[–] MrMongoose 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
There will never be a single party. If the Republicans go belly-up the Democrats will just split in to two factions.
What I'd like to see is the Republican party split in to two separate parties. The social conservatives and the libertarians. I think the libertarian party could actually be respectable and bring something useful to the political discussion of not weighed down by (what I consider to be) the dead weight of the religious right. You'd still have plenty of the family values types getting elected to Congress from the Midwest and southern states - but the presidential elections would regain some of their sanity, at least.
[–] BoiseNTheHood 2 points 1 point 3 points (+3|-2) ago
Can we please just get rid of the antiquated concept of political parties altogether? If you can't stand on your own merits and need an organization to tell you what your opinion is on the issues, you have no business being an elected official.
[–] didntsayeeeee 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
The moment you get rid of political parties, all these independent-minded new folks we have elected will start forming alliances. Because how else are you going to pass anything through a house that requires a majority vote? Pretty soon they'll be swapping support on one issue for support on another. You'll have political parties back again by the end of the week.
[–] MrMongoose 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Correct. Political parties are the natural resting point in which our system will always come to rest. The system didn't get this way by random chance. Politicians evolved by setting what does and doesn't work within the confines of the system and this is what we ended up with. The only solution would be to change the rules - which would be difficult at best.
MAYBE there could be more than two parties. That's the best case scenario, IMO.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
[–] didntsayeeeee ago
It took Civil War conditions for that to happen, and much as people like to talk up the crises of the day things aren't nearly that fucked.
Ultimately the Republican Party brand has a lot of sticking power, I don't think it's going anywhere. Still, things could change under the hood.
[–] MrMongoose 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
The thing you have to remember is that the GOP doesn't believe in government. What's their motivation for making it work? OTOH they can break shit and come back and say 'See? Government doesn't work. We told you so!'
[–] MarcoVincenzo 1 point 3 points 4 points (+4|-1) ago
The Electoral College almost requires a two-party system, but the Whigs were replaced by the Republicans almost wholesale so it could happen again. What I'm wondering is, if it does happen, what are the Democrats going to morph into to oppose it?
[–] MrMongoose 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
It depends on what exactly they are opposing. If it's far-right social conservatism, the Dems will go more libertarian to pick up the middle. If it's the libertarian wing of the Republican party that ends up in control then Dems probably won't move too much from where they are now. Maybe have some slightly more religious candidates in some of the Bible-belt parts of the country.
[–] newoldwave [S] 3 points 3 points 6 points (+6|-3) ago
The stoggy old GOP is being shown the door. Two non-politicians and only sorta Republicans are leading the way in Iowa. Trump has tossed down the gauntlet and told the GOP he'll either do it with them or without them
[–] newoldwave [S] ago
I haven't gotten to the Democrats yet, but they're betting on a lame horse and just don't get it.
[–] knowsguy 6 points 1 point 7 points (+7|-6) ago
Such a tired and unsubstantiated claim.
Yes, both parties primarily prioritize the interests of their corporate donors above Joe Average.
Besides that clear similarity, there are other areas where they are clearly different.
I'd rather have a democrat in office or congress if I'm gay,
or if I'm a woman who chooses contraception or to end an unwanted pregnancy,
or if I'm an unskilled worker who would like more than $8.50,
or if I want to be protected from dangerous work conditions,
etc...
[–] postmortem 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
100% true.
Prairie fires start like this. Lots of little embers that get a little bigger when the wind is just right. Then next thing you know 2 fires become 1 bigger. And it just keeps going until 5000 buffalo come rage-assing at you.
But by that time, yer fucked.
[–] Wolph 4 points 17 points 21 points (+21|-4) ago
America is not going to tolerate religion and politics together for much longer. Young intellectuals will eventually realize they don't like their money being taken by an incompetent government, they will be more likely to go republican if there is no religious core to the party. Sad, but it's true.
[–] purr 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago (edited ago)
I'm a young intellectual who doesn't mix my religion with my politics. I'm not a Republican, but a libertarian. You say that people who don't want their money taken by the government will vote Republican, meaning that people will think that the Republicans support low taxes and small government. However, the public should not be misled: this is not true of most Republicans. This mises.org article and this creators.com article provide some evidence.
edit: Add that the public should not be misled.
[–] Almightyzentaco ago
You seem to be under the impression that voters actually get a say in what happens
[–] YourDumbWhat 4 points 0 points 4 points (+4|-4) ago
"Young intellectuals" is not a significant demographic in the rural south.
Yeah, urban centers are much more progressive, and there are more people in urban areas than rural, however, due to the way districts are gerrymandered for the house and how the senate is designed to be in general, by and large, one rural vote carries more weight than one urban vote. As such, it will take much more than a simple majority to shift American politics away from the current status quo.
The evangelical demographic is still strong, and I don't see it disappearing any time soon. And they are the demographic most likely to not give a hoot about money corrupting politics so long as their corrupt representative continue to mark off all the relevant "he's just like me" (but really isn't) boxes.
[–] Wolph 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
With more and more people going to college and getting degrees we most certainly have a 'Young intellectual' demographic. Millennials are the upcoming generation of workers and parents, they're emotional, and they pride themselves on intellectualism. If you need any more proof of their existence, visit the r/politics on Reddit. The evangelical demo is strong for now, but their opinions and ideals are completely dismissed by these 'young intellectuals', who have been conditioned to dismiss religion as a cavemen esque fairy tale. To them, being a Christian means you dismiss science, education, logic, and common sense.
[–] bulksalty ago
It wouldn't shock me if the African Americans (who tend to be quite religious and surprisingly socially conservative in many ways) joined with the evangelical/culture warrior vote (all three about 13% of voters) to form a populist, socially conservative party. Replacing most of the Republican vote, but also a healthy portion (20-25%) of the Democratic vote. If they pull Latinos, Catholics that's right in the same neighborhood as either major party, and the three big groups are pretty upset at the major parties at the moment.