U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 12, 2016 06:53 AM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 84 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Confusion now hath made his masterpiece!”

–From William Shakespeare’s Macbeth, Act II, Scene III

Tweet
Share

Comments

84 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread”

  1. Just another reason I avoid watching MSNBC, the Fox News of the left

    So I was channel surfing Sunday morning and came across MSNBC which I do not usually watch. There was the Reverend Al Sharpton – without Twana Brawley – interviewing former U.S. Rep Anthony Weiner.

    You can't make this stuff up.

      1. The one time I watched Faux News, they had a report re: how dangerous solar energy really is and how liberals cover that up. It was ridiculous.

          1. And be current with their vaccinations, too. 

            Wasn’t it Sen. Thom Tillis (Teabagger-NC) who a few months ago was lamenting the fact that restaurants were required to order their employees to wash their hands with soap and warm water after using the toilet?

      1. There's more to that story. Although the Twana Brawley case turned out to be a hoax (no sexual assault occurred), Brawley staged the hoax because of fear of her abusive stepfather. Something put fear into that girl, to cut her hair and her clothes, smear herself with shit, and climb into a trash bag. It's a sad case – IMHO, not a joke.

  2. Yesterday, one of our Polsters here linkied to a National Review article that quoted pollster Pat Cadell who was President Carter's pollster and since that time has worked for Republicans and Democrats. According to Mr. Cadell, his polling this year shows that people are fed-up with hard line ideology which translates that people are done with the obstructionist mentality in Washington, DC. And yet, here in Colorado both Mr. Glenn, who won top line at the Republican convention and Ms. Vargas, who won top line in the 5th CD Republican primary, both expressed frustration with Republicans reaching across the aisle to Democrats in the House and Senate.In other words both of them are promising more fervent obstructionism if elected. Neither one of them seems to have gotten the message.

    1. Cadell?

      He's an idiot and h a virtually no understanding of anything in the current cycle.

      Last summer, he predicted Bush win, and Trump would fade fast.

      He wasn't alone, but just because the old timers were all wrong doesn't make any of them less wrong.

      (And don't talk about Silver/538 until you can explain his method.  )

    2. So Glenn and Vargas were critical of their opponents for being too bipartisan?  WTF, because Neville and Lamborn go to such great lengths to work together with Dems?  It looks like the nuttiness in the GOP needs to refresh and reinvigorate itself every few years now.

    2. I saw this last night on PinkNews, a British gay news feed out of London that I follow. There will be more. consequences are just ramping up. I'd say we have a new Hate State (remember that?), but Mississippi passed a law just like it and their idiot governor signed it. 

  4. Oopsie!

    Colorado Democrats admit mistake that cost Bernie Sanders key delegate

    Bernie Sanders won one more delegate in Colorado than first projected after the Colorado Democratic Party admitted this week that it misreported the March 1 caucus results from 10 precinct locations.

    The error — first uncovered by The Denver Post — was shared with rival Hillary Clinton's campaign by party officials but kept from Sanders until the Post told his staff Monday night.

    1. I love how they told the Clinton campaign but kept it a secret from Sanders and the rest of us. Just one more reason why I am no longer a Democrat. BTW: You’ve committed the mortal sin of quoting the paper which shall not be named.

        1. That was an unwarranted insult, Frank…you get to decide what Democrats should think and do?…shouldn't you be concerned that you and the rest of the dinosaurs in the corporate wing of the party are on the endangered species list?
          Maybe this should be my last Dem assembly… with narrow minded traditionalists hanging on to the party, maybe JD and I will start an exodus..

          1. not really

            Thurston Bennet, III will be re-elected this fall. So will many other rational and reasonable Democrat. Chuck Schumer (D-Wall St.) will become majority leader. And the Queen of the Corporate Wing of the Party, HRC, will be crowned in January.

            1. right..and unless we fringe troublemakers lie down and accept your domination, we should, "not let the door hit us in the ass" on the way out. 

              Yes, Frank, thanks to your arrogant condescension, I think I have decided that this will, in fact, be my last Democratic party assembly. I will change my affiliation to unaffiliated when I get home. And I will be careful to not let the door hit me on the way out.

