It will never get better until the GOP is unelectable, and then it might still shift into the one-party Democratic primaries.
Even in the best case scenario, Clinton has 8 years of fighting a stonewalling and evil congress, followed by what I assume is Neo-Hitler running on the GOP ticket in 2024.
A big difference is that the general public takes direct part in primaries. You'd likely end up having, for the short term, a Democratic primary that is, for all intents and purposes, the election, and then a token presidential election against a straw Republican. The downticket items would probably continue as they do now unabated.
But yeah, if there weren't a realignment to return to two major parties within a couple of presidential elections, King Caucus is back. America isn't capable of degenerating into the status one party system of a nation like Japan.
The other big difference is that in the last two centuries we have expanded our ability to repress fringe parties. The American populous may be incapable of degenerating but I don't doubt that such concentrated power would rob the people of their ability to resist it. A one party system would be the demise of opposition in electoral politics. It would bring about the very environment that the Democratic Party was founded in defiance of.
A possibility would be that the Democrats end up being a near-majority party, and are surrounded by a few conservative parties and a liberal/socialist party. They'd effectively win every presidential race, but would be unable to achieve significant legislation without the approval and cooperation of at least one of the minority parties.
Granted, that would require a sea change on the local level that could only even begin to occur in the vacuum left by a collapsed GOP...
Long term, I don't even know what I want. Even if we returned in 20 years to the status quo of two dominant and relatively equally powerful parties, the progress we could make during those 20 years with a Democratic lockup could be enormous.
Local politics is where minority parties have seen the most repression. We've thrown democratically elected socialists and anarchists out of local seats and have done nothing to prevent that happening in the future.
Long term I just want to eliminate plurality elections altogether so that this entire conversation is moot.
I've been trying to split from the "Millennials" for a while now. I've seen huge cultural divides between people my age and those usually referred to as "Millennials". I was generally drew the line at whether you could remember 9/11 or not, which would put me right on the edge between "millennials" and the new generation. I don't like calling us "young millennials" tho. I don't feel a tie to "Millennial"s at all. We are a new culture. The culture is too young to be well defined, but I can already tell it is distinct from those before us.
Generation labels kinda suck but are fun to debate.
I like to think of myself as a Millennial, but I realize I have a family, own a home and have a decent paying job lol...... So I can't count as one right?
I like the "what world news event do you remember?" as the deciding factor (or one of them) not age or current station in life.
I remember: Challenger Berlin Wall Tianamen Square End of Apartheid Gulf War
All of that passed my girlfriend by. Her first big news event was Princess Diana dying. I have other friends for whom 9/11 isn't a big thing, even if they were dimly aware of it.
I'm at the same point as your girlfriend. I remember the hubub of Princes Di dying and Bill Clinton being voted in his second term, but not much before that.
The 2000 election was the first major political event I was really aware of. But really, I think it's people who are too young to remember Bill Clinton's first term who are the "young millenials" being talked about (who aren't voting for Hillary and, y'know, endangering the American project).
The 2000 election was the first major political event I was really aware of. But really, I think it's people who are too young to remember Bill Clinton's first term who are the "young millenials" being talked about (who aren't voting for Hillary and, y'know, endangering the American project).
That's rather generalizing, I'm in that group and am happily voting for Clinton.
The 2000 election was the first major political event I was really aware of. But really, I think it's people who are too young to remember Bill Clinton's first term who are the "young millenials" being talked about (who aren't voting for Hillary and, y'know, endangering the American project).
That's rather generalizing, I'm in that group and am happily voting for Clinton.
By this logic antebellum South was progressive because John Brown armed slaves Harper's Ferry.
I tried really hard to find an analogy from the last 25 years and I couldnt think of one. I think I read too much history...
Since a Millennial is designated as someone born past 1980, that's a pretty significant gap considering so much has changed socially and technology wise (and technology is important for how it exposes people to mature/global ideas) By the looks of things, 9/11 is the key dividing point between old and young millennials.
Somehow Trump is bouncing back in the polls. You can't shame or logic the supporters since they love those memes and statistics and snappy comebacks. So how do you dismantle what is essentially a morass of ignorance?
Protest vote: "I didn't think the leopards would eat MY face!" says person who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces party. ~Saw on twitter around the time of brexit
After having been asked how he would curb black-on-black violence in inner cities, Trump suggests to heavily enforce "stop-and-frisk". And there goes the 4th Amendment.
Reading through some of the justifications from random internet people and seriously, I'd like to puke.
In the article it makes the distinction of anyone born past 1990 as a "Young Millennial". The notion being that the first Presidential Election was in 2008 for Obama.
History doesn't exactly repeat but it sure likes to rhyme. One big difference I see between now and then is the non-White vote carries much more weight than in previous elections, and Trump has gone out of his way to alienate everyone except his core supporters.
What's worse is that Luckey is also linked heavily to GamerGate bullshit, so it's a double-whammy of huge disappointment from a guy I originally had a bit of respect for.
Comments
Even in the best case scenario, Clinton has 8 years of fighting a stonewalling and evil congress, followed by what I assume is Neo-Hitler running on the GOP ticket in 2024.
But yeah, if there weren't a realignment to return to two major parties within a couple of presidential elections, King Caucus is back. America isn't capable of degenerating into the status one party system of a nation like Japan.
Imagine
Democrats - 45%
Berniecrats - 10%
Libertarians - 10%
Republicans - 25%
Trumpists - 10%
Granted, that would require a sea change on the local level that could only even begin to occur in the vacuum left by a collapsed GOP...
Long term, I don't even know what I want. Even if we returned in 20 years to the status quo of two dominant and relatively equally powerful parties, the progress we could make during those 20 years with a Democratic lockup could be enormous.
Long term I just want to eliminate plurality elections altogether so that this entire conversation is moot.
"Clinton’s real millennial problem: young Americans are less loyal to Democrats"
http://www.vox.com/2016/9/21/12963334/clinton-millennial-problem
I like to think of myself as a Millennial, but I realize I have a family, own a home and have a decent paying job lol...... So I can't count as one right?
I remember:
Challenger
Berlin Wall
Tianamen Square
End of Apartheid
Gulf War
All of that passed my girlfriend by. Her first big news event was Princess Diana dying. I have other friends for whom 9/11 isn't a big thing, even if they were dimly aware of it.
But really, I think it's people who are too young to remember Bill Clinton's first term who are the "young millenials" being talked about (who aren't voting for Hillary and, y'know, endangering the American project).
I tried really hard to find an analogy from the last 25 years and I couldnt think of one. I think I read too much history...
Somehow Trump is bouncing back in the polls. You can't shame or logic the supporters since they love those memes and statistics and snappy comebacks. So how do you dismantle what is essentially a morass of ignorance?
1. People who think a "protest vote" is a thing
2. People who are ACTUALLY UNDECIDED
Think for a minute. Imagine the kind of person who, on this day, looks at Trump and Clinton and HONESTLY ISN'T SURE.
Those people are the ones who will decide the fate of the nation.
Reading through some of the justifications from random internet people and seriously, I'd like to puke.
That last sentence put chills in my body.
I found this other article as well.
http://www.vox.com/2016/9/21/12987108/sanders-clinton-nixon-humphrey
History doesn't exactly repeat but it sure likes to rhyme. One big difference I see between now and then is the non-White vote carries much more weight than in previous elections, and Trump has gone out of his way to alienate everyone except his core supporters.