You can not have intellectual discussions in the Political threads because this area of the forum is not setup that way which is why Baron doesn't allow search engines to cache this section...preventing threads / message posts from this section from finding its way online in search engine results unless someone directly post links elsewhere that lead to specific threads / message posts here in the Political thread section. In contrast, there are political forums elsewhere online full of intellectual discussions even among people that disagree with each other and well moderated. Thus, the crap you see occurring here in this Political thread section would not be tolerated and the offending individuals are quickly banned (censored). Kudos to Baron for having a creative way to keep this section off the radar while keeping the hatred on an island...similar to Alcatraz. wrbtrader
Please please please, never compare isolating sections of the site with islands and hatred and prisons. This show traumatized me. :-( I am NOT a number, I am a free man!
I don't think we really have a democratic process. We get, realistically, two choices. Republicans and Democrats are cut from the same oligarchy cloth. This isn't democracy. When a vote is split 50/50 that signals neither party is really agreed with. I'd prefer some threshold - perhaps 60/40 to do it. Our voting system is flawed. Several studies have shown that first past the post voting always results in the least qualified candidate making it in. The convention process insures that only those "in power" remain in power (see: Yang and Sanders getting suddenly sidelined). Our process favors dynasties and "safe" people - such as profession politicians. Something unheard of during the founding of our country. Based on the federalist papers the founding fathers would be revolted at the idea of professional politicians. Money corrupts. Money and power corrupt absolutely. There is no possible universe where someone like Biden or Feinstein,or McConnell with several decades of political work under their belt, can behave honestly. Moreover, if you divide the population by the number of senators, senators must represent something like 300k+ people. Explain to me how they are supposed to represent us faced with those numbers? There is no democracy. It's yet another facade we live under.
You make a really good point about political parties. Washington and Jefferson hated the idea of political parties but the founders didn’t outlaw them and that idea was kicked around. Our country certainly has too much dynastic office holders and way too high re-election rates for incumbents - this is a byproduct of the this process that 2 party system. You also make a really good point about the senate and the senate today certainly is not inline with the founding ideals. The filibuster is not what was envisioned - the Vice President has the 50/50 tie breaking vote that shows the ideal of the senate was not supposed to have such a high threshold that it gives individual senators enough power to stop a large amount of legislation. Also, the senate was never supposed to be directly elected! Overall I have to concede the senate is not inline with American founding ideals.
The Bill of Rights certainly is a standing American ideal. Nice one. I don’t know if the size of government or the economic system of America is connected to any ideal. Hamilton and Washington were Big government guys. We forget Washington forced meme era of the newly formed coast guard to purchase health insurance for themselves - that’s as close to socialism as you’ll find in the 1790s.
The United States has a large population of immigrants (1st generation, 2nd generation) citizens that are able to vote that came from other countries with a different political system that's not a Republican nor a Democrat, doesn't align with liberals and doesn't align with the right. In addition, you have a lot of dual citizens that live abroad in other countries but still eligible to vote in the United States elections that does not align themselves as Republican or Democrat. Instead, they vote on a few independent issues close to their hearts. For example, myself, citizen of different countries. I'm not a Republican nor a Democrat...doesn't align with liberals and doesn't align with the right. There's been years I've voted Republican and years I've voted Democrat. Two big issues dear to my heart is the U.S. military and Health Crisis...I respect those that respect the soldiers and front line workers. In fact, its one of the reasons why I choose to live abroad in another country because there's a better selection (more options) in the politics, more equilibrium between the classes and so on. The American ideal is a nice one and the reason why many immigrate to the United States but its not equal and they stay because they're able to navigate around the obstacles of inequality while others stay because they think they'll eventually be able to navigate around those obstacles. This is why I find it absurd in political debates because there are those that are Republican and assume the person they're debating with is a Democrat or vice versa when in reality it has absolutely nothing to do with that. I will defend citizens right to peacefully protest but there are bad characters abusing that system under the manifestation of the right to freedom of speech, right to freedom of association and right to freedom of assembly for the sole purpose to oppress others... There lies the problem even more so on social media platforms where many from different countries are expressing their views. wrbtrader
Is immigration an American ideal as the country was founded. I don’t think so. I think in its hay day immigration to America was for economic opportunity, that not the case so much anymore. The ugly truth is Europe provides better economic opportunity than America now and if there is a choice immigrants looking for economic opportunity choose Europe. It’s hard to work your way up in America now of days. And there is big Big disconnect between the our modern feelings on a large centralized military and when the country was founded. It’s a good point about the military only I don’t think our modern military would prove to be a founding idea.
America is still a massive, massive powerhouse when it comes to accepting immigrants. Off the charts compared to other countries, and that is only counting legal immigrants. Double it if you count in the illegals. Yeh, sure, maybe you are drinking your latte' and concluding that they would be prefer to go to Sweden or the Netherlands or Canada but out in the real world we are a powerhouse getting it done. And sure if you see the world as C++ programmer or something maybe Europe is your goal and life is groovy. Guess what though? Lots of immigrants to Europe are poor africans and their experience is not as groovy as you describe. Working at Arby's in Wyoming is step up over being stuck in some migrant camp in Italy for years. You get bloviators like Justin Trudeau who said that he/Canada have Canadian values unlike the Americans so will accept any and all immigrants that the American turned back. Then he didnt take a single one and their legal immigration system is much, much more restrictive than the Americans. Also the founders considered the American experiment to be about freedom, not just economic opportunity. And it was their hope that it would flourish in American and light a candle that might even spread further in the world and that has happened. If Europe is a better place now some of that can be attributed to the Americans who have helped to preserved freedoms there and provided support and inspiration for countries to try out the best parts of being an American. The founders were not googling around on the internet thinking "oh shit, sweden is getting ahead of us in accepting immigrants." Fine. Let more countries be free and prosper and go forth. That was always part of the vision.