John Dingall - Democrat, wants to abolish the entire Senate

[beenherebeforeagain]

And the losers' votes are always ignored.
You cannot change that.

Sure you can! It's called "proportional representation," and it seems to work pretty well in parliamentary systems (from my point of view as an outsider). Minor parties often must be drawn into coalition with one of the major parties in order to form an effective governing legislature.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Do all Brits get what they want with a parliamentary system?
Nah.

Some people don't get what they want all the time, ergo, it won't work...

 

[columbus]

Do all Brits get what they want with a parliamentary system?
Nah.

That's a remarkably stupid response.
I didn't suggest that all Brits get what they want.
But it's better than the USA system, where even a majority might find themselves subject to "the tyranny of the minority", a position you reliably support.
Tom

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Do all Brits get what they want with a parliamentary system?
Nah.

They can't get what they want, when they always get what they vote for.
Same as the USA.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sure you can! It's called "proportional representation," and it seems to work pretty well in parliamentary systems (from my point of view as an outsider). Minor parties often must be drawn into coalition with one of the major parties in order to form an effective governing legislature.

I prefer proportional representation.
But not everyone gets to have their way, eg, Brexit.
And electing a president will never be proportional.
So in every election, about half the country will be
chortling with glee, while the others cry "Hitler!".

 

[Revoltingest]

That's a remarkably stupid response.

A response in kind, eh.

 

[Revoltingest]

They can't get what they want, when they always get what they vote for.
Same as the USA.

You can't have it both ways.

Exactly.

 

[columbus]

And electing a president will never be proportional.

Maybe the problem is that the USA has changed hugely since the slavers ran the country.
There's only one president. But suppose, instead of being appointed by an Electoral College POTUS needed a plurality and we held run off votes when no candidate got one?
Tom

 

[Nakosis]

It pretty much speaks for itself.

It makes me wonder what Mr. Dingell would have thought had the Democrats took the Senate and Republicans retained the House.

John Dingell's plan for America? Let's abolish the U.S. Senate

It's a head-scratcher considering his military service, age and experience in government as to why he would come across such a ridiculous notion.

All I can think of is encroaching senility and loss of political vision, being he's been a politician for so long. It's my opinion he obviously lost touch which is why I'm more in favor of term limits as opposed to restructuring of government itself.

Either way, I'm pretty sure it wasn't what the founding fathers would have wanted in terms of a having or promoting a centralized government (which is what I think modern Democrats are shooting for in the first place) which is why we have the House and Senate in the first place I would think.

What are your thoughts about it?

I think we should do away with political parties. Everybody runs as an independant.

 

[columbus]

A response in kind, eh.

I didn't edit and misrepresent your post.

I never suggested that all Brits get what they want. That isn't the point to a parliamentary system.

Basket of Deplorables isn't so far off.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

I didn't edit and misrepresent your post.

I never suggested that all Brits get what they want. That isn't the point to a parliamentary system.

Basket of Deplorables isn't so far off.
Tom

Bless your heart.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I think we should do away with political parties. Everybody runs as an independant.

they'll just hide their affiliation...state of Nebraska elects its unicameral legislature without declared parties...yet everyone knows which party each candidate is from...

rather than trying to do away with parties, we should tear down the barriers that the major parties in the US have installed to prevent minor party and independent candidates from getting on the ballot in the first place...a few more choices and election results might change considerably.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It pretty much speaks for itself.

It makes me wonder what Mr. Dingell would have thought had the Democrats took the Senate and Republicans retained the House.

John Dingell's plan for America? Let's abolish the U.S. Senate

It's a head-scratcher considering his military service, age and experience in government as to why he would come across such a ridiculous notion.

All I can think of is encroaching senility and loss of political vision, being he's been a politician for so long. It's my opinion he obviously lost touch which is why I'm more in favor of term limits as opposed to restructuring of government itself.

Either way, I'm pretty sure it wasn't what the founding fathers would have wanted in terms of a having or promoting a centralized government (which is what I think modern Democrats are shooting for in the first place) which is why we have the House and Senate in the first place I would think.

What are your thoughts about it?

Have you read his book?

 

[Stevicus]

It pretty much speaks for itself.

It makes me wonder what Mr. Dingell would have thought had the Democrats took the Senate and Republicans retained the House.

John Dingell's plan for America? Let's abolish the U.S. Senate

It's a head-scratcher considering his military service, age and experience in government as to why he would come across such a ridiculous notion.

All I can think of is encroaching senility and loss of political vision, being he's been a politician for so long. It's my opinion he obviously lost touch which is why I'm more in favor of term limits as opposed to restructuring of government itself.

Either way, I'm pretty sure it wasn't what the founding fathers would have wanted in terms of a having or promoting a centralized government (which is what I think modern Democrats are shooting for in the first place) which is why we have the House and Senate in the first place I would think.

What are your thoughts about it?

I've noticed such views gaining prevalence, especially in light of the 2016 election and all the squabbling over the Electoral College and the popular vote.

What it really means it the elimination of semi-autonomous "states" and having everything under a centralized national government. This steps on the toes of States' Rights advocates, but then again, the same principle isn't really transferred to how state governments relate to county and municipal governments. The same States' Rights advocates who argue against a centralized national government ostensibly want centralized governments within states, which appears to be a betrayal of the basic principle of self-rule and local autonomy.

I suppose another possibility could be to reorganize the individual 50 states and make them into 10 states, each with a population of about 30 - 31 million. That way, no one state could have a numerical advantage over another. It might also be more efficient to have large metro areas (which might be in 2 or more states) all within the same state. Suburbs in multiple states could also be absorbed into their larger cities as a way of sharing and redistributing resources.

 

[sun rise]

No, not with a first name like that.
We don't want the country run by people with names like....
Beto
Skipper
Buffy
Gonzo
Muffin
Great names for puppets though.

Much MUCH better than "Donny".

 

[sun rise]

There's no way that election would've turned out well.
But without the EC, perhaps Trump would've chosen
his campaign venues differently. After all, he strove
to win the presidency, not the popular vote.
His competitor chose the popularity contest.

When power is your goal, you choose the route that favors power.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Much MUCH better than "Donny".

You mean, "The Donald."

 

[sun rise]

<Shudder>

Or Hillary...

Get ready to shudder a LOT

 

[sun rise]

You mean, "The Donald."

Der Donald also works.

 

[Jumi]

I never quite grasped the difference between senate and congress in the two party system. Not that I really tried mind you. We have just one house parliament and multiple parties. Democracy doesn't exactly go away with having just one parliament...