Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Cruz throwing in the towel?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
    This isn't telling me anything about Trump or Cruz.

    If true, it tells me about the GOP itself.
    That tone-deaf cabal of establishment hacks has... perhaps, begun to realize just how irrelevant and out of touch they are, and that the American people are not so ignorant or stupid as they had believed.

    The GOP is incapable of representing the bulk of the people they claim to. Thier sabotage and hostility towards the most popular candidate has proven this, and like any dying man they want to repent... buy a few more years.
    It won't change the fact that the GOP is headed for dissolution, or reduced status as the Centrist Party in the US.
    Its just a matter of time.
    Nonsense.

    We control both sides of Congress, when the House used to be a Dem stronghold for years.

    We hold a majority of governorships, and more state legislatures than the Dems.

    Even Mass has turned purple.

    The GOP has been riding a steadily growing tide of strength over the last twenty+ years, while the Dems have become increasing fragmented and inwardly contentious.

    Pundits have been predicting an end to the two-party system since slavery was an issue.

    Ask yourself: are lobbyists going to be willing to finance three sets of candidates when right now they can pay for two?

    The voters don't call the tune-campaign finance calls the tune, and the people paying the band will not accept a 35%+ raise to the cost of doing business.
    Last edited by Arnold J Rimmer; 20 Jan 16, 13:39.
    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

    Comment


    • #32
      I'd say the rise in independent voters and the demise of unions and other organized political bodies outside the parties themselves says it all. The Republicans and Democrats are doomed if they don't shift course radically.
      The Democrats will become a minority party of the Progressive Left chock-a-block with Socialists and other sort on the hard Left while the Republicans will become a dyslexic concoction of Right Wingers who can't agree on anything.

      Since the Left has historically proved obstinate to change it is really up to the Republicans to reform or be replaced. The Democrats will become the disloyal opposition wanting to toss the Constitution out in favor of a Socialist Democracy of the sort that has undermined the economy and standard of living of so many countries to date.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
        The Republicans and Democrats are doomed if they don't shift course radically.
        No they aren't. As long as big money - whether corporations, PACs, Unions et al, dominate the political process, the parties are safe. No contenders can rustle up enough capital to contend against them. None have the established links with the necessary media and PR conglomerates. None have the necessary national organizations. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy Movement dissipated like farts in the wind for these very reasons.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Skoblin View Post
          No they aren't. As long as big money - whether corporations, PACs, Unions et al, dominate the political process, the parties are safe. No contenders can rustle up enough capital to contend against them. None have the established links with the necessary media and PR conglomerates. None have the necessary national organizations. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy Movement dissipated like farts in the wind for these very reasons.
          I agree completely except about the Tea Party.

          The Tea Party was created for a single purpose; it achieved that purpose (to eliminate certain incumbents) and then faded away.

          The two parties are the only organizations with the national structure of unpaid volunteers required to mount Federal (and some State) level elections. And have the fund-raising ability.

          Like I said before, the people paying for the elections are not going to pay more to get the same effect.
          Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
            I agree completely except about the Tea Party.

            The Tea Party was created for a single purpose; it achieved that purpose (to eliminate certain incumbents) and then faded away.

            The two parties are the only organizations with the national structure of unpaid volunteers required to mount Federal (and some State) level elections. And have the fund-raising ability.

            Like I said before, the people paying for the elections are not going to pay more to get the same effect.
            My Mom is on the demoscat mailing list. You should see the mail that we get. (Those mean republicans are shutting down social security yet again...)

            The truth of the matter is anyone even suggesting that would be commiting political suicide. Yet like clockwork the begging continues. We keep accepting the mail for the humor factor and it costs them money...

            Every penny counts.
            Credo quia absurdum.


            Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
              Pundits have been predicting an end to the two-party system since slavery was an issue.
              Funny you should mention that-

              1860 Election Results
              Candidate Party Electoral Votes Popular Votes

              Abraham Lincoln Republican 180 1,866,452

              John C. Breckinridge SouthernDemocratic 72 847,953

              John Bell Constitutional Union 39 592,906

              Stephen A. Douglas Democratic 12 1,382,713


              I count 4, and there were more on the fringes.

              Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
              The voters don't call the tune-campaign finance calls the tune, and the people paying the band will not accept a 35%+ raise to the cost of doing business.
              So... Representative Democracy is stone-cold Dead, and anyone who wants to can ignore the wishes of their Rulers on that basis?

              If that's not the case, if there is any hope, we have to at least try.
              War may be inevitable, everywhere in this nasty old world, but I would prefer to put it off a little while.
              Last edited by The Exorcist; 20 Jan 16, 17:05.
              "Why is the Rum gone?"

              -Captain Jack

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                War may be inevitable, everywhere in this nasty old world, but I would prefer to put it off a little while.
                Amen to that. Why is it those who've never seen the elephant want to???
                Credo quia absurdum.


                Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                  Amen to that. Why is it those who've never seen the elephant want to???
                  Boredom?
                  "Why is the Rum gone?"

                  -Captain Jack

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                    So... Representative Democracy is stone-cold Dead, and anyone who wants to can ignore the wishes of their Rulers on that basis?
                    The simple fact is that it costs millions to run for a Federal and many state-level offices. Without that money you cannot reach the slender margin of voters who actually bother to vote.

                    Not only do you need money, but you need a grassroots organization, trained and ready to get out there and stump for you. Only two organizations have that capability: the GOP and Dems.

                    There is absolutely no incentive for the powers-that-be to change that structure, and every reason not to change it.

