CHANGE!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I wish people would've seen him as the stinknut he was bad in 08.  He's from Chicago, come on.  I don't even see how the fuck can anyone feel comfortable in trusting either R's or D's anymore anyway.

1. Two party system means exactly that.
2. I'm not entirely sure that the folks here understand Chicago politics in the way we do. 

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

2.  HAR!  I spent more time in Chicago than you have on the planet.  I made a comment about Obama back in the day, something about never trusting a Chicago politician and most especially never trusting a Chicago politician that looks clean, but I'm too lazy to go look for it.  In any case, you aren't old enough to understand Chicago politics properly.

I wasn't referring to you, Roger, though I can see why you might take it that way. You, Cain, and ECH are the only people here who I would imagine have an inkling of Chicago politics, no offense to anyone else. But you are right, Chicago politics take decades to understand properly.

It's not so much the time spent at it, as the required cynicism that only comes with decades of watching politicians and preachers lie.

Yeah, I'm still too young and idealistic to truly distrust people's intentions. Give me a few more decades of caring, and then I'll see where I'm at.

It's not even that.  You may already distrust them, but you can still hear what they're saying.

When a member of either party starts to talk, and all you hear is this horrible low farting noise, then you are ready to learn Chicago politics.

[Phox]

I wish people would've seen him as the stinknut he was bad in 08.  He's from Chicago, come on.  I don't even see how the fuck can anyone feel comfortable in trusting either R's or D's anymore anyway.

1. Two party system means exactly that.
2. I'm not entirely sure that the folks here understand Chicago politics in the way we do. 

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

2.  HAR!  I spent more time in Chicago than you have on the planet.  I made a comment about Obama back in the day, something about never trusting a Chicago politician and most especially never trusting a Chicago politician that looks clean, but I'm too lazy to go look for it.  In any case, you aren't old enough to understand Chicago politics properly.

I wasn't referring to you, Roger, though I can see why you might take it that way. You, Cain, and ECH are the only people here who I would imagine have an inkling of Chicago politics, no offense to anyone else. But you are right, Chicago politics take decades to understand properly.

It's not so much the time spent at it, as the required cynicism that only comes with decades of watching politicians and preachers lie.

Yeah, I'm still too young and idealistic to truly distrust people's intentions. Give me a few more decades of caring, and then I'll see where I'm at.

It's not even that.  You may already distrust them, but you can still hear what they're saying.

When a member of either party starts to talk, and all you hear is this horrible low farting noise, then you are ready to learn Chicago politics.

When that day comes, you'll be the first to know, Roger. Or at least you will be the first to understand.

[Triple Zero]

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

How's that work for the Netherbelgiumlands?

Although we got zillions of parties and ended up with Wilders semi in the parliament, so that should kind of tell you multi-party systems are not a panacea either. Although I do have to say, it seems to be a step up from what you guys have to put up with.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

How's that work for the Netherbelgiumlands?

Although we got zillions of parties and ended up with Wilders semi in the parliament, so that should kind of tell you multi-party systems are not a panacea either. Although I do have to say, it seems to be a step up from what you guys have to put up with.

Duverger's Law states that a winner-take-all system will go to two parties, so that all the wrong things get accomplished, and a parliamentary system will eventually generate so many parties that nothing at all can be accomplished (See:  Canada).

[Cramulus]

you guys remember the  Obama apologist site?
http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

now there's a counter to it:
http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

[Death]

I wish people would've seen him as the stinknut he was bad in 08.  He's from Chicago, come on.  I don't even see how the fuck can anyone feel comfortable in trusting either R's or D's anymore anyway.

Maybe we could have had the sane alternative.

I dislike them equally.  No preference.

[Death]

He's from Kenya, come on. 

Fixed

He's a Chicago politician is closer to what I meant.  I'm an Illinoisan and what is it like our last two or three governors have been arrested and impeached?  He was buddy buddy with Blago and I figured the trial could have brought some of their crap to air but I figured wrong.

[Death]

I wish people would've seen him as the stinknut he was bad in 08.  He's from Chicago, come on.  I don't even see how the fuck can anyone feel comfortable in trusting either R's or D's anymore anyway.

1. Two party system means exactly that.
2. I'm not entirely sure that the folks here understand Chicago politics in the way we do.  

Two party system sucks big fat cock.  
What about the Greens and Libertarians?  I bet they wish they could have a turn.  I don't know how many times I've heard "don't throw your vote away" to people who want to vote for them.

