New Libertarian In Duh House

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
New Libertarian In Duh House

2008-05-14 18:34:57

Liberal-Sl@yer: Certified BF2S Asshole; +131|6879|The edge of sanity

The fact is that Americans are drawn into party lines because of the appeal of being part of a group. The bigger the group the more likely that someone is to join that group for the satisfaction of being in a group. This leads to the drawing of people into parties in which they really are out of place.
I, personally, identify most with the libertarian party and will probably join someday, but I have done research on why I want to join this party. Research into why you identify with a party is what is lacking in American politics, and why the two party system has dominated American politics throughout its history. If more Americans were to research into why they want to join a party then we would most likely see a rise in third party activity, especially the libertarian party because of the appeal of being an advocate of all around freedoms, economically and politically.

2008-05-14 18:37:58

Marinejuana: local; +415|7008|Seattle

CommieChipmunk wrote:
lol at parties making us think that we're voting for different things

Plutocracies

2008-05-14 18:46:45

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6870|Chicago, IL

lol third parties

our system is such that only two parties can exist. If a third party becomes popular, one of the two major parties simply pirates its position, and effectively eliminates it.

This does not mean that third parties are useless, but it may be more effective to lobby for change within an established party than join a third party.

2008-05-14 18:51:55

Liberal-Sl@yer: Certified BF2S Asshole; +131|6879|The edge of sanity

S.Lythberg wrote:
lol third parties

our system is such that only two parties can exist. If a third party becomes popular, one of the two major parties simply pirates its position, and effectively eliminates it.

This does not mean that third parties are useless, but it may be more effective to lobby for change within an established party than join a third party.

Depends on what position you are trying to take. Some positions that are in third parties are outlawed by both of the reigning parties.

2008-05-14 18:53:02

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6870|Chicago, IL

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:
S.Lythberg wrote:
lol third parties

our system is such that only two parties can exist. If a third party becomes popular, one of the two major parties simply pirates its position, and effectively eliminates it.

This does not mean that third parties are useless, but it may be more effective to lobby for change within an established party than join a third party.
Depends on what position you are trying to take. Some positions that are in third parties are outlawed by both of the reigning parties.

like responsible spending?

2008-05-14 18:54:18

Liberal-Sl@yer: Certified BF2S Asshole; +131|6879|The edge of sanity

S.Lythberg wrote:
Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:
S.Lythberg wrote:
lol third parties

our system is such that only two parties can exist. If a third party becomes popular, one of the two major parties simply pirates its position, and effectively eliminates it.

This does not mean that third parties are useless, but it may be more effective to lobby for change within an established party than join a third party.
Depends on what position you are trying to take. Some positions that are in third parties are outlawed by both of the reigning parties.
like responsible spending?

Yes, as well as anyhting anti-religion, or anti-global warming (spark I don't want a debate just giving an example).

2008-05-14 18:56:19

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6870|Chicago, IL

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:
S.Lythberg wrote:
Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

Depends on what position you are trying to take. Some positions that are in third parties are outlawed by both of the reigning parties.
like responsible spending?
Yes, as well as anyhting anti-religion, or anti-global warming (spark I don't want a debate just giving an example).

An anti-religion stance in one of the major parties would be good for our nation, it would call out some of the hypocracy and idiocy of the fundamentalist right that is ruining the Republican party.

2008-05-14 18:59:55

Liberal-Sl@yer: Certified BF2S Asshole; +131|6879|The edge of sanity

S.Lythberg wrote:
Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:
S.Lythberg wrote:

like responsible spending?
Yes, as well as anyhting anti-religion, or anti-global warming (spark I don't want a debate just giving an example).
An anti-religion stance in one of the major parties would be good for our nation, it would call out some of the hypocracy and idiocy of the fundamentalist right that is ruining the Republican party.

Only in the republican party?

2008-05-14 19:01:54

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6870|Chicago, IL

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:
S.Lythberg wrote:
Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

Yes, as well as anyhting anti-religion, or anti-global warming (spark I don't want a debate just giving an example).
An anti-religion stance in one of the major parties would be good for our nation, it would call out some of the hypocracy and idiocy of the fundamentalist right that is ruining the Republican party.
Only in the republican party?

well, it's hurting Obama, but it seems to have totally hijacked the Republican party.

2008-05-14 19:17:00

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7130|67.222.138.85

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:
S.Lythberg wrote:
Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

Yes, as well as anyhting anti-religion, or anti-global warming (spark I don't want a debate just giving an example).
An anti-religion stance in one of the major parties would be good for our nation, it would call out some of the hypocracy and idiocy of the fundamentalist right that is ruining the Republican party.
Only in the republican party?

The Democratic party is not anywhere near as reliant on the bible-thumper vote.

