Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
Somehow you don't mind TWO parties ruling the nation intermittently for hundreds of years, but are afraid of TWENTY areas which might take a lead if any changes are introduced into the voting system.
Left wing (US def) politics markets better than conservatism. It is easy to feel that the little gal is being "wronged" by corporations, by the moneyed class who gets any opportunity they desire, by fate etc. The US political left plays staunchly to this style of voter, and offers policies to protect and better their lot by taking the money from those who have more and using it to fund government safety, support, and welfare programs. You can feel good emotionally about "helping" by voting for such an agenda.

This approach has put the DEMs into commanding leads -- sometimes approaching 85% of the votes -- in all of our major urban areas.

Conservatism virtually always loses a national popularity contest because -- save immediately after a crisis when jingoism is 'in' -- it simply isn't "sexy." So, if we have a completely unrestricted vote that works as one national popularity contest, the conservative side of the GOP is done. There will be the Democrats, who will absorb some of the GOPs elements and morph into a more or less classic Social Democrat style party in Euro terms, and then we will have political growth on the farther left and probably end up with a socialist party and a green party. But the conservatives will be reduced to an 'arm' of the Dems that is listened to but seldom in political affairs.

I have never viewed the social democrat economic model as capable of sustaining the lifestyle to which Americans are accustomed, certainly not without punitive level taxation.

So pardon me if I don't get all "warm and fuzzy" over near absolute democracies. I find the flaws too high a price for the ideals being sought.


Franklin is reputed to have said to one citizen that our government was "A republic, if you can keep it."

The electoral college, FPTP, and other aspects of our Constitution seek to do just that. However flawed it may be in some ways, our founders revered free speech, but feared total democracy.