              Thanks for helping me make that decision ,Frank.

                  1. Holy crap, that escalated quickly.

                    I do get tired of repeating myself endlessly. But here goes, AGAIN:

                    *Nobody sane thinks Sanders is divine or Hillary is the devil. Certainly nobody posting on here. That's called a "straw man" argument, and you all know better than to use it.

                    *The Democratic "big tent" may or may not be big enough to contain the Sanders ideas. Not the man himself, not his supporters, his ideas.

                    *Sanders being an independent is a plus – you faithful old guard Dems don't trust him, but it's a large part of his trustworthiness and popularity with his base. People don't trust your fricking party to keep its promises, to do the right thing, not to sell out to the highest bidder.

                    And I'm a Democrat. I'll vote for Hiillary if crunch time comes, of course. For most of my fellow Bernites, that is an "of course" reluctant, but reliable, vote.

                    Why? Because I am NOT an idiot, a starry-eyed idealist, a non-taxpayer looking only for "free stuff", etc. I took offense to the term "irregular" because it is so symptomatic of the way that the old guard Democrats regard Sanders supporters -we're not really welcome,not trusted, not encouraged to contribute our own ideas.

                    From my own perspective, I had to basically beat down the door of the Morgan County Democrats before I could even get a callback. And I volunteered to be a precinct committee person, and will probably have to beat the door again, just to find out how/when I'm supposed to be walking my precinct.

                    Probably nothing to do with being a Bernie supporter – more to do with trying to contact an organization with elderly and sick volunteers sporadically staffed phone lines,  a blue dot in a red county, suspicious of newcomers in a small town.

                    Having said that, our caucuses in our blue dot had 10 times the attendance they had last time – most of them first time caucusers and Bernie supporters.

                    So here's a question for Frankly,for Vger, for Bluecat, for the Morgan County Dems – at what point do you stop fearing the "irregulars", the newcomers, the idealists, stop condescending to us, and start actually welcoming, and LISTENING to us?

                    Change, or die. That's what the Republican party is facing. It's pretty much dying. What will Dems do?

                    1. Bluecat  here speaking for BlueCat… I don't fear the Bernie's supporters as long as they don't plan to sabotage HRC if she wins th nomination. I too get tired of repeating myself.

                      So one more time…..I think Bernie has brought great energy to this race and welcome the attention he's drawn to his issues and the pressure he's put on the Dem party to be more responsive to grass roots concerns. I don't fear him. I appreciate him.

                      But I don't appreciate those among his supporters, according to one poll 30%, who claim they won't support HRC if she wins the nomination.

                      The GOP is coming apart at the seams and if HRC wins the nomination, as she is over 90% likely to do, or if Bernie wins it we need to take full advantge. I do not appreciate those Bernie supporters who would instead erase that advantage by splintering our party just when th GOP is splintering as the Dem party is the only entity in a position to challenge the GOP.

                      I don't lump you in with that 30%. You’ve said before and repeated just now that you you will support whichever of the two wins the nomination. Don't you lump me in with those who consider Bernie a threat. I'm simply someone who thinks HRC would make the better president as you are someone who thinks Bernie would. I also think his head to head match ups with Cruz and Trump are deceptive at this stage.

                      It's those who would rather make a holier, more principled than thou point rather than take advantage of GOP chaos who I think are fools, not Bernie or his supporters in general. I know lots of Bernie supporters who will join us in defeating the GOP whether he wins or not.

                      As far as HRC supporters are concerned, nowhere near 30% say they wouldn't support Bernie if he wins. All but a handful would support whichever wins the nomination. My exasperation is directed to anyone on either side who says they won't help us defeat the GOP unless their preference wins the nomination.

                      I hope that's clear. This is the umpteenth time I've said it.

      3. Ah, the utter ennui of being right all the time....

        mamajama55 says:

        March 2, 2016 at 6:15 AM MDT

        And in fact, that did happen….Per the Denver Post's reporting this morning, Sanders got approximately 60% of the popular vote of caucus attendees, but will receive 33 delegates to Hillary's 34.

        OK, you can all jump on now and tell me that I'm a bitter, paranoid Bernie Bitch who just doesn't understand complex delegate math with her small lady brain.

        Or, you could just admit that Colorado's system of awarding delegates is  an undemocratic clusterf*ck. We need to go to a simple primary system.

        1. This was definitely an example of the party being less than forhcoming but if you read today's article you'll see that the correction was made a while ago though not on the website. It sucks that they shared this info with the HRC campaign and not with the Sanders campaign and certainly shows bias but the one delegate difference has been adjusted in plenty of time for the convention. You have every right to be ticked but it's fixed now.

          My resentment goes back years. It's been clear that the DNC has been putting its thumb on the scale for HRC for years, clearing the way, preventing other viable candidates from emerging.  If Bernie hadn't landed in the DNC punch bowl the Repugs would have been getting all the press and HRC's poll numbers at this point would suck because polls reflect what people are paying attention to. They wouldn't be paying any attention to a boring slo-mo coronation with no real contest.

          On the other hand, politics being what they are, it's not all that shocking that the DNC and Colorado Dem party are more supportive of the Dem party member candidate than they are of the candidate who has never been part of the party. It's pretty amazing that it hasn't been a lot worse. Compare and contrast how the GOP is handling their outsider candidate who, unlike Bernie, has a huge plurality of their voters' support.

          In the end the selection will be fair on our side.

    2. I'm waiting to see this as a headline ColoradoPols post.

      This news kind of takes the edge off of the castigation of the way the Repuglicans ran their caucuses and convention.

      Sadly, yet more evidence of the death march the Colorado Democratic establishment seems determined to make with Hillary Clinton.

          1. Agree we need a primary.  But Hillary would have probably won Colorado in a primary — she has won 15 of the 21 primaries.  Bernie is the caucus king, winning 10 of 12 of those undemocratic procedures.  If, knowing that, you still support a primary, good for you (and I expect you do.)

            1. In past primaries, at least where Senatorial candidates are concerned and winning the caucus just gets you the top slot for the primary ballot, it's been very typical for the more liberal candidate to win the caucus attended by more hard core activists and for the more middle of the road candidate to win the primary. Primaries better reflect the average voter and, in Colorado, the average Dem voter is more centrist than the average caucus goer so those who think a primary would have been much better for Bernie are probably mistaken.

      2. Pretty sure it's not going to be a death march. And good luck with getting anybody pure enough for you elected with that Independent Progressive thing. And BTW, why isn't Bernie honestly running as what he is. If he's so damn pure why is he pretending to be a Dem all of a sudden? Of course we know why. Joining one of the two major parties is the only way to be a serious presidential candidate but if he's so damned principled compared to the real Democrats why is he dirtying hs hands instead of running as the independent he's always been. Or maybe joining up with you and your Independent Progressives? Yeah, that would work.

         

        1. You know, BC, I have struggled with voting for Hillary Clinton if she were nominated by the Democratic Party. I was sitting on the fence. I had not yet made up my mind. But, the Clinton-Bro twins – Voyageur and FrankUnderwood – have pushed me over the edge. If they represent the Democratic party – and unfortunately I have come to believe they do, it is time for the Democratic Party to die. Yes, it will be a slow and lingering death. The next generation will have no interest in politics because they will believe, rightly so, that it is all corrupt and that there is no fundamental difference between the parties. It is all window dressing and Kabuki theatre. Why? Because condescending politicos insist on lecturing common people about their responsibility to the party rather than the party's responsibility to the people. Good job, you guys.

          2. So, the value of the party is judged solely by it's willingness to bow down to the great God Dodd, cuz it's all about Dodd.   Duke is a good man at heart, he'll get over his disappointment and go back to doing positive things,  Dodd is a narcissist who was never a member of anything but the Dodd is great party.   We won't miss him because he never was part of our party.

            1. Maybe so, V. But you are in error. James is right, your personal opinion of him, notwithstanding. The party of John Hickenlooper, Michael Bennett, and Hillary Clinton is as much corrupted by billions of corporate dollars as is the GOP. Not one of these "Democrats" is willing to turn their backs on the billionaires of Wall Street and the military-industrial complex. 