2008-05-14 19:20:51

Deadmonkiefart: Floccinaucinihilipilificator; +177|7129

FallenMorgan wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
FallenMorgan wrote:
The libertarians support a smaller government, with lower state control. The United States really is becoming sort of statist in the way the government makes laws that creep into our daily lives. Americans are sort of stupid, mostly because they don't take responsibility for their own actions and learn from the concequences, mostly. You ride a bike without a helmet, you get a ticket, you ride a bike again without a helmet, you get another ticket, then oneday your skull splits down the middle in a terrible accident. Otherwise, you'd maybe ride a bike with no handlebars, and fall and maybe get some bruises, then you put handlebars on your freaking bike!

Many laws are against victimless or non-violent crimes. Prison systems mix non-violent and violent offenders, and thus turn non-violent people who made a mistake into, potentially, violent people with Nazi tattoos. Now that they're trying to tell people how to educate their children and what they can and cannot do with their bodies, the state's power is growing, especially with the Patriot Act.

A funny thing about the Patriot Act is that the number of terrorism procecutions is far less than the amount of wire-tappings and the like. Also, the Republican Party used to be really small. The Libertarians just need the boost they got, and I believe it may have to do with McCain. A lot of people actually voted for Huckabee in the primaries, though, McCain is less conservative, and the people who voted for Huckabee were conservatives. All we can hope for is a schism within one of the greater Parties.
Ideals mean zero without popular opinion to back it up. You had less of the popular vote than Nader in 2004, and your paper card and $25 isn't going to change anything.
That's really what sucks. As long as America is full of Conservatives and the like, the Libertarians have little chance. It's just one reason why living in a large country sucks. If McCain wins I'll consider moving to Canada, and hopefully pass through Milton, Washington to pick up my online friend, since she'd probably feel the same about McCain.

If McCaine wins? If any of those three win, you're getting the same person in a different suit.

2008-05-14 19:22:48

Liberal-Sl@yer: Certified BF2S Asshole; +131|6879|The edge of sanity

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:
S.Lythberg wrote:

An anti-religion stance in one of the major parties would be good for our nation, it would call out some of the hypocracy and idiocy of the fundamentalist right that is ruining the Republican party.
Only in the republican party?
The Democratic party is not anywhere near as reliant on the bible-thumper vote.

Albeit true, how likely would the democrats adopt a position that is agianst religion?

2008-05-14 19:48:37

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7024|132 and Bush

S.Lythberg wrote:
lol third parties

our system is such that only two parties can exist. If a third party becomes popular, one of the two major parties simply pirates its position, and effectively eliminates it.

This does not mean that third parties are useless, but it may be more effective to lobby for change within an established party than join a third party.

There was a time not too long ago when Republicans were the third party choice and Democrats took a back seat to the Federalist and Whig party. Complacency has led us to believe that the two party system is inevitable. 232 years is a relatively short time to count all other options out. Voters are growing tired of the choices they are presented with. These changes do not happen overnight. History will determine how long we are willing to accept incompetence and corruption.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-05-14 20:17:56

FallenMorgan: Member; +53|6337|Glendale, CA

Deadmonkiefart wrote:
FallenMorgan wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Ideals mean zero without popular opinion to back it up. You had less of the popular vote than Nader in 2004, and your paper card and $25 isn't going to change anything.
That's really what sucks. As long as America is full of Conservatives and the like, the Libertarians have little chance. It's just one reason why living in a large country sucks. If McCain wins I'll consider moving to Canada, and hopefully pass through Milton, Washington to pick up my online friend, since she'd probably feel the same about McCain.
If McCaine wins? If any of those three win, you're getting the same person in a different suit.

Hilary isn't a grizzled old man...possibly.

2008-05-14 21:02:47

liquix: Member; +51|6877|Peoples Republic of Portland

Cool for you man. The various third parties have been growing quite a lot lately, Nader for example gouged valuable votes in the 2000/2004 elections and that certainly swayed things. Probably for the worse, as it's generally easier to adopt a dem than a repub to the Green party; but the point still stands. Libertarian party just closed up their office here in Beaverton Oregon, which was really a bummer, and I'm not even a Libertarian. I'm a fan of the triumvirate system, would be nice to have a triplet of elected presidents. One from the Three major parties.

Maybe to solve disputes they could battle royale, or American Gladiator Ball-gun fight

Last edited by liquix (2008-05-14 21:03:36)

2008-05-14 21:11:32

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7130|67.222.138.85

liquix wrote:
Cool for you man. The various third parties have been growing quite a lot lately, Nader for example gouged valuable votes in the 2000/2004 elections and that certainly swayed things. Probably for the worse, as it's generally easier to adopt a dem than a repub to the Green party; but the point still stands. Libertarian party just closed up their office here in Beaverton Oregon, which was really a bummer, and I'm not even a Libertarian. I'm a fan of the triumvirate system, would be nice to have a triplet of elected presidents. One from the Three major parties.

