Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (37860)	5/25/2007 11:12:34 AM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 542233

Sam: but as long as we have a winner-take-all electoral system, we can't have more than two. Just not possible. Good comments, and I agree. In my state, you have to commit to being democrat or republican in the primary and can't cross party lines to vote. You can check the independent box - but then you can't vote for any republican or democrat. Think of the result of this in terms of local candidates - commissioners for instance. This is new, so the grip the two parties have on the people is strengthening. steve

To: Sam who wrote (37860)	5/25/2007 1:16:02 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542233

The libertarian wing of the GOP is still pretty strong. They thought Bush was their man, that the Christian business could be controlled, and that Bush wouldn't do anything crazy, but would just keep lowering taxes and not enforcing regulation. They found out differently. They have been outmaneuvered both by neocons and by the Christians, and have received far less attention than their numbers in the party warrants, IMHO. So they are pissed. Paul is a voice for them. He will appeal to the people who voted for Perot in '92. I think he'll do a lot better than the media is expecting. Hmm, I've understood it a bit differently. Let me state my view and then let me know where we disagree. I've seen the Reps as an uneasy alliance between two groups: big business interests (with some tag along small business constituents) and social conservatives. Principled libertarians were tolerated and, since they certainly couldn't find an ideological home in the Dem party with its commitment to a large state, they went along with the Reps for the ride. The big business group wanted a small state in so far as regulation issues were concerned but a more munificient state in so far as infrastructure issues were involved--education, transportation, etc. So I haven't seen the principled libertarians as having much influence inside the Rep Party. And, some hope they might swing to the Dems, sort of because of their preference for choice in life styles and women's health issues. Sort of the "keep the big brother out of our lives" vote. So where do we differ?