LogFAQs > #979075888

LurkerFAQs, Active Database ( 12.01.2023-present ), DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Reps and Dems banned; Which third party are you voting for?
ParanoidObsessive 02/27/24 3:04:33 PM #14:	captpackrat posted... My vote would be cast for Vermin Supreme. Maybe someone needs to track down one of Pigasus' descendants and convince them to run: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigasus_(politics) Or we could always go for the related candidate... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobody_for_President Jen0125 posted... Bernie Sanders That's the biggest joke answer in the entire topic! Entity13 posted... Whigs are but a Republican precursor when the core of their identity was to be anti Andrew Jackson, rather than just anti Democrat in general such as when the GOP formed in the 1850s Not exactly. If anything, they're sort of a cross between the two current parties. And it was less that they were "anti-Jackson", more that the party was already splitting along ideological lines and Jackson became the figurehead of one half, while the other half basically jumped ship and joined with what was left of the Federalists to form an opposing bloc. So it became easy to rally dissent by focusing on Jackson as the face of the opposition. The Whigs were strongly in favor of federal power and development, while the Democrats of the era were strongly non-interventionist (to the point where FDR's New Deal would have been far more likely to be a Whig proposal than a Democrat one based on the ideology of the two parties in the 1800s). Things like social nets, financial support, and public works projects would have fallen more under the Whig ambit than the Democrat one. The Whigs also supported higher education pretty strongly. And they were generally anti-war and anti-imperialist. If anything, you could argue that they fused the economic drive of modern Republicans with the sense of social responsibility of modern Democrats - in some ways, you could almost describe them as anti-libertarians. In a lot of ways, the Whigs were sort of what a lot of people today wish the Republicans were. And when they broke up, just as many of them drifted into the Democrats as Republicans - it was mostly the northern Whigs who helped form the Republican Party, but most of the southern Whigs wound up joining the Democrats after the war (and were mostly anti-secessionist and a significant opposition party during the war). There really isn't a clear line from Whig to Republican any more than there's a clean lineage from Federalist to Whig. It doesn't really help that neither current party really represents the claimed ideologies they used to anyway. The Democrats of the 20th and 21st centuries are significantly different from the Democrats of the 19th century (in the same way that one could argue that the Republicans of the 1800s are significantly different from the Republicans of most of the 1900s, who in turn are both different from the Republicans of today since the 1980s or so). Both parties have pulled significant 180 turns on various policy issues or ideological stances (like the Lincoln-era Republicans being radically in favor of equality versus the strongly pro-slavery southern Democrats during the Civil War era, contrasted with the strong push towards civil rights issues from the Democrats that was mostly led by LBJ, which has led most people today to see the Democrats as the "pro-minority" party). Parties evolve. Parties betray their established ideals all the time (or more charitably "evolve" with the times). And the two-party system as a whole tends to force them into ideological extremes where every issue is simplified into an either/or binary choice in spite of the fact that the world almost never works that way, and that type of thinking almost always does far more harm than good. But hey, one team can say "Other team bad!" and get re-elected (and get paid!), so apparently the system is working as intended! Entity13 posted... Libertarians are a GOP-lite for non-MAGA Republicans who want to evade all social responsibility and call socially contracted things like taxes theft. If anything, the Libertarian Party in the US is mostly for people who want to get high. Or for people who are already high and believe at least 2-3 conspiracy theories. Possibly including the assumption that everyone in Washington DC is either a lizard person or an agent of a vast Jewish/Zionist cabal. Most actual libertarians and An-Caps I've know refuse to vote for Libertarian candidates, because they don't see them as representing their actual ideals or philosophy. It's the irony of the US political system - the Conservatives aren't conservative, the Liberals aren't liberal, and the Libertarians aren't libertarian. Also, the Green Party doesn't include a single green person (that I know of). Entity13 posted... Otherwise, I'd rather say The Rent is Too Damn High Party is looking good. What we really need is someone to start this party in the US: https://youtu.be/h6mJw50OdZ4?t=90 --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted [p:979075888] in Reps and D... [t:80706774]...