How long do you think the current U.S. regime will last?

That is, how long before someone who isn't a Republicrat is head of state in this country? Each election, both parties become more similar and both move farther to the left. It seems to me that the goal of both parties is simply to perpetuate their own existence. And if that means ruling (Yes, ruling. They've long ago given up anything but the feeblest pretense that they're public servants.) in a manner hostile to the American people, then fuck the American people.

So, do you think there will be any substantial change other than the same old Republican/Democrat anytime soon? Is it possible that it will be achieved through democratic election, or will something else happen? What will set the change in motion? Economic collapse? Class conflict? Race war?

I don't think it's that simple. I think we'll eventually see a balkanization of this country, probably into anywhere from 4 to a half dozen new nation states.

Then the water wars will start.

Moocey I wonder the same thing myself. Unfortunately, it is going to take far too long for us as a nation to get a clue about how bad the current two parties are for the country and the people of this nation.

Economic collapse on a global scale, probably...maybe40-50 years out.

Then, with any luck, Balkenization baby!

Yea, I dream of the day it becomes a theofascist dictatorship too. And some will, then, still cry about 'leeeftism '

Never. The world ends in December of 2012, remember?

"Can't you stop your lips from flapping for five minutes"

I thought it ended January 20, 2009 at 12:01 pm?

agreed

Your arguments are so striking, I think I'm gonna give up and concede to you

What would I argue against....you did nothing but shout moonbattery about theofascist dictatorships.


You're crazy as a shithouse rat and that's how you will be treated.

I'll start worrying once you treat me like somebody you like. That's when I know... I took the wrong turn somewhere.

Jesus Tap Dancing Christ, you bring your petty bickering into every thread in the RR. Can you at least keep it out of this one?

Well the race war is a pipe dream...with so many mixed-race people
these days, which side would they be on? It would be a logistical nightmare.

With our current Constitution (which btw I like I'm just saying...) it's damn near impossible for a third party to work it's way up.

About the only chance is for one of the big two to split.

Neither the "Republican Party" nor the "Democratic Party" is the same entity it was 40 years ago or even 20 years ago.

How do you figure the above? The Constitution really has no provisions for political parties, so I'd be interested in some elaboration.

First Past the Post for our legislature.

Especially considering we've already had the Federalists, the Bull Moose Party . . .

I'm sorry what is that?

Well, if Obama turns out to be a complete disaster and the Republican party name is still toxic in four years--and I'd say there's about a 25% chance of the former and a 90% chance of the latter--we could possibly have an independent President Bloomberg on our hands. Of course Bloomberg is about as mainstream as politicians get, so maybe that wouldn't count, and in any event it's still a longshot even if the necessary conditions above happen.

The chances of a genuine third party president, or an independent non-self-financed president are about 0% over the duration of the current constitution; the chances of an independent largely self-financed President sometime in the next 50 years may be as high as 5-10%; the chances that one of the major parties fractures, is replaced by an overlapping but distinctly new coalition of interests, and manages to get a President elected in the next 50 years I'd put higher than that, maybe 25% or so.

Obvious disclaimer: most of those numbers are opinions pulled largely out of my ass.

I think it's possible for a third party to rise to power, but it'd probably involve one of the two main parties completely self-destructing, along with a pre-existing third party (or parties) being ready to swoop in and pick up the pieces.

I'm thinking something along the lines of the collapse of the Progressive Conservative party in Canada, which led to rise of the Reform Party and the Bloc Québécois.

To me, it looks like the left is more content with their party than the right. I think a third party with a real shot has a better chance of being conservative.

It might be nice to see some real conservatives again. Some with intellect and style...

He tried.


http://www.buchanan.org/


also: http://www.takimag.com

He could have used a little more polish, IMO.

I remember when Republicans used to be diversified. You could have your Goldwaters and your Rockefellers and every range in between.

The Dubya regime pretty much tried to homogenize everybody into one snarling Cheneyesque lump.

A misleading term meaning 1-vote per person per office, and the person with the most votes wins.

Funny thing is though, that's actually NOT in the Constitution, at least at the Federal level. The states could change to approval voting or another system if they deigned to.

Which is why I asked. I couldn't seem to recall or find the reference in the Constitution.

Not explicitly but under the rules laid out in the Constitution, how can any other system work?

Which rules? What's to prevent a state from implementing approval voting, where the most-voted-for candidate wins?

No, that's the time we start wishingthe world had ended 2 minutes prior.