General discussion


American Politics -- 3 on 3

By olprof67 ·
Heading into what seems to be the most polarized election in 40 years, I'd like to postulate a new theory of the dynamics of the electorate in recent days.

As a number of writers have noted, ideology became a much stronger component of the political spectrum with the coming of age of the baby boom in the late 1960's. The Democrats' faith in central planning began to fragment in the wake of Vietnam, while the Republicans' social conservatism became a drawback in the attempt to recruit young voters.

The more ideologically-oriented of liberal voters were drawn to a number of movements, usually with a different single issue at the core but united in opposition to what was identified as the military-industrial complex, while disaffected Republicans split between traditionalist single causes (abortion being the most prominent) and a growing Libertarian movement.

Note too, that despite their emergence, the more ideologically-oriented of each side tended to carry a strong prejudice against the opposite core party. Though Greens and Libertarians might be able to engage in intelligent and cordial discourse, it is rare to find a Libertarian who doesn't carry a deep-seated predisposition against the Democrats, and vice-versa.

Now add to this mix the disaffected populist wing of both parties; the most socialistically-oriented of the liberal Democrats, and the populist conservatives who have emerged in the wake of Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity et. al.

With the electorate again polarized, and the better-educated of both sides locked in place by ideological commitments, it could well be that the final outcome may be affected by a last-minute indiscretion by the disaffected wing of either party.

Ladies and gentlemen, please comment.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

32 total posts (Page 4 of 4)   Prev   02 | 03 | 04
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

The Electorate College could vote for a Dictator.

by admin In reply to Are you saying...

There is actually this theory going around right now that a certain Country is buying off the U.S. Electorate to do just that at some point in the future.

An Electoral College President elected broadly aginst the will of the people would probably not stand unless the military was also involved and would not refuse Executive orders at some point. This was probably not as much of a problem to our countries framers, who would not expect an Electoral College Coup in conjunction with the Military as they relied on individual militias joining together.

There are dangers both ways, but the popular vote is less likely to make mistakes on whims and fancies as a benefit of the Electoral College process and the Electorates would face tremendous public uproar if they vote on their personalwhims and fancies. It's a gamble, but less of one when there are checks and balances such as this IMO. I would not really want any one group in possesion of absolute power in our government, and the Executive branch possesses the power to become absolute under certain situations unlike the Judicial or Legislative. I think due diligence and prudence in arranging checks and balances in this is of some benefit. I could go for a different system, but would want more distribution of power- not less.

That's just my opinion though :>

Collapse -

An Apochryphal Comment

by olprof67 In reply to The Tyranny of the masses ...

"Democracy consists of the masses, led by the asses."

(author unknown) :)

Back to IT Employment Forum
32 total posts (Page 4 of 4)   Prev   02 | 03 | 04

Related Discussions

Related Forums