David Brooks and Arianna Huffington argue for shaking up the two parties to get healthier competition of ideas in the "Intelligent Debates" show. Huffington noted that France is ahead of us in upward mobility indexes under our two party polarized system.
She noted "France being ahead of us in upward mobility is like saying we are ahead of France
in better croissants and afternoon sex."
P.J. O'Rourke said he didn't want loopey third parties like the 'Garden Gnome Party' to which Brooks chimed in "that was Mike Dukakis."
The point is well taken by Brooks who covers congress closely that people generally come to politics with the best of intentions but have to line up with the party prerogatives and any dissent is viewed as disloyal. This makes people conform to behaviors that stunt their creative progress.
Huffington says that people are giving up on making the world better through politics but engaging in civic engagement on a smaller scale instead, because the two party system is something people have given up on and there are unprecedented numbers of registered independents now. P.J. O' Rourke says it looks like a phase.
Are we temporarily ungovernable or badly governed? The budget crisis isn't going away, argued P.J. those
"dumb SOBs down in Washington will have to own up to this fact"
Huffington, says we need to take steps to make it better and shake up the dysfunctional stagnant two party system. Allow more competition. It is at the essence of a freedom based system. We believe in it in everything but politics.
It's a great debate to have. The polarized platforms ideologically lock out lots of people who can't in conscience subscribe to one or the other lock step. "People do not trust establishments" said Huffington.
"Movement" candidates only get three percent of the vote. Obama was a party institutional candidate with all the party backing, he wasn't a movement candidate. John Adams said political parties are there to govern passions, argued another panelists who said the two parties are able to channel productively all the passions of anti-establishmentarianism, economic dissafection, social estrangement or disaffection and creative impulses. Should Congress be like a football game with just two sides?
Do we have less a common narrative, greater bifurcation of news, is the problem in the way information flows through the country and tribes around facts rather than interpretation?
Brooks noted more people have Ferrets than watch Fox news but it has a lot of centralized power of information flow.
The extreme polarization, P.J noted is more normal than not. Brooks disagreed. Brooks says that this is much more stagnant and stuck -lack of agreement, the leadership nature itself changed, people are not as free to put forward ideas.
A solution? Non party primaries. A third percent of the country isn't offered anything. Non party primaries gives them something. A third of the country is totally disaffected and don't vote. A lot of people do not feel represented by any of the two parties.
Would a multiplicity of parties make it more ungovernable? Zev Chafies says politicians will make find a way to game any system. So if its open to anyone- it would be more chaos.
The only place I know where people are forced to vote is North Korea said Zev.
Brooks says he considers himself Hamiltonian and he is a bit of a misfit on these talking shows because he sits in the Republican seat. The labels speak about what team you are on.
Huffington concludes that the two party system is like a stale marriage that needs a little
spicing up-they need to go on Craig's List and find a third party. (Huffington, a bottle blonde in black velvet does seem to be the wild card on these shows.) O'Rourke is the author of "Don't vote, it just encourages the Bastards.' He thinks the two party system keeps governance within real life. We all say we are all a bit of both democrat and republican. No one turns down a government benefit but no one says "oh goodie" when their taxes go up. "Two parties is as many as I can stand" said O'Rourke. "If the third party is not wearing a shirt, you may want to do a background check...he may be in congress" arguing for different fresh blood than the characters who are locked into the partisanship, argued Huffington. (shirtless third second or first parties are generally never welcome.)
She noted that the failed two party system has more African Americans in jail than in permenant jobs.
Zev said "we stand at Armegeddon and we stand for the Lord" quoting Teddy Roosevelt.
Zev said that America is a highly governed country ergo the system is not failing. No society is perfect.
Brooks said if he and Ariana were elected they would not be able to reach agreement or sit in the same room negotiating because the two parties are too totally
RIGID. It precludes reaching agreement or solutions. We have too many problems that need resolving. He said "vote for the glamorous side" and vote for Arianna's position that we need
a major shaking up.
