There is trouble in Iran
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
- Status
C
Chibibar
I know that you can do write in vote for president. So you think it is possible even with electoral college that if 51% of the voters wrote Chibibar for president that I can be president?Shakey said:
GasBandit
Staff member
For the most part, yes, but it's a self-perpetuating system. It's also effectively quashed by the way committee memberships are done. All the procedures for such positions of power within the legislature are based upon the assumption of there being only 2 parties.Shakey said:
The problem is not the people, it is the Two Party System.Shakey said:
It is hard to get a party off the ground. You need to present candidates for office, you need to get them on county, city, and state wide ballots, all the ballots are controlled by public servants that serve one of the two parties. The laws require a high number of signatories on a petition to get candidates on the ticket.It is easy to get signatures if you belong to an established party. Then the third party needs to get the word out about their platform and candidate. Oh, and the TV, radio stations and print media outlets each have loyalties to particular parties. If you can buy space, then you have to pay for it, without having a national party behind you throwing $2,000 a plate fundraisers it is almost impossible to compete against the Goliaths.
It is the system...
There's plenty of blame to spread around, and the people are not exempt from this.sixpackshaker said:
Nah, it's definitively the system. See, if a party needs 51% of the votes to have a say on who is the next president, it quickly defeats the ambition of power that would drive individual factions to make parties. If you had a system based on party alliances, by contrast, smaller parties would have a much bigger say in politics, because if you're the president thanks to your own party and the supporting votes of three minority parties... Damn, you're going to keep those happy too. Spain's system, while far from perfect either, gives much more flexibility to the voter and the politician.
That's one of the things that makes me wonder if it was rigged at all. I'd have thought if they were going to rig an election, they would do a better job of it. And yes, I'm honestly wondering if "it looks too rigged to be rigged."Scarlet Varlet said:
This.Gruebeard said:
That doesn't scream 'rigged' at me. I just assume it means that their software, or calculators, or abacii, or whatever just spat out a projection based on the votes that had already been counted. I've never rigged/ran an election in Iran, so I couldn't tell you if that's what's going on or not. But like I said, numbers going up and/or down don't really concern me on the whole.DarkAudit said:
Case in point: Even the official tally shows that Iranians who voted from outside the country preferred Mousavi. I'm surprised no 'election fraud' yellers have harped on this point.sixpackshaker said:
Not saying it would be a good point to harp on. Just that I expected someone to be harping.
Canada isn't a two party system, (well, kindasorta, but ... ) and you should have heard the cries of anguish when we tried to get a coalition all up in here. Not speaking out against party alliances. They have a place and purpose, and I was rooting for one here in the great white north. But when people aren't familiar with that concept, it just isn't going to fly.Denbrought said:
90% sure he was saying that the American people are largely to blame for what America has become. But bonus points for being tactful.DarkAudit said:
Yeah, I'm pretty sure someone wasn't reading all of the conversation :-P
Also, as others haev said, the US has devolved into a de facto 2 party system - it's not a matter of having a good idea and getting the word out to a few friends; it's money, influence, attention, and so forth. Getting even 5% of all votes with a new party would be a major thing to do, but you'd still have fuck all to say.
Split it up!
- Religious right-wing nutjob party
- Libertarian / extreme freedom and minmalist government party
- Conservative party
- Progressive/social-democratic party
- Liberal party
- Green party
- Some other stuff
:-P
Also, as others haev said, the US has devolved into a de facto 2 party system - it's not a matter of having a good idea and getting the word out to a few friends; it's money, influence, attention, and so forth. Getting even 5% of all votes with a new party would be a major thing to do, but you'd still have fuck all to say.
Split it up!
- Religious right-wing nutjob party
- Libertarian / extreme freedom and minmalist government party
- Conservative party
- Progressive/social-democratic party
- Liberal party
- Green party
- Some other stuff
:-P
J
JCM
If you let your two-party government fuck you in the arse, then wipe up and still demand you pay for it, and you dont-
a) move to another country,
b) vote against the same two-party system
or
c) fight against it,
You are pretty much to blame for allowing them to rape you over and over and say nothing about it, so that does make most americans guilty for the state their country is in, and if this is what Gasbandit is saying, I must say I agree 100%.
Well, to be fair, its still better to be an american and be the bitch of two parties, than be british and have a bloody queen or be brazilian and have your ass owned by the highest bidder.Chibibar said:
And people still ask me why I have multiple citizenship.
Now where did i put that link to that guy mathematically proving that the US's voting system (winning with under 50%) always leads to a 2 party system...
Yeah, but they get to put Royal in front of all sort of neat things... also, you do know she doesn't have much power, right? (she's also the Queen of Canada, Australian and all other Commonwealth countries... don't really mean nothing though).
I
Iaculus
'Doesn't have much power'? Try 'has practically zero'. She's a figurehead and legal lynchpin, nothing more.
And yet she gets to live a life of luxury and do pretty much anything she wants. In fact, anyone related to her gets to do pretty much anything they want.Iaculus said:
She may not have a lot of official power but if the Queen of England asks for something to be done, it'll usually be done.
I
Iaculus
Unless they happen to be in government. The Royals are very carefully-managed - the important ones, at least.AshburnerX said:
damn...Enresshou said:
I
Iaculus
Welp, looks like we've found the board's resident reader of the Daily Express.@Li3n said:
BURN THE WITCH!
J
JCM
Does she weigh as much as a duck?Iaculus said:
C
Chibibar
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_ ... as_nuclear
Well, there is a loophole
So if a ship leave NK has "illegal" cargo and they refuse to be search, you can't do anything can you?
Well, there is a loophole
So if a ship leave NK has "illegal" cargo and they refuse to be search, you can't do anything can you?
P
Papillon
But Canada has a similar voting system (for the legislative branch of government), and we're only down to 4 major parties, after having 5 major parties for awhile. One of the parties (Bloc Quebecois) is a strongly regional party, to which the proof probably doesn't apply, but I don't think it explains why we have 3 other major political parties.@Li3n said:
K
Kitty Sinatra
You're kinda forgetting that Reform and the Bloc were very recent. Most of Canada's federal history involved only 3 parties, and the same 2 have formed every government to this day. We're damn close to being a 2-party nation; but our system supports more far better than the US system.
P
Papillon
Actually, this supports my point: according to the theory referenced above, any plurality voting system should tend to a two party system. In Canada, the opposite has happened. We started with a two party system, the Conservatives and the Liberals. The NDP were formed in the 60's, and then the Bloc has formed more recently. The theory that pluralities tend to two party systems doesn't explain the continued "success" of the NDP.Gruebeard said:
I don't get where people get that we "devolved" into a two party system. It was pretty much that way since the inception of the country and became apart of the presidential elections when George Washington left office.
The closest this country came to having a viable third party, Theodore Roosevelt caused the vote to split, resulting in the least popular ideas and policies to win.
The closest this country came to having a viable third party, Theodore Roosevelt caused the vote to split, resulting in the least popular ideas and policies to win.
- Status