This painting just brings a smile to my face

Prince Of Dorkness

dancepartner wrote:

Ugh... never mind.

If you're asking me to predict what the political landscape is going to look like in 20 years... I can maybe make a few guesses... but had you told me 20 years ago that our first black president would give a HUGE shout-out to marriage equality in his second inauguration speech, I'd think you were watching too many episodes of Seaquest DSV.

I'll tell you this much... the days of political parties making points by calling out minorities are gone. So you're already seeing the "conservatives" giving in on immigration and marriage equality and GLBT rights. You're seeing fewer fruitcakes advocating such extreme laws against abortion and women's reproductive rights. You're seeing those social wedge issues have lost most of their political power.

We'll see if that's going to stay that course... but my guess is yes.

dancepartner

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

dancepartner wrote:

Ugh... never mind.

If you're asking me to predict what the political landscape is going to look like in 20 years... I can maybe make a few guesses... but had you told me 20 years ago that our first black president would give a HUGE shout-out to marriage equality in his second inauguration speech, I'd think you were watching too many episodes of Seaquest DSV.

I'll tell you this much... the days of political parties making points by calling out minorities are gone. So you're already seeing the "conservatives" giving in on immigration and marriage equality and GLBT rights. You're seeing fewer fruitcakes advocating such extreme laws against abortion and women's reproductive rights. You're seeing those social wedge issues have lost most of their political power.

We'll see if that's going to stay that course... but my guess is yes.

Oh for a crystal ball. Yeah, I have a hard time with "expert predictors" so I only put you on the spot because this thread had a lightness to it; (a good place to ask someone of your temperment for their prediction... )

I do agree with, & like your phrase of; "social wedge issues". The hot buttons that divide us.

More specific: Do you see a strong 3rd (or 4th) party in America's near-future (as I believe we will see at least 1) to resemble any of the current melee going on or do you see another total remake of the standard dem & rep like you pointed to earlier — ("The Republican Party used to be the liberal party and the Democrats, lead by the extremely-conservative "Dixiecrats," more like today's "tea party," were racist, classist assholes.") finding the flexability they will need in order to remain a 2-party premeir show?

Prince Of Dorkness

dancepartner wrote:

More specific: Do you see a strong 3rd (or 4th) party in America's near-future (as I believe we will see at least 1) to resemble any of the current melee going on or do you see another total remake of the standard dem & rep like you pointed to earlier — ("The Republican Party used to be the liberal party and the Democrats, lead by the extremely-conservative "Dixiecrats," more like today's "tea party," were racist, classist assholes.") finding the flexability they will need in order to remain a 2-party premeir show?

what I think it likely to happen is that as the regional needs and demands of different areas will lead to the rise of smaller "regional interest parties."

In Canada, one of the biggest political parties is the Bloq Quebecois. But they only run candidates in one province. Their entire mandate is to represent the interests of the Quebecois. (those are French-speaking Canadians of French descent. Just living in Quebec doesn't make you Quecbois, just like living in New Orleans doesn't make you Cajun and living in Anchorage doesn't make you an Eskimo.

I think you'll see "The Southern Heritage Party" and "The Dixiecrat" party.

I wouldn't be surprised to see The Green Party electing congressmen and senators on the west coast...

but the reason that we have a two-party system is that we vote for a local representative and then a national one. Which makes us choose party sides. And no presidential candidate other than Ross Perot in the early 90s has ever inspired enough people to abandon their party allegiance, and that was at an odd time when the parties really WERE switching.

The "Reagan Democrats" had voted for George Bush and he was a god-awful, horrible, wretched and unforgivably bad president. He never gets the same vitriol that Clinton, Carter or Bush Jr get because he was so horrible that few people even were aware of him. He just did nothing. And none of it well.

dancepartner

Prince o D said; "I think you'll see "The Southern Heritage Party" and "The Dixiecrat" party.

I wouldn't be surprised to see The Green Party electing congressmen and senators on the west coast..."

thanks. I was interested in your take. Oftentimes, you bring a splash of history into your posts which includes a feel for why such and such developed. True; history often repeats itself; good experiences are worth repeating, bad ones are often the same debacle-types our uncles & their uncles & their uncles kept running into resulting in the ebb & flow of brewed modifications. Yet, once & awhile an anomaly comes along & takes human development in another 'who wouda thunk' direction.
To me, this explains your southern Heritage & Dixiecrat revisit but it's your green party comment that's a bit deflating for me. Guess it's the price I pay for being an optimist. I'd say you are likely 90% right but I'm holding out for the 10%, once & awhile anomaly.
I guess I was hoping you'd 'predict' a strong, 3rd party emerging in our lifetime -- be it green or otherwise.

Prince Of Dorkness

dancepartner wrote:

& Dixiecrat revisit but it's your green party comment that's a bit deflating for me. Guess it's the price I pay for being an optimist. I'd say you are likely 90% right but I'm holding out for the 10%, once & awhile anomaly.
I guess I was hoping you'd 'predict' a strong, 3rd party emerging in our lifetime -- be it green or otherwise.

OK so I should explain those more and I'm going to sound like a plutocratic asshole and I don't give a shit.

"The Southern Heritage Party" and "The Dixiecrat" parties that I imagine existing are because the south states are, sadly, relatively poor, lower-educated and under a strangle-hold by white Christians who see their place atop some imagined mountain eroding away.

The president was right... They cling to their guns and their bible and while everything from education, economic level and even history says that "you are not special in any way," the guns and bible stories and skin color used to make them feel special in the old world and they can't deal with a world where they no longer do.

So while the rest of the country progresses away from a time when being white a middle class made you the backbone of the country, they will for, secessionist parties wanting to leave the Union and steadfastly dig their heels in, making laws to keep down anyone who threatens their place in their own worlds.

It's sad... but it's the way it is.