              If Bernie had tried to run an independent candidacy, the press would have minimalized him and relegated him to novelty status (they really tried, anyway). Using the framework established by the party system, Bernie has taken that big money system and stood it on its head. He now has sufficient traction that, if/when, the establishment corporate handlers at the national level manage to squeeze him out, he will be well established enough to run and win a third party candidacy based on a populist movement that will even bring in disaffected conservatives, who can now see who and where the real enemy of the American people is…

              Think it can't happen? Yeah…you guys have been right about everything else so far, haven't you?

              1. So you think a 79-year old man will ride a third party movement to the White House in 2020?  Not likely.   The Clinton Administration will be followed by Elizabeth Warren in 2024, as the Age of Feminism continues to reshape America.

              2. John Hickenlooper, Michael Bennett……

                You left out Bill Ritter, Roy Romer, Dick Lamm, and Ken Salazar from the pantheon of  big-money, DLC candidates who actually have the ability to win elections and block Republicans from power. 

            2. We won't miss him because he never was part of our party.

              I think what Duke is saying, and James likely determined some time ago, is that the statement you made has been true for some time but only recently has become clear.

              So far, about seven million of the 16+ million votes in the Democratic nomination race have gone to Bernie Sanders, who folks have called a poseur, a hypocrite, a loon and whose supporters have been called delusional, narcissistic, anti-feminist, and loons themselves– much of that right here.  These folks really believe in the ideas he's presenting and the world he envisions– they always have.

              In the past, these folks would dutifully come when called, to vote for a Democrat that they only supported somewhat, who wasn't offering a vision of the good society they could believe in, but at least wasn't that other guy who wants to do all the bad stuff.  Now, they have a candidate they can really get behind, and they've been mocked, made out to be traitorous, and described as arsonists for claiming their right to vote or not for a candidate of their choice.  All because, what, they've gotten uppity?

              The left is being told to sit down and shut up while the grown-ups take care of everything.  That's a fine position to take, and perhaps a practical one, we'll see. But you can't realistically expect to take it and not suffer any consequences.

              1. Of course, the 9.4 million votes that went to Hillary are all corporate scum suckers who should rot in hell?  Are you really going there Pseudo?

                1. Is that what I said?  I said nothing about Hillary Clinton or why people should or shouldn't support her.  I also said nothing about the character of the people who support her.  Why would you be so defensive?

                  1. Yeah, that's pretty well what you said.   If your 7 million are the elect of God, then doesn't that make our 9.4 million on Satan's side?  Or are you daring to suggest that the party's moderate to liberal majority deserves almost as much respect as its left wing?  Your side is perfect but we in the majority stink.   I hear a lot of that from your side, pardon me if I don't rush over and bow to Bernie as a result.

                    1. I apologize.  I responded because I thought you misunderstood what I wrote.  I didn't realize that you had no interest in understanding it.

                  2. Well I'm not defensive and have never characterized Bernie's supporters as traitors or loons. I do think they will be both if they prevent us from taking advantage of the falling in our laps of the gift of the chaos in the GOP.

                    In fact, while a hefty 30% of Sanders' supporters are now saying that they wouldn't support HRC if she wins the nomination, only a handful in terms of percentage of HRC's supporters are are saying the same about Bernie.

                    V likes to be grumpy and caustic and doesn't represent all HRC supporters by any means. And let's be clear. Bennet, HRC and many of the other Dems who get pilloried here and deservedly so, though no more so than Obama, still vote for what progressives support most of the time as opposed to none of the time, do not support crazy right social stances against choice, voting rights, LGBT rights and scores of others that are important to progressives and are pretty much almost entirely supportive of Obama on most issues.

                    Of course, like them Obama ran as and has behaved as a pro-business centrist. If you think it wouldn't have made any difference if McCain or Romney had won, you'rer nuts.

                    For one thing we would have had a 7 seat conservative majority on the Supreme Court and who knows how many more conservtive justices throughout the federal appeals system. Do you think gays would have he right to marry nationwide now?

                    I like a lot of Bernie's ideas. There is more agreement between Bernie and HRC than there is difference on most issues. I don't think Bernie has successfully made the transition from single issue campaign to his unexpected position now as a real presidential contender. I think he's more of a big inspiring idea guy and I'm glad he's made it this far.

                    But HRC is almost certain to win the nomination and if she doesn't her supporters are overwhelmingly willing to support Bernie. If  some of Bernie's supporters really want to screw up this golden opportunity and let the GOP take the WH and add to the Supremes to make a point of their ideals, I say screw them and the horse they rode in on.

                    It may be a long time before the GOP is this much of a mess and any disappointed supporters of one D or the other who presents an obstacle to taking full advantage is a fool.This is not the tiime to splinter.

        2. And BTW, why isn't Bernie honestly running as what he is. If he's so damn pure why is he pretending to be a Dem all of a sudden? Of course we know why. Joining one of the two major parties is the only way to be a serious presidential candidate

          That is true, BC. The game has been rigged for so long everyone thinks that is the only way it can work. 

          I will spend the rest of my life trying to change that.

          2. I'd rather not live the rest of my life under GOP hegemony when we have the power to crush it. And Bernie, don't kid yourself, is just as much of a pol as any Dem. The Mother Teresas of the world aren't in politics. I'm sure the GOP will appreciate your purity efforts as only by splintering the opposition do they have a snowball's chance of surviving changing demographics.  

            1. It's OK. BC..It is obvious that the Democratic party no longer needs addle-pated purists like me…as Frank Underwood suggests…We won't let the door hit us on the way out…good luck with it….

              1. Strictly speaking, Duke, if our party is a big tent, doesn't that mean we don't actually have a door?   "Don't let that canvas flap hit you on the ass on your way out" just doesn't do it for mesmiley  So as far as I'm concerned, you're welcome to stay in your honored place in our ranks, at least until we can work out a new set of exit insults.  It's not like we've got Democrats to spare in Mesa County.

              2. If you plan to help the GOP win by refusing to support whoever wins the D noination and encouraging others to follow your lead then you're no good to those opposing GOP policy anyway. You may as well vote for all the crazy anti-choice, anti-gay rights, anti-voting rights, religious "freedom" bills because that's, in effect, exactly what you're doing when you throw away your vote because the Dem who would support you on all of those things and more isn't pure enough for you.  Of course  the idea that any pol including Bernie is "pure" is a joke. He's done what he needed to do to get elected in his congressional district just like any other pol.

                And BTW, many Dems have moved to the left on on the money/corporate issues due to pressure from Sanders. Warren, the scrutiny they bring to bear and the grass roots who support them. Try getting an iota of movement in that direction from the Rs you'd be helping to elect.

                What you propose is the opposite of big tent. It's taking your ball and going home, leaving others to fight your battles for you against the GOP.

                You're welcome.

        3. Joining one of the two major parties is the only way to be a serious presidential candidate 

          Because he's an opportunist and self-out when it comes to the Cause. My God, he's just like HRC!

          (Yes, Mama, and Duke and Jimbo, I've denigrated your hero by equating him with my mortal candidate.) 

            1. Don't put Mama in with the likes of Dodd.   He never was a Democrat, by his own admission.  MJ is passionate for her man but respects those of us who prefer someone else.  And even though he's cussing us now, Duke is not an idiot. He will vote against Trump and for Hillary in the fall, assuming she does lock it up.   So what if he votes for progressive candidates as ab Unaffiliated.  Give him some space.

              1. Fair enough……Mamajama's passionate about her candidate and his positions but I shouldn't have put her in league with those two. If I could edit, I'd remove her name from my last post.
                There, mark down where you were and what time is happened. The arrogant, condescending Frank Underwood expressed regret and demonstrated humility.
                Don’t expect to see it happen again anytime soon.

                1. Completely unconvincing, Frank.

                  If regret and humility were really part of your mindset, I daresay you would have chosen a different username. As it is, you chose the name of a character noted for a complete lack of compassion and humility…a murderer, actually The name you chose represents a devotion to power at any cost, a commitment to grabbing influence and personal enrichment.

                  That is what it means to be a Democrat to you, huh? It is just a game, isn't it? why don't you have Thurston take on the challenge of taking care of the 4.9 million children who are being raised by their grandparents (part of the 50,000,000 living in poverty)because society has completely failed them and the misguided kids who gave them life. Have Hickenlooper commit to cleaning up the billion dollar mess left behind by his billionaire Oily Buddies whose opulent offices occupy the upper floor of the Republic tower.

