold in a hyper-partisan climate?

3) Do moderate political ideologies even have a chance anymore?

In other words, can a Conservative amicably accept Liberal ideas, or can a Liberal amicably accept Conservative ideas without resorting to hyper-partisanship?

Democrats and Republicans don't have a lock on everything; independent representatives and Senators still get elected occasionally.

The thing about first-past-the-post voting is that it actually advantages small parties as long as their support is very regional.

The deck is certainly stacked against parties like the Greens or Libertarians, with their support diffused across a wide geographic area: they're doomed to finksh no better than third in almost any district they run in.

... but if a party had that level of support concetrated in a couple of districts, they could actually win some seats.

The examples from other countries show that when a country is as evenly dividedas the US, a small third party can have tremendous influence beyond its size if it holds the balance of power. Look at the Bloc Quebecois in Canada. Look at the UDP in the UK.

The trick for third parties is just to concentrate their efforts on a small handful of districts where they stand a chance of winning.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I was thinking about this and the political climate is probably the same as it was just before the civil war. I don't see war coming but major change.

Anyone who can't endure wearing a mask to Costco wouldn't be able to endure an actual civil war.

 

[Left Coast]

Solution: get off social media. New study found nearly 50% of Twitter posts were from bots.

Agreed. Unless RF counts as social media, in which case, STAY ON.

 

[Left Coast]

Democrats and Republicans don't have a lock on everything; independent representatives and Senators still get elected occasionally.

The thing about first-past-the-post voting is that it actually advantages small parties as long as their support is very regional.

The deck is certainly stacked against parties like the Greens or Libertarians, with their support diffused across a wide geographic area: they're doomed to finksh no better than third in almost any district they run in.

... but if a party had that level of support concetrated in a couple of districts, they could actually win some seats.

The examples from other countries show that when a country is as evenly dividedas the US, a small third party can have tremendous influence beyond its size if it holds the balance of power. Look at the Bloc Quebecois in Canada. Look at the UDP in the UK.

The trick for third parties is just to concentrate their efforts on a small handful of districts where they stand a chance of winning.

Are there any states or parts of the country where you think Libertarians and/or Greens should focus their efforts for maximum benefit?

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't know if the following will add anything to the discussion or not (probably not).

Someone once told me that 1% of the world is politically left, 1% is politically right, and the other 98% wish that the 2% would just go **** themselves.

I'm not sure if that person was right or not. If he was, then it would seem that I am actually part of a majority for a change.

That person in the middle has their problems too.
Remember that it's the vast majority who favor the wars
we seem endlessly embroiled in. People say they want
change, but they vote for candidates who do the same
old same old. Sure, sure...they complain, but it's only
about the other side. As evidence I offer the disappearance
of protests against Bush's wars when they became Obama's.
And in our last election, the candidate who voted to fund
both wars got the most votes.

This is the big reason we don't have real 3rd party options.

 

[taykair]

...the vast majority who favor the wars

Maybe it's only the majority of the minority who favor wars, since the majority doesn't vote.

 

[esmith]

Are there any states or parts of the country where you think Libertarians and/or Greens should focus their efforts for maximum benefit?

CA, WA, OR, but they are so far left don't think it would make a difference.

 

[Revoltingest]

Maybe it's only the majority of the minority who favor wars, since the majority doesn't vote.

I spoke of the majority of voters.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

America Is Now the Divided Republic the Framers Feared

Hyper-partisan set in shockingly quick once the last of the Blue Dog (conservative) Democrats and liberal Republicans have become all but extinct in this country. The gate was intentionally slammed shut by rigging the system to prevent any new third-party from entering, effectively creating an entrenched dictatorship. As a result, we end up with the politicians that are in front of us now, where the people don't make candidate choices, rather we are given candidate choices to vote on.

A trio of questions for this thread to start things off, but by no means limited to those as others will have their own questions and commentary to contribute.


1) Can hyper-partisanship be reversed once it's entrenched?

2) Is it even possible anymore for conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans to resurface and regain a foothold in a hyper-partisan climate?

3) Do moderate political ideologies even have a chance anymore?

In other words, can a Conservative amicably accept Liberal ideas, or can a Liberal amicably accept Conservative ideas without resorting to hyper-partisanship?

Not without reforming the fan clubs and getting more people to vote for more non-mainstream fanclubs would typically run.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Are there any states or parts of the country where you think Libertarians and/or Greens should focus their efforts for maximum benefit?

Greens seem to have had their biggest successes in California, but I wasn't suggesting an existing third party.

I'm not sure it would be easy for an existing party like the Greens to completely change their tack and abandon the districts of most of their current members.

Whatever party comes along will have to be one that doesn't care too much about the vote-splitting that would hurt one of the existing parties, so we're probably talking about:

- something intrinsically regional: a "Texas Independence Party" or the like, or
- a party so far from the existing ones on the political spectrum that they don't see much difference between the Republicans and the Democrats (which probably means something on the far left).

 

[Left Coast]

Greens seem to have had their biggest successes in California, but I wasn't suggesting an existing third party.

I'm not sure it would be easy for an existing party like the Greens to completely change their tack and abandon the districts of most of their current members.

Whatever party comes along will have to be one that doesn't care too much about the vote-splitting that would hurt one of the existing parties, so we're probably talking about:

- something intrinsically regional: a "Texas Independence Party" or the like, or
- a party so far from the existing ones on the political spectrum that they don't see much difference between the Republicans and the Democrats (which probably means something on the far left).

Interesting. If the Greens haven't been successful enough to carve out an influential chunk of the electorate, I don't know how an even further left party would do so. If the Dems and Reps keep drifting further apart, the only viable political option I could see for a third party would be some sort of Justin Amash-style Libertarian party: socially liberal, fiscally conservative.

 

[taykair]

I was a Libertarian once. Card-carrying member. Even sat on my state party's central committee. (I still get a chuckle when I use the words "libertarian" and "central committee" in the same sentence.)

After being in the party for a short while, I noticed that it was composed of three groups:

1. Former Republicans and Democrats who couldn't advance within their own parties, so they said, "The hell with it. I'll be a Libertarian."

2. Ayn Rand cultists -- those who believe that Atlas Shrugged is the Word of God (that is, if any of them actually believed in God).

3. Folks who want legal dope.

And, yes, I was in group three.

 

[Left Coast]

I was a Libertarian once. Card-carrying member. Even sat on my state party's central committee. (I still get a chuckle when I use the words "libertarian" and "central committee" in the same sentence.)

After being in the party for a short while, I noticed that it was composed of three groups:

1. Former Republicans and Democrats who couldn't advance within their own parties, so they said, "The hell with it. I'll be a Libertarian."

2. Ayn Rand cultists -- those who believe that Atlas Shrugged is the Word of God (that is, if any of them actually believed in God).

3. Folks who want legal dope.

And, yes, I was in group three.

I have frequently joked that libertarians are just conservatives with a gay friend.

I once went on a date with a guy and made that joke because I assumed he was a leftie...he wasn't. He didn't find my joke funny. LOL.

 

[sun rise]

As @bobhikes pointed out, the Civil War was one such example of extreme polarity. WWII and the Cold War were other cases. The resolution in those cases was one side winning and the other side losing. That is, of course, what all of us hyper-partisans want - a clean victory for those on the side of virtue: us.

 

[tytlyf]

Solution: get off social media. New study found nearly 50% of Twitter posts were from bots.

That and most people get their news from social media memes, etc. We all know who the culprits are. Rush Limbaugh and Roger Ailes.