</cite> <quote><cite>captpackrat posted...</cite><quote>My vote would be cast for Vermin Supreme.</quote>Maybe someone needs to track down one of Pigasus' descendants and convince them to run:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigasus_(politics)Or we could always go for the related candidate...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobody_for_President<cite>Jen0125 posted...</cite><quote>Bernie Sanders</quote>That's the biggest joke answer in the entire topic!<cite>Entity13 posted...</cite><quote>Whigs are but a Republican precursor when the core of their identity was to be anti Andrew Jackson, rather than just anti Democrat in general such as when the GOP formed in the 1850s</quote>Not exactly. If anything, they're sort of a cross between the two current parties. And it was less that they were "anti-Jackson", more that the party was already splitting along ideological lines and Jackson became the figurehead of one half, while the other half basically jumped ship and joined with what was left of the Federalists to form an opposing bloc. So it became easy to rally dissent by focusing on Jackson as the face of the opposition.The Whigs were strongly in favor of federal power and development, while the Democrats of the era were strongly non-interventionist (to the point where FDR's New Deal would have been far more likely to be a Whig proposal than a Democrat one based on the ideology of the two parties in the 1800s). Things like social nets, financial support, and public works projects would have fallen more under the Whig ambit than the Democrat one. The Whigs also supported higher education pretty strongly. And they were generally anti-war and anti-imperialist. If anything, you could argue that they fused the economic drive of modern Republicans with the sense of social responsibility of modern Democrats - in some ways, you could almost describe them as anti-libertarians.In a lot of ways, the Whigs were sort of what a lot of people today wish the Republicans were.And when they broke up, just as many of them drifted into the Democrats as Republicans - it was mostly the northern Whigs who helped form the Republican Party, but most of the southern Whigs wound up joining the Democrats after the war (and were mostly anti-secessionist and a significant opposition party during the war). There really isn't a clear line from Whig to Republican any more than there's a clean lineage from Federalist to Whig.It doesn't really help that neither current party really represents the claimed ideologies they used to anyway. The Democrats of the 20th and 21st centuries are significantly different from the Democrats of the 19th century (in the same way that one could argue that the Republicans of the 1800s are significantly different from the Republicans of most of the 1900s, who in turn are both different from the Republicans of today since the 1980s or so). Both parties have pulled significant 180 turns on various policy issues or ideological stances (like the Lincoln-era Republicans being radically in favor of equality versus the strongly pro-slavery southern Democrats during the Civil War era, contrasted with the strong push towards civil rights issues from the Democrats that was mostly led by LBJ, which has led most people today to see the Democrats as the "pro-minority" party).Parties evolve. Parties betray their established ideals all the time (or more charitably "evolve" with the times). And the two-party system as a whole tends to force them into ideological extremes where every issue is simplified into an either/or binary choice in spite of the fact that the world almost never works that way, and that type of thinking almost always does far more harm than good.But hey, one team can say "Other team bad!" and get re-elected (and get paid!), so apparently the system is working as intended!<cite>Entity13 posted...</cite><quote>Libertarians are a GOP-lite for non-MAGA Republicans who want to evade all social responsibility and call socially contracted things like taxes theft.</quote>If anything, the Libertarian Party in the US is mostly for people who want to get high. Or for people who are already high and believe at least 2-3 conspiracy theories. Possibly including the assumption that everyone in Washington DC is either a lizard person or an agent of a vast Jewish/Zionist cabal.Most actual libertarians and An-Caps I've know refuse to vote for Libertarian candidates, because they don't see them as representing their actual ideals or philosophy.It's the irony of the US political system - the Conservatives aren't conservative, the Liberals aren't liberal, and the Libertarians aren't libertarian.Also, the Green Party doesn't include a single green person (that I know of).<cite>Entity13 posted...</cite><quote>Otherwise, I'd rather say The Rent is Too Damn High Party is looking good.</quote>What we really need is someone to start this party in the US:https://youtu.be/h6mJw50OdZ4?t=90 --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76"POwned again." --- blight family</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1