Not gonna lie, seeing
Vae Victis recced on
crack_van more or less made my day. :">
So, it is a Friday night on a university campus. Seeing as there is an exclusive party for the College Democrats leadership board (of which I am somehow a member) tomorrow night, tonight is going to be devoted to finishing
femgenficathon and at least starting
dh_exchange. Both of which are due in
(
Read more... )
No, I would say that you do -- a party in the U.S. can consolidate quite a bit of power for itself too. See: Republicans in the 2004 elections -- presidency captured, House & Senate captured, and indirectly, the judicial branch as well. Although, hopefully, this will never happen again. x)
Yes, they are dishearteningly similar, aren't they? The way I see it, there can be no intellectual vigour in civil discourse if your electoral opponent is, year after year, identical. I don't know if you've gotten to this in your history class yet, but there have been occasions in U.S. political history where a third party/individual has made enough of an impact to frame the debate (the Populist Party in the late 1800s) or to even alter the outcome of elections (if my memory serves me right, the 1912 presidential election was a three-way contest in which Teddy Roosevelt's Progressive Party stole enough votes from the Republicans to allow the Democratic candidate, Woodrow Wilson, to win). And the U.S. had a multiparty system in the mid-1800s with the Democrats, the Whigs, and the formation of the Republican Party. Except the Whigs kind of disappeared with the onset of the Civil War, so. :p
Anyway, you can see that I enjoy rambling about these sorts of things, but I really ought to start my reading for the weekend now!
Reply
Leave a comment