                    The voters choose the candidates they wish from the ballot. But the men with the money and the organization choose the names which go upon the ballot.

                    Like I noted: the GOP is doing better than it has in my lifetime.

                    And the two-party system is not going anywhere, because there is no political or financial reason for it to change. Especially given the growing apathy amongst voters.
                    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Skoblin View Post
                      No they aren't. As long as big money - whether corporations, PACs, Unions et al, dominate the political process, the parties are safe. No contenders can rustle up enough capital to contend against them. None have the established links with the necessary media and PR conglomerates. None have the necessary national organizations. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy Movement dissipated like farts in the wind for these very reasons.
                      They are as the parties they now are. They may continue to be the major players for some time to come but if they can't maintain registration numbers they will become effectively minority parties vying for votes from non-members.
                      I really think the Democrats have the worst of that. As they move further Left, they are getting into the range where about 20% of the voters would affiliate with them full time. The Republicans are more likely to sit at around 30% as things are going with 50% or more (a slim majority) not affiliated with either party.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                        The simple fact is that it costs millions to run for a Federal and many state-level offices. Without that money you cannot reach the slender margin of voters who actually bother to vote.

                        Not only do you need money, but you need a grassroots organization, trained and ready to get out there and stump for you. Only two organizations have that capability: the GOP and Dems.

                        There is absolutely no incentive for the powers-that-be to change that structure, and every reason not to change it.

                        The voters choose the candidates they wish from the ballot. But the men with the money and the organization choose the names which go upon the ballot.

                        Like I noted: the GOP is doing better than it has in my lifetime.

                        And the two-party system is not going anywhere, because there is no political or financial reason for it to change. Especially given the growing apathy amongst voters.
                        Which is amusing, since the voters are content to sustain this system. They're happily resigned to it because, hey, my vote might be irrelevant and I despise the major parties, but wasting my vote for them is better than wasting my vote on someone who can't win.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                          The simple fact is that it costs millions to run for a Federal and many state-level offices. Without that money you cannot reach the slender margin of voters who actually bother to vote.

                          Not only do you need money, but you need a grassroots organization, trained and ready to get out there and stump for you. Only two organizations have that capability: the GOP and Dems.

                          There is absolutely no incentive for the powers-that-be to change that structure, and every reason not to change it.

                          The voters choose the candidates they wish from the ballot. But the men with the money and the organization choose the names which go upon the ballot.

                          Like I noted: the GOP is doing better than it has in my lifetime.

                          And the two-party system is not going anywhere, because there is no political or financial reason for it to change. Especially given the growing apathy amongst voters.
                          Look, al of that is true, as far as it goes.
                          But none of it explains Trump's huge popularity and his consistently high ratings, or the fact that he could be the first Republican since Reagan to take New York.

                          And he has millions, he has people on the ground and he hasn't even bothered to start a massive Commercial campaign yet.
                          Not bad, eh?

                          And I only listed the top 4 from 1860, there were more, and I showed that to demonstrate that the 2-party system is not immortal and it hasn't been carved in stone since day one. The lifetime of an Empire is just as limited as that of a Mayfly or a Star.... but if they believe what you say they will just keep cruising along thinking themselves immortal and untouchable.
                          And that kind of attitude is the kiss of death in the real world.
                          "Why is the Rum gone?"

                          -Captain Jack

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                            Which is amusing, since the voters are content to sustain this system. They're happily resigned to it because, hey, my vote might be irrelevant and I despise the major parties, but wasting my vote for them is better than wasting my vote on someone who can't win.
                            Americans have despised the party system from the beginning of the Republic, but it did not stop the Framers and Founders from establishing the parties. The reason only two major parties exist is that there simply is no room in the body politic for more than two. Now, if one of the two drift to far to their wing, then a third party may come into being and send that party the way of the do-do. It has happened before. The Whigs replaced the Federalists, and the Republicans replaced the Whigs. Currently both parties are trending to the wings, so it will be interesting to see which breaks first.

                            Tuebor

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                              Look, al of that is true, as far as it goes.
                              But none of it explains Trump's huge popularity and his consistently high ratings, or the fact that he could be the first Republican since Reagan to take New York.

                              And he has millions, he has people on the ground and he hasn't even bothered to start a massive Commercial campaign yet.
                              Not bad, eh?
                              He has access to GOP assets on the ground, whom he has been cultivating for years. I know, because I'm part of those grass-roots assets.

                              As to his campaign, his expenditures are public record. He has spent megabucks on media outreach. Likewise, look at his funding.

                              But as long as being President equates into a privilege for billionaires, sure, its a ray of hope...

                              Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                              And I only listed the top 4 from 1860, there were more, and I showed that to demonstrate that the 2-party system is not immortal and it hasn't been carved in stone since day one. The lifetime of an Empire is just as limited as that of a Mayfly or a Star.... but if they believe what you say they will just keep cruising along thinking themselves immortal and untouchable.
                              And that kind of attitude is the kiss of death in the real world.
                              Its inapplicable. Today's USA is far different from the 1860s. It costs millions of dollars to run a national or even large state campaign, and a grassroots organization. That is a simple fact of economics.

                              The people who finance such things are not going to be willing to increase their costs. That's a fact. The voters don't pay the bills, nor do they vote for candidates who do not have the funding to reach them.

                              Nor are more parties a means for better government. What multiple parties means is more committee compromise to raise sufficient votes to pass a bill through Congress, less power within a given party to effect change, and greater power to the Federal bureaucracy.
                              Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X