- Navigation
- Hot
- New
- Recent Comments
- Activity Feed
- Marketplace
- Members Directory
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
1. The two-party system is the problem. Any reform that helps third parties gain seats in legislatures, including such radical changes as Ranked Choice Voting, the Single Transferable Vote, and/or a British style parliamentary system, can only help.
2. Let's encourage more fringe-lefties like Bernie Sanders to run, while encouraging right-leaning candidates to quit early once there are more than a couple of them. So long as we are stuck with the two-party primary system we might as well game it by getting "spoilation" to happen on the left and not on the right.
3. I would like to see more questions referred to voters -- but not as an alternative to legislation (unless it's limited to repealing existing laws). As a first shot (and example), I propose a constitutional amendment that any new law on certain hot-button topics (say guns, abortion, and any further bans of foods or drugs now legal), should require voter approval IN ADDITION to the legislative approval now required, not instead of it. Because too much sneaky lawmaking goes on on those topics, and making it harder can only help.
While we're at it we should also require voter ratification of treaties and constitutional amendments. Many countries in Europe now have this, including the Swiss, and it has blocked a lot of stupid legislation.
Neither party represents us. And there is no saving this country from within - it's too far gone. But choosing the lesser of evils still makes sense.
Do you really think McCain would have done the same damage as Obama?
(Repeated for emphasis.)
These guys expect a pay day down the line, and that is why they support TPA. They don't care about the folks back home, except at election time, the they turn their backs for years. They say they support gun rights, then vote for something like this. They say they are against Obamacare, and vote for something which would expand it. Yes, and the big environmental issue of Agenda 21, yest their vote would promote that as well. Jerks, one and all.
Her response? She punched me on the arm. Owww!
ProfChuck, you win the Comment of the Day!
Imagine!
A casino in every national park!
That will put those damned indians out of business!
Trump claims to be against gun control, but favors longer purchase waiting periods and approves of the "assault weapon" ban.
Load more comments...