[Triple Zero]

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

How's that work for the Netherbelgiumlands?

Although we got zillions of parties and ended up with Wilders semi in the parliament, so that should kind of tell you multi-party systems are not a panacea either. Although I do have to say, it seems to be a step up from what you guys have to put up with.

Duverger's Law states that a winner-take-all system will go to two parties, so that all the wrong things get accomplished, and a parliamentary system will eventually generate so many parties that nothing at all can be accomplished (See:  Canada).

I'm not really seeing how the latter scenario has to be a bad thing.

(See: Canada? I hear they got healtcare and shit)

[The Good Reverend Roger]

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

How's that work for the Netherbelgiumlands?

Although we got zillions of parties and ended up with Wilders semi in the parliament, so that should kind of tell you multi-party systems are not a panacea either. Although I do have to say, it seems to be a step up from what you guys have to put up with.

Duverger's Law states that a winner-take-all system will go to two parties, so that all the wrong things get accomplished, and a parliamentary system will eventually generate so many parties that nothing at all can be accomplished (See:  Canada).

I'm not really seeing how the latter scenario has to be a bad thing.

(See: Canada? I hear they got healtcare and shit)

They also have about 5 major political parties, and a ton of tiny ones.  Majority governments are a thing of the past.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I wish people would've seen him as the stinknut he was bad in 08.  He's from Chicago, come on.  I don't even see how the fuck can anyone feel comfortable in trusting either R's or D's anymore anyway.

1. Two party system means exactly that.
2. I'm not entirely sure that the folks here understand Chicago politics in the way we do.  

Two party system sucks big fat cock.  
What about the Greens and Libertarians?  I bet they wish they could have a turn.  I don't know how many times I've heard "don't throw your vote away" to people who want to vote for them.

1.  Duverger's Law states that's all you're going to get with our system.  So far, he's been 169% correct.

2.  Just because the Greens and Libertarians are funnier doesn't mean they're better.

Fact:  Under the Greens, you have no hope of getting a job.  Under the Libertarians, you have no hope of getting a weekend (or a living wage).

[The Good Reverend Roger]

He's from Kenya, come on. 

Fixed

He's a Chicago politician is closer to what I meant.  I'm an Illinoisan and what is it like our last two or three governors have been arrested and impeached?  He was buddy buddy with Blago and I figured the trial could have brought some of their crap to air but I figured wrong.

Actually, he wasn't buddy buddy with Blago when Blago tried his shennanigans.

But why let facts get in the way?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I wish people would've seen him as the stinknut he was bad in 08.  He's from Chicago, come on.  I don't even see how the fuck can anyone feel comfortable in trusting either R's or D's anymore anyway.

Maybe we could have had the sane alternative.

I dislike them equally.  No preference.

Yes, a THIRD war is just the same as keeping the old two.   

There's bad, and there's worse, and there's always a fanatic who can't tell the difference between them.

[Remington]

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

How's that work for the Netherbelgiumlands?

Although we got zillions of parties and ended up with Wilders semi in the parliament, so that should kind of tell you multi-party systems are not a panacea either. Although I do have to say, it seems to be a step up from what you guys have to put up with.

Duverger's Law states that a winner-take-all system will go to two parties, so that all the wrong things get accomplished, and a parliamentary system will eventually generate so many parties that nothing at all can be accomplished (See:  Canada).

I'm not really seeing how the latter scenario has to be a bad thing.

(See: Canada? I hear they got healtcare and shit)

They also have about 5 major political parties, and a ton of tiny ones.  Majority governments are a thing of the past.

3 major parties. The Bloc doesn't count.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

1.  Duverger's Law means that a 2 party system is all you'll ever have.

How's that work for the Netherbelgiumlands?

Although we got zillions of parties and ended up with Wilders semi in the parliament, so that should kind of tell you multi-party systems are not a panacea either. Although I do have to say, it seems to be a step up from what you guys have to put up with.

Duverger's Law states that a winner-take-all system will go to two parties, so that all the wrong things get accomplished, and a parliamentary system will eventually generate so many parties that nothing at all can be accomplished (See:  Canada).

I'm not really seeing how the latter scenario has to be a bad thing.

(See: Canada? I hear they got healtcare and shit)

They also have about 5 major political parties, and a ton of tiny ones.  Majority governments are a thing of the past.

3 major parties. The Bloc doesn't count.

Why not?