Maybe to solve disputes they could battle royale, or American Gladiator Ball-gun fight

The three majors parties would be?

2008-05-14 21:16:29

Deadmonkiefart: Floccinaucinihilipilificator; +177|7129

Right now, they would be the Democratic-Republicans, the Libertarians and the Green-Party.

2008-05-14 21:19:54

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7130|67.222.138.85

Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Right now, they would be the Democratic-Republicans, the Libertarians and the Green-Party.

Don't jest. They may have beaten the Libertarians in the last election, but they still got less than half of a percent of the vote.

2008-05-14 21:43:45

FallenMorgan: Member; +53|6337|Glendale, CA

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Right now, they would be the Democratic-Republicans, the Libertarians and the Green-Party.
Don't jest. They may have beaten the Libertarians in the last election, but they still got less than half of a percent of the vote.

The third parties make up less than 1% of the votes, which is very sad.

All we can hope for is some kind of schism within one of the major parties.

2008-05-14 21:51:21

Deadmonkiefart: Floccinaucinihilipilificator; +177|7129

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Right now, they would be the Democratic-Republicans, the Libertarians and the Green-Party.
Don't jest. They may have beaten the Libertarians in the last election, but they still got less than half of a percent of the vote.

I'm not kidding.
The point I was trying to make was that the Democrats and Republicans are becoming pretty much the same party.

2008-05-14 22:10:39

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|7104|Disaster Free Zone

FallenMorgan wrote:
In 2000 the LP got .04% of the popular vote, and in 2004 we got .32% of the popular vote.

OMG, Wow. I knew 'third parties' never stand a chance of winning, but .32% of the votes... that's pathetic.

This is the first preference outcome of our election last year.

Party	Votes	% votes	Swing
Liberal	4,506,236	36.28	-4.19
Australian Labor Party	5,388,147	43.38	+5.74
The Greens	967,781	7.79	+0.60
The Nationals	682,424	5.49	-0.40
Family First	246,792	1.99	-0.02
Democrats	89,810	0.72	-0.52
One Nation	32,650	0.26	-0.93
CDP Christian Party	104,705	0.84	+0.22
Citizens Electoral Council	27,879	0.22	-0.14
CLP - The Territory Party	40,298	0.32	-0.02
Socialist Alliance	9,973	0.08	-0.04
The Fishing Party	2,083	0.02	+0.00
DLP - Democratic Labor Party	6,018	0.05	+0.04
Climate Change Coalition	9,470	0.08	+0.08
Conservatives for Climate and Environment Incorporated	3,239	0.03	+0.03
Liberty and Democracy Party	17,041	0.14	+0.14
Non-Custodial Parents Party	795	0.01	+0.00
Socialist Equality Party	4,283	0.03	+0.03
What Women Want (Australia)	3,870	0.03	+0.03
Independent	275,135	2.22	-0.24
Non Affiliated	1,234	0.01	-0.02

At least in Australia the minor parties still control some power and in a lot of cases are the ones which control the deciding votes for bills getting passed.

2008-05-14 22:19:49

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7024|132 and Bush

Majority rule is now a bad thing? ^^

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-05-14 22:28:28

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|7104|Disaster Free Zone

Kmarion wrote:
Majority rule is now a bad thing? ^^

monopolies or duopolies are a bad thing.

2008-05-14 22:32:21

FallenMorgan: Member; +53|6337|Glendale, CA

DrunkFace wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Majority rule is now a bad thing? ^^
monopolies or duopolies are a bad thing.

Yes. If the Republicans win they basically get a monopoly on America. Here's a sort of humor-ish idea:

Split the nation in two in a sort of dualist type thing. One side is more for Liberals, while another is for Conservatives.

2008-05-15 02:16:00

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6834|'Murka

FallenMorgan wrote:
DrunkFace wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Majority rule is now a bad thing? ^^
monopolies or duopolies are a bad thing.
Yes. If the Republicans win they basically get a monopoly on America. Here's a sort of humor-ish idea:

Split the nation in two in a sort of dualist type thing. One side is more for Liberals, while another is for Conservatives.

But it doesn't work that way if the Democrats win?

If the Dems win in November, retain their majority in the House and finally get a majority in the Senate...we'll have the same thing we had for most of Bush's presidency: a rubber-stamp Congress.

That is a recipe for continued fail.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
New Libertarian In Duh House

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums New Libertarian In Duh House

CommieChipmunk wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

liquix wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Board footer