November Election

[mkemse]

Why is the US system any better than our Swedish one for one? To me your system seems too flawed to be anywhere near "the best". Sure it is democracy but you basically have two parties to choose from, and they are both kinda similar. To me perfect would atleast mean more than 2 parties to choose from.

I did not mean too insinuate we are better then your system,if that is the way i cam across my apologies, it was NOT my intent, what I meant was,We have now and have had in th Past other parties we have had Independnts run, the Librirtarian Party Run, the Green Party Run, but the Public here has decided on their own to stay with the 2 main parties,NO system is 100% perfecr, if there is one that is i have not seen it
We are not the best, we are flawed and we ppplace are flawns in thefront window forthewhole world to see but we have what MOSt countries do not, and that is CHOICE you do not have choice per sey in Russia, China, Japan, Korea ect no our system is far from perfect but it has lasted over 200 years and if we do not like things we have the chance to change it ever 4 years

[Virulent]

the Public here has decided on their own to stay with the 2 main parties

There are only two parties in the U.S. that even have their presidential candidates on the ballots in all 50 states. If the Libertarian or Green presidential candidate isn't even on the ballot, I don't know how you can claim that the people made an informed choice.

The public never had a choice; people with money chose a two party system because its cheaper... you get the perception of real choice, and the minimum number of candidates to legally bribe with campaign contributions.

Any parliamentary system, like the one Sweden has, is unarguably more democratic than the U.S. system.

'Cept for one is the bad guy.

LOL! That's hilarious.

[mkemse]

There are only two parties in the U.S. that even have their presidential candidates on the ballots in all 50 states. If the Libertarian or Green presidential candidate isn't even on the ballot, I don't know how you can claim that the people made an informed choice.

The public never had a choice; people with money chose a two party system because its cheaper... you get the perception of real choice, and the minimum number of candidates to legally bribe with campaign contributions.

Any parliamentary system, like the one Sweden has, is unarguably more democratic than the U.S. system.



LOL! That's hilarious.

Thanks for your comments, they are appreciated

BTW how many ACTIVE Poltical Parties does your country have, just curious??

[Virulent]

how many ACTIVE Poltical Parties does your country have, just curious??

1; the Capitalist Party. I'm an American.

"democracy" is just limited voluntary tyranny by any other name.

When I die, it will be to no loss; Kuskovian makes me entirely redundant.

The US is a Republic in order to limit pure democracy. The Founder's did this intentionally

This is true... its important to note though that all of the Founding Fathers were anti-party. Most famously, George Washington's advice: "Let me ... warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally."

The Founding Fathers speeches and writings speak of a republican polity, deferring to state's rights in internal matters, without parties, wherein a vote was for a man not for a party. The Electoral College was created because the Founders believed that there would be numerous candidates, and that the Electoral College was necessary to winnow them down to just a dozen or so.

To be clear though, I'm not saying that the above or any other government would be preferable to the organization that currently takes 28% of my money and spends 22.5% of it on blowing up people who never fucked with me. I don't believe any compulsory statist authority is ethical or advisable.

[Ragoczy]

Any parliamentary system, like the one Sweden has, is unarguably more democratic than the U.S. system.

The US is a Republic in order to limit pure democracy. The Founder's did this intentionally, because they recognized that pure democracy is the the tyranny of the majority -- in reality, worse than a dictatorship. Think about it, it's easier to overthrow a dictator than the majority.

Pure democracy is when seven wolves and a sheep decide what's for lunch. Everybody gets a vote; even the lunch.