Very little separates both parties. Both r consumed in a power struggle. Its a capitalist battle either party uses chameleon tactics at will to sway voters. There is a lack of full political options to vote for. Jesse Ventura stated abolish parties n vote for ppl. Research n vote your conscience n not a choice of 2 tigers with differing stripes. Problem is that makes too much sense.
america should become a demogracy. your vote doesnt really count if you dont live in a swing state. and only two parties? what if i dont like either?
Cracker define what you mean by democracy. One man one vote on all issues ? Nothing would ever get done. It sort of worked for a time in one small city state where only a small group was actually allowed to vote. By the way that city was later destroyed by it's rivals after it tried to build an empire. Republican democracy is what America has now while the uk has parliamentary democracy like other parts of Europe.
let each individual have a vote, if in a state 49 votes D and 51% R, the 49% of that state basicly has no vote right? doesnt seem ok.
Agree Crack. Full options r not available. Swing states sway power. Parliamentary govt was from the Vikings. Basically heads of clans Thanes held council n consummated ways to rule their ppl. From there governing took root n evolved in various forms other than church run nations. One reason i hold that that church n state r separate n have no business mixing, but that hardly applies to the US since E Pluribus Unum was replaced by In God We Trust.
I'm pretty sure that the president is elected with an electoral college not by who has the most campaign contributions Now let's look at the electoral college it's not right for a person to win 5 states and become president when the majority of the country is saying otherwise
Voting should be done on a percentage system rather than an arbitrary system... [here are some made up numbers] Say 64% of the U.S. Votes for democrats and only 36% of US vote for republicans then then democrats should in theory win due to the overall numbers. However the current system, because it is in states the votes are counted and then given a red or blue color in that state. You then count the Reds and blues even though more people voted for the Reds because there are more people in their states... Not sure if I'm clear or not been helpful but basically, it should be based on an entire scale and not a state scale. The same is true in other countries like the UK, most people did not vote for the party in power. But due to constituencies turning their color due to those few people then the conservatives got in. But there are a heck of a lot more parties in the UK so is more complicated... Sorry for wall of text :/
This is capitalism. Capitalism works fine in a scenario with unlimited borders and ressources. But in limited scenarios it will destroy the host (earth) like parasites do. I know that socialism and communism doesnt work (although there never has been REAL communism just countries that called themselves so), too because of humans nature beeing greedy. But pure capitalism is absolutely decadent and destructive. We need some kind of hybrid with restrictions and rules. Its not only an American problem this exists all over the world. Its only very drastical in the USA. Rich become richer. This will lead either to a collapse and some Kind of a worldwide civil-war, anarchy and maybe a revolution in the best case. Or in the worst case we will get a dystopical system with 60-80% being slaves, some 10-20% controllers and the Rest will be 24/7 celebrating Elite which noone Even know who they are, where they live and what they do. Like in 1984 or Even worse. The us- System supports asocial, selfish ellbow-hardliners which give a xxx about starving children, dieing oceans and forests. The world actually is led by bad humans thats my opinion.
Parliamentary govt is seats. The party collecting the most seats governs with their leader being Prime Minister. Seats r constituencies decided by a formula of populace n area. The Commons. The Senate is appointed in generally is cronyism most often. England its the House of Lords. Govt can be formed as either a majority or a minority govt. A vote of confidence can come into real play in a minority govt. Usually results in the 3 parties collaborating more. Winner makes up his cabinet of ministers n appoints the Attorney General n Speaker of the House. The Attorney General was the Queens rep before Canada was given permission to form its own constitution n govern ourselves without the Queen/King consent. We r still a part of the Commonwealth but not obligated under the same when a call to war by England. Before we were obligated to supply our share of soldiers per capita in all efforts of war and resources that England entered into. We also had our share of costs whether to fund the war or for reparations. Newfoundland could not meet its tab for WW II n was given the option of pay or join the Dominion of Canada. It then became our last province out of necessity. Ballz said the Queen if i had them I'd be King
You are right but thats not the point. The governments in most "democratic" systems have almost nothing to say. They are just puppets or maybe some kind of firewall for the real deciders. Those are Banks, lobbyists, and industrial/economical bosses. Those dont care about our planet or the people. They only see their wealth.
I edited more into that post. Yes governing is a fence for power brokers n lobbyists. As for not caring about the environment thats untrue. Right wing parties r capitalists n do not feel obligated to be stewards of the earth generally speaking. During negotiations on the Kyoto Accord Canada was prominent about agreeing to carbon taxes. The US was not. The bottom line rules.
You can have a mix system. In Japan like America, each voting district first electing a person directly from each district. Then, however, we have proportional representation of about 100 seats. If party X didn't elect anyone directly but 5% of the population voted for party X, then party X can send 5 of its members ( the party chooses who) into office. This system gives account for regional interests while still giving the majority a say.
Here in Canada u need to garner a minimum of the vote to get official party status as a viable party n receive political funding allocations. Furthermore all members of parliament r elected even their leader in their constituency to be a member a govt n therefore rule as PM. Also term of office is not always fixed or fully used n an election can be called by the ruling party at anytime or if a non confidence vote wins.
Is that a question or r u holding out? The USA is a Union of states. States r entities as in nations n unlike provinces. A Republic has A Senate n a House of Representatives. Both r elected by the citizens. President is elected by the electoral college n holds the power to veto.
The problem boils down to campaign contributions. Know how much hillary Clinton has amassed from her heritage fund"? Yeah, she's a greedy Democrat lying to the people she supposedly is representing but keeping her own purse strings shut tight. You will find that every Democrat operates in the same fasion. They are rich and could actually care less about real people unless there is something in it for them. Sheep and the ignorant are the "followers" and very easily fooled and duped by their emotional backdrop. Republicans are just as bad, but go after the funding that corporations dole out. Term limits and campaign contributions need to be installed.