The Capitol Attack Relitigated

[clearspira]

Didn't Bush Jr also get in without the popular vote? The electoral college has always been a problem but it seems many only noticed when it got Trump in.

[TGLS]

Well the NPVIC has been a thing since 2006. There have been polls showing majority support since 1944. The difference is that after 2016 Republican support took a serious plunge and Democrat support surged.

[Draco Dracul]

Didn't Bush Jr also get in without the popular vote? The electoral college has always been a problem but it seems many only noticed when it got Trump in.

There was major outrage at the time. Trump magnified it because it happened twice in less than 20 years.

[Jonathan101]

The electoral college is really the least of America's political problems. It needs a different political system entirely, which would probably mean a new constitution, though fat chance of that happening anytime soon without a civil war.

It's common knowledge amongst constitutional scholars the world over that almost every country that has adopted a US-style political system has suffered all kinds of problems ranging from political violence, revolutions and coups. It's a miracle it has survived as long as it has.

[clearspira]

The electoral college is really the least of America's political problems. It needs a different political system entirely, which would probably mean a new constitution, though fat chance of that happening anytime soon without a civil war.

It's common knowledge amongst constitutional scholars the world over that almost every country that has adopted a US-style political system has suffered all kinds of problems ranging from political violence, revolutions and coups. It's a miracle it has survived as long as it has.

I would say the greatest problem with a US-style system is the fact that you only have two choices. If you don't like the Democrats or the Republicans then you are screwed. No real change can happen because there is literally only one game in town and they know it. You guys often act like there is some big gulf between these parties but there's not, not really. They are just divided on a few key topics.

For example, the UK isn't all that different with the Tories and Labour, BUT, two of the biggest changes to our country in living memory (Brexit and the inevitable Scottish Independence) came about because UKIP and the SNP were able to break into that two party system and leave a lasting impression. It is possible here to give the two party system good kick to the balls if enough people come together in a way that will never happen in the US.

Of course, a two-party system also offers stability in a way that a multiple party or coalition system does not. That's its selling point and a good one at that. It depends, I guess, on what you are hoping to achieve and what you feel is more important.

[TGLS]

It is possible here to give the two party system good kick to the balls if enough people come together in a way that will never happen in the US.

I dunno. People from outside the United States often miss that the Republicans and the Democrats are far less cohesive parties than those in most other countries. You only really get less cohesive parties in one party democracies.

[Jonathan101]

The electoral college is really the least of America's political problems. It needs a different political system entirely, which would probably mean a new constitution, though fat chance of that happening anytime soon without a civil war.

It's common knowledge amongst constitutional scholars the world over that almost every country that has adopted a US-style political system has suffered all kinds of problems ranging from political violence, revolutions and coups. It's a miracle it has survived as long as it has.

I would say the greatest problem with a US-style system is the fact that you only have two choices. If you don't like the Democrats or the Republicans then you are screwed. No real change can happen because there is literally only one game in town and they know it. You guys often act like there is some big gulf between these parties but there's not, not really. They are just divided on a few key topics.

For example, the UK isn't all that different with the Tories and Labour, BUT, two of the biggest changes to our country in living memory (Brexit and the inevitable Scottish Independence) came about because UKIP and the SNP were able to break into that two party system and leave a lasting impression. It is possible here to give the two party system good kick to the balls if enough people come together in a way that will never happen in the US.

Of course, a two-party system also offers stability in a way that a multiple party or coalition system does not. That's its selling point and a good one at that. It depends, I guess, on what you are hoping to achieve and what you feel is more important.

The two party system is created by the Constitution.

It mandates a plurality vote to win, which means that if you've got multiple parties, it makes strategic sense for those parties to merge into two big parties to maximise their chances of victory.

This is, to a certain extent, a problem in pretty much every system, but it is particularly a problem in a US-style one.

It is possible here to give the two party system good kick to the balls if enough people come together in a way that will never happen in the US.

I dunno. People from outside the United States often miss that the Republicans and the Democrats are far less cohesive parties than those in most other countries. You only really get less cohesive parties in one party democracies.

People inside the US often don't see the disunity either. It's more evident right now than in the past with the Trumpists of course, but even then the average not-very-informed voter might not think beyond Republican vs Democrat.

The fact that political divisions are not more blatant in the form of actually different parties means you have to do a bit more detective work to find out what a particular candidate actually supposedly stands for, and a lot more backstage politicking over which factions candidate gets to be the nominee.

(also, the British Tory party is about to implode over the current Prime Minister, so don't underestimate the lack of cohesion in parties in other countries).

[hammerofglass]

I do wonder if the Republican party is looking at an implosion as well. It probably depends on how the midterms go; if the Trump-backed nominees get as thoroughly trounced as the polls are predicting his whole wing of the party will have outlived its usefulness.

[Frustration]

Parts of the US political structure were borrowed from the Romans, who notoriously collapsed into a dictatorship that merely called itself a Republic.

One of the problems the Founding Fathers didn't comprehend is mathematical - you can't make a stable system of mutual control without a minimum of five elements, and as Frank Herbert noted, in politics the tripod is the least stable structure.

[Thebestoftherest]

I do wonder if the Republican party is looking at an implosion as well. It probably depends on how the midterms go; if the Trump-backed nominees get as thoroughly trounced as the polls are predicting his whole wing of the party will have outlived its usefulness.

I have to wonder what will happen to all the politicians who backing on Trump support when he dies. I think it safe to say he closer to the grave than the cradle at this point, how much power will he have once he gone.