broder on electoral college considerations
cohen on nonsense
wills on voter responsibility
This is why the post beats the NY Times...
broder examines the electoral college, thoughtfully
cohen suggests that O'Reilly's "victim" is really no victim
wills suggests that voters are not "disenfranchised" by every single thing.
This in interesting and thoughtful writing, methinks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Broder:
"A bigger problem, Best and others argue, could be the effect on the two-party system. Most proposals for direct election specify a minimum percentage for victory -- usually 40 percent or 45 percent -- with a runoff between the top two contenders if no one reaches that threshold."
Here Broder assumes that this is a problem. He needs to prove this point. The IS the role of "fringe" parties. To sway the electoral process. The two party system is not written into the constitution. It was not considered a part of the American form of republican government. It just happened to come to be. Why would it be a problem to ditch that?
No problem at all to ditch the entrenched two parties that make up this two party system. In DC, there are theme statues of donkeys and elephants, as if the Democratic and Republican parties ARE the government.
John Cobb, of the Green Party will seek to get some legislators into congress: huzzah! say I.
Besides, we don't have too parties: we have one party, the Corporate Party, with two factions: the Repulican faction and the Democratic faction: neither one dare step out of line.
I notices tonight on NOW, how the parties so utterly limit the agenda: Bush lives and dies by his war. How refreshing it would be to have a third party suggest that the whole war thing is bullshit. We have noting to fear but fear itself. And the Bush organization knows that as they beats the drums of fear.
Post a Comment