                  And while you are at it, have Hillary put the touch on her friends at Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan to pay back the life savings of the millions of people who lost everything when the Big Banks broke the back of the American economy.

                  No…you won't do any of that, Frank, Because power and winning and the self-aggrandizement that goes along with it are your focus. That appears to be what you think this is about. You are wrong, Frank. Just plain wrong. You and the rest of the entrenched, corporate operatives who wallow in their money and look the other way, are having a great time watching the carnage on the other side of the aisle, laughing complacently while the conservative attack dogs devour the GOP. 

                  I recommend you cast a glance over your shoulder…the hounds are coming for you, too. 

              2. You lie, Voyageur. I never said that. My first campaign was for Robert Kennedy. I was a registered Democrat from the time I was first eligible until about one year ago (@ 40 years). I have been a precinct caption and a delegate to the state convention. 

                Reiterate, sir, you are a lying sack of excrement. 

              3. Thumbs up on mama, V. She also has said many times that she will vot for HRC if she wins the nomination because mama isn’t a self righteous fool.

  6. If the axiom "past behavior predicts future behavior" and that is applied to HRC, the Bern, and political parties….what does that mean to you?

    Tribalism is in the human psyche.  The only times the US presented as a "great" nation was when it was at total war (total tribalism).  That is not working any more.  Political Party politics (internal war) cannot represent the future when both parties are so stuck in the processes embedded in the past.  

  7. The parties, two majors, are stupid.  Are they unavoidable?

     

    Lieberman and Sanders are the only indies I can name.  But still, I have hope that the parties'dominance can be ended. 

    I don't worry how a seven party, non partisan govt will run. The facts lean left, the world leans left.  It's the big money that is trouble. As always, workers are the enemy to be divided by various isms, and crushed or at least held back by the superiority of capital. Capital that needs no sleep, no food, no law, only socialized loss and elimination of risk.

    i prefer visionaries at the top. That Bernie's vision may be more delusion than not does not bother me.  R congress will see to it that any non-R president is gridlocked. And no one cares.

    the map gets redrawn in 2020's.  If the D party is a tenth as useful as it claims, it will get winnable districts. Ha!  Instead, the end of the parties is our only way to save the republic.

    1. Madco, if you want proof of the futility of multiparty systems, look at Israel.  No party has ever had amajority there, not even ben Gurion.  So religious right factions shut down El Al on the sabbath, settler militants flood the occupied west bank and bini netanyahu sabotages a two-state solution because his far right would pull out.  Or historically, look at the Confederacy.  In theory, they were all Democrats.  In practice, one party meant no party.  Davis was helpless in dealing with his Congress because he had no party to form a base of support.  Two parties provide accountability.    Small splinters like the Socialists can provide ideas and act as gadflies.   But multiparty or no party is chaos.

      1. They also have proportional representaion whereby every party is guarranteed a number of seats based on the proportion of the population they represent. It's why a country that's 90% secular has to put up with orhodox religious laws. Everybody needs to appease a certain number of  small wackos parties in order to put together a majority coalition which gives the wackos lots of power. But many parliamentary systems with more than one party don't have proportional represention and don't have all that many parties.

      2. I have no idea why you'd claim multiparty systems are futile.  Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Taiwan, are just some perfectly reasonably well functioning multiparty democracies, which commonly have to form coalitions to govern.

        I think it would be harder for us to make a multiparty system work here, in a non-parliamentary system (more particularly because of our focus on first-past-the-post elections).  But it's certainly not impossible.

        1. Proportional representation is at the heart of the problem.   Some, like Germany, require a 5 percent threshold, which only the Greens meet, and that barely.  

        2. Germany is basically two party, the Socialists and Christian Democrats, with the latter having a somewhat different name in Bavaria.  The Greens exist only because of proportional representation.    Italy is living proof that multi-party systems are futile.   And if you think Taiwan is a model democracy, well, good luck with that.

          2. I'd argue there are working examples that are a better example for what it would look like in the USA.

             

            But fine, I accept your premise – new conclusion: the Democratic party must end.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

58 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!