The problems speak for themselves.
She noted "France being ahead of us in upward mobility is like saying we are ahead of France
in better croissants and afternoon sex."
P.J. O'Rourke said he didn't want loopey third parties like the 'Garden Gnome Party' to which Brooks chimed in "that was Mike Dukakis."
The point is well taken by Brooks who covers congress closely that people generally come to politics with the best of intentions but have to line up with the party prerogatives and any dissent is viewed as disloyal. This makes people conform to behaviors that stunt their creative progress.
Huffington says that people are giving up on making the world better through politics but engaging in civic engagement on a smaller scale instead, because the two party system is something people have given up on and there are unprecedented numbers of registered independents now. P.J. O' Rourke says it looks like a phase.
Are we temporarily ungovernable or badly governed? The budget crisis isn't going away, argued P.J. those
"dumb SOBs down in Washington will have to own up to this fact"
Huffington, says we need to take steps to make it better and shake up the dysfunctional stagnant two party system. Allow more competition. It is at the essence of a freedom based system. We believe in it in everything but politics.
It's a great debate to have. The polarized platforms ideologically lock out lots of people who can't in conscience subscribe to one or the other lock step. "People do not trust establishments" said Huffington.
"Movement" candidates only get three percent of the vote. Obama was a party institutional candidate with all the party backing, he wasn't a movement candidate. John Adams said political parties are there to govern passions, argued another panelists who said the two parties are able to channel productively all the passions of anti-establishmentarianism, economic dissafection, social estrangement or disaffection and creative impulses. Should Congress be like a football game with just two sides?
Do we have less a common narrative, greater bifurcation of news, is the problem in the way information flows through the country and tribes around facts rather than interpretation?
Brooks noted more people have Ferrets than watch Fox news but it has a lot of centralized power of information flow.
The extreme polarization, P.J noted is more normal than not. Brooks disagreed. Brooks says that this is much more stagnant and stuck -lack of agreement, the leadership nature itself changed, people are not as free to put forward ideas.
A solution? Non party primaries. A third percent of the country isn't offered anything. Non party primaries gives them something. A third of the country is totally disaffected and don't vote. A lot of people do not feel represented by any of the two parties.
Would a multiplicity of parties make it more ungovernable? Zev Chafies says politicians will make find a way to game any system. So if its open to anyone- it would be more chaos.
The only place I know where people are forced to vote is North Korea said Zev.
Brooks says he considers himself Hamiltonian and he is a bit of a misfit on these talking shows because he sits in the Republican seat. The labels speak about what team you are on.
Huffington concludes that the two party system is like a stale marriage that needs a little
spicing up-they need to go on Craig's List and find a third party. (Huffington, a bottle blonde in black velvet does seem to be the wild card on these shows.) O'Rourke is the author of "Don't vote, it just encourages the Bastards.' He thinks the two party system keeps governance within real life. We all say we are all a bit of both democrat and republican. No one turns down a government benefit but no one says "oh goodie" when their taxes go up. "Two parties is as many as I can stand" said O'Rourke. "If the third party is not wearing a shirt, you may want to do a background check...he may be in congress" arguing for different fresh blood than the characters who are locked into the partisanship, argued Huffington. (shirtless third second or first parties are generally never welcome.)
She noted that the failed two party system has more African Americans in jail than in permenant jobs.
Zev said "we stand at Armegeddon and we stand for the Lord" quoting Teddy Roosevelt.
Zev said that America is a highly governed country ergo the system is not failing. No society is perfect.
Brooks said if he and Ariana were elected they would not be able to reach agreement or sit in the same room negotiating because the two parties are too totally
RIGID. It precludes reaching agreement or solutions. We have too many problems that need resolving. He said "vote for the glamorous side" and vote for Arianna's position that we need
a major shaking up.
The problems speak for themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment