Third Party Rising

[speeds]

Thanks for the info, DC. Takes me back to Mrs. Donofrio's 11th grade US History. Spent most of that class watching A&E Biography and the movie Glory.

There's four major parties in Canada and in recent years minority governments have been the norm, even with the PM making an election call in 08 when it seemed like good timing for the Conservative Party (they were beaten 165-143 seats but the other parties are reluctant to form a coalition resulting in a minority Conservative gov't again). Had the Liberals, Democrats, and BlocQ decided to band together they would've formed the majority and taken the election but the are unwilling to compromise with each other. A LibDem party alone might've taken enough votes from the Bloc to beat the "small-c" Conservatives but no bones to that, either.

I'm trying to imagine how a multi-party system would work in the US considering even majority governments seem extremely contentious since, shit, Nixon I guess. Long before my time.

 

[speeds]

Hey, take it easy on Pelosi and Reid!

 

[Colonel Ronan]

HOLY SHIT SPEEDS! THIS IS FUCKING WEIRD!

 

[speeds]

HOLY SHIT SPEEDS! THIS IS FUCKING WEIRD!

That bird comes down from your attic and looms over you while you sleep, Ronan.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

That bird comes down from your attic and looms over you while you sleep, Ronan.

Aw, how cute! But really, I used that exact pic in another thread and clicked on this one right after. Bricks were shat.

 

[Denny Crane]

Thanks for the info, DC. Takes me back to Mrs. Donofrio's 11th grade US History. Spent most of that class watching A&E Biography and the movie Glory.

There's four major parties in Canada and in recent years minority governments have been the norm, even with the PM making an election call in 08 when it seemed like good timing for the Conservative Party (they were beaten 165-143 seats but the other parties are reluctant to form a coalition resulting in a minority Conservative gov't again). Had the Liberals, Democrats, and BlocQ decided to band together they would've formed the majority and taken the election but the are unwilling to compromise with each other. A LibDem party alone might've taken enough votes from the Bloc to beat the "small-c" Conservatives but no bones to that, either.

I'm trying to imagine how a multi-party system would work in the US considering even majority governments seem extremely contentious since, shit, Nixon I guess. Long before my time.

We rarely have majority governments. Bush was president for 8 years, 2 of them with congress run by the other party. Clinton was president for 8 years, 2 of them with his party in control of congress. GHW Bush had opposition party in control of congress his 4 years. Reagan had opposition house for 8 years, opposition senate for 2. Jimmy Carter had 4 years with his party in control of it all.

We actually seem to do a lot better with divided govt. - one party controls congress the other the presidency - and that's quite unlike a parliamentary system.

How would 3 parties rule together? On each and every bit of legislation, some combination of people from the three parties would have to form a majority (enough votes) to pass it.

When it comes to who gets to be speaker of the house or the various committee chairmen, they'd surely come to some sort of arrangement (2 of the parties gang up on the other).

It all boils down to something that's in common with democracies everywhere. Count your votes, and don't hold a vote unless you're sure you have enough.

 

[barfo]

But someone else does?? The fact is, the only group out there right now with a chance at being a third party is the Tea Party, and yet Friedman didn't mention it.

I think that Friedman was saying that a third party could form, not that one was forming.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

I think that Friedman was saying that a third party could form, not that one was forming.

barfo

I think he was saying that at least two third parties are forming, one from west coast, one from east coast.

I suppose the one formed second would be the fourth party.

Like being the fourth marxist brother.

 

[barfo]

I think he was saying that at least two third parties are forming, one from west coast, one from east coast.

I'll take your word for it. I only skimmed the article on an airplane. Seems like a weird thesis though. Maybe I better go read the piece.

I suppose the one formed second would be the fourth party.

Like being the fourth marxist brother.

The fourth one gets all the girls.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

I'll take your word for it. I only skimmed the article on an airplane. Seems like a weird thesis though. Maybe I better go read the piece.

See post #18 in this thread. I quote the relevant part of his article.

The fourth one gets all the girls.

barfo

That would be farto.

 

[barfo]

That would be farto.

Exactly. That fat bastard farto. What is it about him?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Exactly. That fat bastard farto. What is it about him?

barfo

His farts smell like roses, of course.

 

[barfo]

See post #18 in this thread. I quote the relevant part of his article.

I see. That sounds like "I was at two cocktail parties, one on the east coast, and one on the west, where people talked positively about third parties after I brought the subject up."

barfo

 

[barfo]

His farts smell like roses, of course.

Roses are gassy,
Violets are P.U.,
farto gets girls,
Marxists rule you!

barfo

 

[hasoos]

Clearly, for a third party to be viable, it will have to be one with moderate views and leaders that aren't mean, ignorant or just plain stupid.

That pretty much rules out the Tea Party.

 

[Denny Crane]

I see. That sounds like "I was at two cocktail parties, one on the east coast, and one on the west, where people talked positively about third parties after I brought the subject up."

barfo

He's certainly a lot better connected than someone overhearing something at a cocktail party. He calls them SERIOUS GROUPS.

 

[barfo]

He's certainly a lot better connected than someone overhearing something at a cocktail party. He calls them SERIOUS GROUPS.

Well, if he used the CAPITAL LETTERS, it must be serious.

barfo

 

[speeds]

We rarely have majority governments. Bush was president for 8 years, 2 of them with congress run by the other party. Clinton was president for 8 years, 2 of them with his party in control of congress. GHW Bush had opposition party in control of congress his 4 years. Reagan had opposition house for 8 years, opposition senate for 2. Jimmy Carter had 4 years with his party in control of it all.

We actually seem to do a lot better with divided govt. - one party controls congress the other the presidency - and that's quite unlike a parliamentary system.

How would 3 parties rule together? On each and every bit of legislation, some combination of people from the three parties would have to form a majority (enough votes) to pass it.

When it comes to who gets to be speaker of the house or the various committee chairmen, they'd surely come to some sort of arrangement (2 of the parties gang up on the other).

It all boils down to something that's in common with democracies everywhere. Count your votes, and don't hold a vote unless you're sure you have enough.

Sorry when I said majority I meant majority as in, well never mind two different systems I guess.

 

[Minstrel]

He's certainly a lot better connected than someone overhearing something at a cocktail party. He calls them SERIOUS GROUPS.

If he had called them "srs bsns," I'd be convinced.

 

[MARIS61]

But someone else does?? The fact is, the only group out there right now with a chance at being a third party is the Tea Party, and yet Friedman didn't mention it.

It's not a 3rd party, it's just the more gullible portion of the Republican party being told they are something different.

When the time comes, they will fall back in line and vote as they're instructed to.

 

[boatsandstars]

I think it's hilarious when people lambast the Times and then when they write one thing the like, they say "finally, they get it."

 

[Denny Crane]

I think it's hilarious when people lambast the Times and then when they write one thing the like, they say "finally, they get it."

What a gem. In any case, it seems only Thomas Friedman gets it, not "they"