Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[clement]

A few years ago didn't France have this situation with multiple parties, and the vote was spread between them, and some Nazi dude made it to the final runoff?

Yes. Jean-Marie Le Pen. He wasn't an actual nazi, but he was definitely a xenophobic, ultra-nationalist fascist who was both anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim. Basically he's anti-foreigner. But yeah, he shocked the world when he came in second in the 2002 presidential election beating out the socialist candidate Lionel Jospin. So the runoff was between Chirac and Le Pen. I took part in a march in Paris in favor of Chirac. This was a case where all the people on the left came out in full force to back the candidate on the right, to send a strong message that Le Pen's politics were not welcome. Chirac won the runoff with 82% of the vote.

[Hudler]

I'm pretty sure the US government has spying on citizens for longer than 8 years. It just gets more press when a Republican administration does it. Do you really think it's going away when Obama gets elected?

Link? I've never heard of widespread spying on people during
the Clinton years or even during the Reagan years. And I'm a
firm supporter of RICO.

Good lord, if it even happened, does that make it ok? One of
my greatest hopes is that Obama restores the Constitution.

And the liberal press thing: old and refuted decisively. The
corporate media is decidedly RW; but they are always, first and
foremost, frontrunners. They WILL pile on the Bush administration
because they were so inept/corrupt, but they cheered them all
the way during the "golden" years.

The wack-job that ran the FBI for most of it's existance kept files on any and everyone,including survailance and wiretaps,usually with very little evidence. (no link,I'm to lazy and hungover to find one) I wasn't implying to it is OK,just that it is a fact.

[Freed Roger]

A few years ago didn't France have this situation with multiple parties, and the vote was spread between them, and some Nazi dude made it to the final runoff?

Yes. Jean-Marie Le Pen. He wasn't an actual nazi, but he was definitely a xenophobic, ultra-nationalist fascist who was both anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim. Basically he's anti-foreigner. But yeah, he shocked the world when he came in second in the 2002 presidential election beating out the socialist candidate Lionel Jospin. So the runoff was between Chirac and Le Pen. I took part in a march in Paris in favor of Chirac. This was a case where all the people on the left came out in full force to back the candidate on the right, to send a strong message that Le Pen's politics were not welcome. Chirac won the runoff with 82% of the vote.

Thanks for the fill-in.

Our country's next foray into 3rd parties could be moral conservatives (or whatever they're called) splintering off from the GOP. Then they will realize they have no chance to win without major money, so they will return back to the coop. The 3rd party that most wish for - more of a centrist group, will probably never happen, unless the candidate happens to be a multi-billionaire (which I'm always suspicious of). Otherwise there's no way to stir pa$$ion amongst the donors. Moderate is not sexy.

IMO the viable way to have moderation in this country is a) secure a strong democratic party that can finally match the strength of the republican party that has dominated the last 2 decades of DC. b) work within each respective party to rid themselves of extremists, and move the platforms away from wedge issues. c) eventual gridlock where neither party can get anything done, without the cooperation of the other. Thus, only worthwhile legislation will get passed.

[Richie Allen]

I've always wished that a third party could compete in this country but the more I think about it the more I'm convinced that it wouldn't make a bit of difference. Just more lamebrain millionaires in the picture to piss me off. The Presidential debates would be just like the party debates are now, with the trailing candidates ganging up on the leader, and in the end we'd probably end up with one of the same clowns we'd get with a two party system but now possibly two thirds of the country would hate the choice and spend the next four years complaining.

[greenback44]

Except when they've done things like elect Adolf Hitler.

I understand why progressives and libertarians want a third party, but I'm rather happy with a system that favors bland centrists like Obama.

Heck, we've had Dick Cheney for the last eight years.

How's that worked for us?

We've been a whisper from martial law for the last four years.
Torture, no habeus corpus, no posse commitatus, illegal war,
and spying on American citizens. Maybe not Hitler material,
but certainly not the America I thought I knew.

Um, maybe not Hitler material? Every day for a year I walked past a memorial for a synagogue burned down on Kristallnacht, so the difference is stark to me.

The United States government has a long, established pattern of not living up to its ideals. You probably know more about the sins of J Edgar Hoover, internment camps for Japanse-Americans, the United Fruit Company, the CIA's behavior, gunboat diplomacy, the various misdeeds in Indochina, etc. than I do. I'm not saying this is a good thing -- and, in fact, I tend to agree with Reverend Wright's rather unpleasant discourse on the subject -- but what we've seen from Bush has been consistent with our level of badness. Considering the significance of the events of 9/11, Bush's envelope-pushing has been tamer than I expected, and I'd guess tamer than historical norms, since in 2001 the American public wouldn't have needed much convincing to take steps similar to what FDR took during WW2 or Lincoln took during the Civil War.

[Arthur Dent]

And you believe that two party democracy has been the restraining force? I'm afraid I don't see it.

[BW23]

I don't believe that the far right can be anything more than a supplement to a party. Most people I know, even religious people, are really turned off by the far right. No way a party can be centered around that and succeed. If I'm misjudging that, then I don't know or understand this country any longer. I do not consider Reagan and Bush I Republicans to be anywhere close to what the conservatives in the party are today. That may be where it started, but where that party was and where the neo-cons of today want the party to be are different places.

I agree with richie mostly, but I do think McCain's best chance was to be himself.

What I stated the other day in why I lean right is pretty much far right, IMO. Obviously, religion plays a part with how I view certain issues (abortion, for example). And I know very, very, very, very few Christians who aren't conservatives. So I don't know what religious people you've talked to (or what religion they are, but it's quite the contrast from those I talk to.

But I guess we contrast on, well, everything.

[GatewaySnayke]

OK, I watched the McCain stuff on MTP. It was...something. He really hates being called George W. Bush. And his explanation into why it's OK to tax people more eight and four years ago and why it's not OK now was incoherent. When he talked about why it was necessary to buy back bad mortgages, he was essentially arguing for a socialist policy, but tried to frame it as something more capitalist because it would keep home values high if your neighbor doesn't get foreclosed on.

[cpebbles]

Sorry, if I somehow missed this being linked earlier.

[/youtube]

Drat that liberal media!

[ghostrunner]

Someone wrote it recently, but the ship on redistributing wealth has sailed. We've been doing it for almost a century, and at much higher levels than we are today. I don't know why conservatives act as if this is some bold statement from Obama.

Everyone has a different threshold they're comfortable with. Mine's at about 50% for the top bracket. I'm pretty much okay with anything under that.