NationStates Jolt Archive

It's up to the mods of course if this thread rermains or gets stickied, but in all the hubbub over the President, there hasn't been much mention of congress. Remember that the House and 1/3rd of the Senate is running for office as well and a shift on COngress could have more impact than a new President. What would happen if the Democrats win more seats in the Senate? Reaching 60 seats seems highly unlikely, but considering the way the polls are looking, I suspect that the Democrats could pick up 3 to 5 seats.

What about the House? Will their inaction cause a Republican rebound, or will the Democrats retain a lead? Build on it?

Reaching 60 seats seems highly unlikely

i wouldn't actually be surprised if they did. unlikely, but not highly so. especially if mccain craters the way i kinda expect him to.

It would be nice to see a Republican-held Congress, if Obama wins, but the Democrats to retain power if McCain wins. I'm a firm believer in less-is-more when it comes to passing laws. Having the legislative and executive branches held by opposing parties seems the easiest way to get the least done.

And, yes, on every political spectrum I've been tested on, I've come up "cynical" ;)

I'm a firm believer in less-is-more when it comes to passing laws.

even when the laws in question are ones needed to undo the damage inflicted by the laws the bush movement passed?

It's up to the mods of course if this thread rermains or gets stickied, but in all the hubbub over the President, there hasn't been much mention of congress. Remember that the House and 1/3rd of the Senate is running for office as well and a shift on COngress could have more impact than a new President. What would happen if the Democrats win more seats in the Senate? Reaching 60 seats seems highly unlikely, but considering the way the polls are looking, I suspect that the Democrats could pick up 3 to 5 seats.

What about the House? Will their inaction cause a Republican rebound, or will the Democrats retain a lead? Build on it?

I;m always under the belief that whomever holds the majority power will likely abuse it... and no problems will be solved. Party politics will be the death of this nation.

It's up to the mods of course if this thread rermains or gets stickied, but in all the hubbub over the President, there hasn't been much mention of congress. Remember that the House and 1/3rd of the Senate is running for office as well and a shift on COngress could have more impact than a new President. What would happen if the Democrats win more seats in the Senate? Reaching 60 seats seems highly unlikely, but considering the way the polls are looking, I suspect that the Democrats could pick up 3 to 5 seats.

What about the House? Will their inaction cause a Republican rebound, or will the Democrats retain a lead? Build on it?

I suspect the down...turn...wind...whatever the proper word is effect of Senator Obama running on the Democratic ticket will have a lot of influence and is likely to allow for more Democrats than otherwise might have been expected.

In short, my prediction: Democratic majority in both houses.

even when the laws in question are ones needed to undo the damage inflicted by the laws the bush movement passed?
I would actually like to see a cap on the number of allowable laws, so that in order to pass a new law, an old one must first be abolished. Or, another option: it would be wonderful if one house passed laws, while the other was responsible solely for un-passing them :D

Party politics will be the death of this nation.

party politics is unavoidable in any system of representative democracy. there is literally nothing to be done about it.

party politics is unavoidable in any system of representative democracy. there is literally nothing to be done about it.

But there are things that can be done about the symptoms. How about for instance removing the ability of congressman to tag a bill onto another bill thats say designed to give billions of tax dollars in grants to people who are unable to get a better education in college or tech school with something utterly ridiculous, like forcing every oldest child in a family to be drafted into the military. All this JUST so the bill will not be passed, all this JUST because the guy who proposed the original bill was from a different part.

But there are things that can be done about the symptoms. How about for instance removing the ability of congressman to tag a bill onto another bill thats say designed to give billions of tax dollars in grants to people who are unable to get a better education in college or tech school with something utterly ridiculous, like forcing every oldest child in a family to be drafted into the military. All this JUST so the bill will not be passed, all this JUST because the guy who proposed the original bill was from a different part.

actually, shit gets tagged on as part of the bargaining that results in bills going anywhere at all. there isn't really a coherent way to stop it that doesn't just wind up creating ridiculously long and complex 'original bills' , with all the hashing out done unofficially behind closed doors.

actually, shit gets tagged on as part of the bargaining that results in bills going anywhere at all. there isn't really a coherent way to stop it that doesn't just wind up creating ridiculously long and complex 'original bills' , with all the hashing out done unofficially behind closed doors.

Then I say we all only vote for lesser known 3rd party candidates this election and then full 1/3 of congress will have a totally different point of view. Then maybe at least the laws will be entertaining...

party politics is unavoidable in any system of representative democracy. there is literally nothing to be done about it.

I don't think so. I think party politics is a latent facet of imperialism. It really revolves around the idea that you know what's best for someone you've never met and don't know.

But there are things that can be done about the symptoms. How about for instance removing the ability of congressman to tag a bill onto another bill thats say designed to give billions of tax dollars in grants to people who are unable to get a better education in college or tech school with something utterly ridiculous, like forcing every oldest child in a family to be drafted into the military. All this JUST so the bill will not be passed, all this JUST because the guy who proposed the original bill was from a different part.

A nice hypothetical suggestion, but how do you suggest we actually impliment it? In order to ban riders, as you suggest, we'd have to pass a law, and the very body that would be required to pass that law is what you are attempting to restrict.

I don't think it could be done.

A nice hypothetical suggestion, but how do you suggest we actually impliment it? In order to ban riders, as you suggest, we'd have to pass a law, and the very body that would be required to pass that law is what you are attempting to restrict.

I don't think it could be done.

Via national referendum. I know that there are provisions for such a thing on the local and state levels of government but as for a national referendum I'm not sure. Its worth looking into the possibility though.

I don't think so. I think party politics is a latent facet of imperialism. It really revolves around the idea that you know what's best for someone you've never met and don't know.

how do you prevent people from organizing as coalitions to better get and exercise power once you have a system of representatives? it's in their interests individually to do so, let alone collectively.

how do you prevent people from organizing as coalitions to better get and exercise power once you have a system of representatives? it's in their interests individually to do so, let alone collectively.

And it is within our interests as a people who theoretically have the ability to do so to prevent these people from getting away with it; we can solve this problem if we make enough people aware.

And it is within our interests as a people who theoretically have the ability to do so to prevent these people from getting away with it; we can solve this problem if we make enough people aware.

how? what could you possibly do that will stop parties from forming? the only thing i can see even vaguely working while keeping elected representatives is preventing those representatives from knowing who the other representatives are, and limiting everyone to a single term in any office, anywhere. but even then, it's in my interests to band together with other non-politicians to form parties that will recruit candidates to exercise power for us.

how? what could you possibly do that will stop parties from forming? the only thing i can see even vaguely working while keeping elected representatives is preventing those representatives from knowing who the other representatives are, and limiting everyone to a single term in any office, anywhere.

One very simple way is to help people make informed choices, not just choices like "Democrat" "Republican" "Libertarian" "Green". If people made informed choices about who the candidate is and what ideas they are bringing to the table. And on a personal note, if I thought your suggestions were the only way I'd happily go for it.

I'm not talking about ending party politics, like you said its impossible. But we can as a voting populace control the damage that it causes.

One very simple way is to help people make informed choices, not just choices like "Democrat" "Republican" "Libertarian" "Green". If people made informed choices about who the candidate is and what ideas they are bringing to the table.

parties make that easier, rather than harder.

parties make that easier, rather than harder.

Too many people are throwing the party label on a candidate and calling it an election. They need to learn what kind of repercussions these choices are having.

Too many people are throwing the party label on a candidate and calling it an election. They need to learn what kind of repercussions these choices are having.

the repercussions are that people who fall somewhere within the range of a given coalition's acceptable policies and positions get elected on the basis of that, and then, when in power, work with other members of that coalition to get their shit enacted.

Mike Johanns for senator in the state of my street's namesake.

the repercussions are that people who fall somewhere within the range of a given coalition's acceptable policies and positions get elected on the basis of that, and then, when in power, work with other members of that coalition to get their shit enacted.

and those politicians who would make changes for the better are left to dry.

and those politicians who would make changes for the better are left to dry.

well, that's where things like primaries and the democratic structure of the party apparatus itself comes in. you just gotta figure out where to get leverage and how to organize you and your supporters to forcefully apply it.

if you want bigger ideas but want to keep representative democracy, then you actually need a system that encourages smaller, more cohesive parties, rather than the lumbering behemoths engendered by first past the post elections in single member districts in a presidential system. or you could go the other direction and agitate for more decentralization and more face-to-face politics, which opens up the same sorts of avenues for progressive change, by restricting the range and volume of people who have to be brought on board with an idea before implementing it.

I'm hoping the Nazz will have another, "pick the congress numbers" contest. I believe I won the 2006 title and am looking forward to defending the championship! :D

Some really heated congessional races this go around. Better get a helmet people! :p

Jesse Venture may run for senate here in MN. Thank you various gods.

About the only way that we can stop them will be with term limits. Of course, when the citizens of the state of Washington voted on mandatory term limits, the speaker of the hosue, who was from Washington sued. The supreme court ruled that we cannot impose term limits on senators and representatives, since we can decide not to reelect them.

Now, considering that 95% of incumbents get reelected, the sheep will just flock to the voting booth and send them back.

Sooner or later the citizenry will be fed up with the shenanigans in the capitol, and the citizens will take action against them.

It would be nice to see a Republican-held Congress, if Obama wins, but the Democrats to retain power if McCain wins. I'm a firm believer in less-is-more when it comes to passing laws. Having the legislative and executive branches held by opposing parties seems the easiest way to get the least done.

And, yes, on every political spectrum I've been tested on, I've come up "cynical" ;)

Definitely a Republican Congress if Obama wins. But McCain is a RINO (Republican In Name Only), if he wins, it won't matter who controls Congress.

Definitely a Republican Congress if Obama wins. But McCain is a RINO (Republican In Name Only), if he wins, it won't matter who controls Congress.

not that ill vote for mccain but in theory he can at least stem the tide of democratic legislation that will come as a result of the next election. AND he can work with the dems to pass stuff that needs passing.

that wouldnt be bad

But McCain is a RINO (Republican In Name Only)

not according to his record. he is consistently one of the most republican republicans. what he lacks is the cultural attitude of american conservatism - the blind obedience to authority, the immediate impulse towards eliminationist rhetoric and actions, etc. republicans don't like him because he is a craven bootlicker. it is in this sense that he is rather like the democrats.