I think it's the difference between a majority voting system (the winner takes it all) and a proportional represantation. I mean, you don't have five or six parties in the House of Representatives. A Party needs professionals which are dealing with policy permanently to build up structures nationwide. The 5% threshold makes sence for me. We had dozends of parties in the German parliament during the short democratic period between 1919 and 1933. So it was simple for the radicals to make democracy ridiculous. I don't know whats good for America, one strong government which sometimes seems to decide for relatively extreme solutions, or a bunch of parties which are permanently bargaining compromises. New movements like the green parties for example seems to stay weak for a longer time in a majority voting system, compared with proportional representation systems. They never will gain the majority, but they can influence the political programs of other parties very effectively. So single new minority interests can become part of the common sence and people don't have to change their political opinions about other issues.

-- Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:00 am --


Blackouts seems to be typical for conservatives. We had to realize that phenomenon when we were ruled by chancellor Kohl for sixteen years. Leading politicians should be able to speak in a structured way and respect the grammar

Historically speaking, third parties were much stronger in US the 19th century and the early 20th century. They actually won pluralities in many state legislatures, and were prominent in national elections. From 1940 on this almost ceased. This is partially due to the decline of leftwing third parties. The National Democratic Party swung further to the left and co-opted many leftist platforms. A second factor was the ever increasing impact of Corporate campaign funding. The Dems and Reps have a vested interest in keeping third parties out. This has resulted in some states like Georgia, whose ballot laws are more restrictive than those in former Communist countries. Of course it should be difficult to get elected, but it should not be nearly impossible to get on the ballot. In many US elections, especially at he local level, candidates run unopposed. This is due to restrictive ballot laws that favor the major parties. I don't see how this benefits the voters. Of course it should be difficult to get elected, but it should not be nearly impossible to get on the ballot.

Speaking of the OP: "Why I'm afraid of candidates like that..."

What's the deal with Herman Cain and Pokemon, anyway? Last summer he quoted from the Pokemon movie, and now he's done it again.

Click here for Forbes article and also hilarious Daily Show clip

I'm wondering now whether Herman Cain was ever serious about running for President. It's my understanding that he mainly got into the presidential race in order to drum up publicity for himself and a lucrative book tour. (Kind of like what Sarah Palin did.)

-- Nephele

I don't even know what to say, I hope you are correct in your assumption on his motivations... Politics in my own country are seldom what I would like them to be... but my god am I worried for my American friends... Even if he is just looking for a book tour, the fact that you can use the political system for this kind of gain and the fact that you can even come by that the assumption honestly, completely terrifies me...

Yes, it is worrisome. To quote Will Rogers: "Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for."

And speaking of quotes...

"I could use pants." – Herman Cain
(Not really, but watch the Daily Show clip I linked above. Hopefully, you can watch this one outside the U.S., as it appears to be a mirror copy of the original show.)

-- Nephele

To be honest, if a politician based most of their policies around Pokemon the world would be a better place. See: Jon Stweart ripping someone apart using nothing more than quotes from the same movie.

I do like that whoever wrote this piece clearly sat down and researched the HELL out of Pokemon though, that was cool.

"To be fair to Herman Cain, we can't all be as wise as Slowking when he's wearing the Shellder of Knowledge. Look it up, bitches." – Jon Stewart

I looked it up: "Slowking are Slowpoke who were bitten on the head by a Shellder. This is often the result of a Slowpoke holding a King's Rock because a Slowpoke holding this item will attract Shellder to bite its head, rather than its tail."

Hmm... I'm not really a Pokemon fan, so this makes as much sense to me as any of Herman Cain's policies.

Like Cain's flawed 9-9-9 tax plan which some are saying was inspired by SimCity.

-- Nephele

I'm recalmed, Romney is the winner in Iowa and the worst candidates are out of the race. Fox seems to demolish all of the republican candidates and Obama might be the laughing third. None of both probably will be able to regulate the finance markets to abolish harmful speculations, none of both will start new war without a good reason. Both candidates have the cognitiv capacities to lead the biggest western democracy and are political realists. So from the European point of view the worst has been past.

I think Ron Paul was the only one who might be counted on at least as far as keeping the U.S. out of any more wars, but with the taint of his old newsletter scandal, that may be the end of that. Not that there was really much chance that the Republicans would give him the party nomination, anyway.

-- Nephele

Rick Santorum must be stopped.

I have nothing further to say about this.

I'd take him over "it's the morality that changed" Newt. But not be happy about either.

I am hoping we see a Palin-Bachmann [or a Bachmann-O'Donnell] independent run to act as the Republican's version of Nadar.

Nooooo no no no no.....

Watch this

and look at that man who wants to be the President say that "Homosexuality is behavioral." He said that! O have to say I'm surprised that a FOX newsman called him out. I suppose even FOX has their limits.

Fig-Newton GinGRINCH had dozens of ethics violations and had a long-time affair (which he announced during Clinton's investigation). He ended up marrying that women, for which I guess he's thinking that squares things, but seriously Ricky wants gays to stop behaving gay, basically. These..."people" shouldn't even be in the government! WTF!?

^^He seems like a pretty nice guy to me

Haha, someone should lock Santorum in a really crowded gay bar just for laughs. Although everyone else in said bar might not be so happy.

I'm paying really close attention to the others candidates, but so far they're all scaring me. And Mitt Romney would be cool except he seems really fake. Plus he's said some not-so-nice things about Michigan (his and my home state), Detroit, and the auto industry as a whole. So I'm probably voting for Obama at the rate these people are spitting out bullshit.

And yeah, Nephele, the Republican Party is trying its hardest to put Mitt Romney out there, but conservatives just aren't biting. When it comes to the others they're just trying to bulldoze them out of the way (like they did with Herman Cain and Ron Paul). They're next act will be to destroy Santorum most likely. I actually think he'll end up getting the (Republican) nomination...

I actually had to check the logo in the corner again when I saw that. A Fox employee disagreeing with a Republican on TV in a tone that was almost MOCKING was so outside the realm of what I considered possible that I didn't believe it was happening at first.

That Fox News journalist was Chris Wallace, who previously worked for NBC and ABC news networks before switching to Fox News. He's won a number of journalism awards in the past, but he's also somewhat of an apologist for Fox News.

Last summer, Jon Stewart and Chris Wallace went head-to-head in a discussion of Fox News' bias. Chris Wallace defended Fox News against Stewart's accusation of bias, by stating that the "mainstream media" was biased in favor of a liberal agenda. (Conservatives don't consider Fox News to be mainstream.)

Stewart countered by stating that mainstream news networks such as MSNBC may be biased, but it's not necessarily a liberal bias (and he gave examples to back that up). In fact (to quote Stewart): "The bias of the mainstream media is towards sensationalism, conflict, and laziness."

Sensationalism, conflict, and laziness, which could just as easily define Fox News -- except that Fox is also all of these and genuinely politically biased. As evidenced in that very interview of Chris Wallace with Jon Stewart in which Stewart brought up Fox News' vice president Bill Sammon's notorious e-mails ("marching orders") instructing Fox News journalists to interject the words "Marxist" and "socialist" into their commentary about Obama. That part of the interview, by the way, was edited out of the version that Fox News chose to broadcast.

-- Nephele