Is anyone sick of all the winning?

[SuburbanFarmer]

Having more than two parties is no panacea, there is in fact little difference in having three or four. Take it from those who know first hand, you won't like the third or fourth party either and nothing will have really changed, it is not the big change you seem to expect it would be.

Your society's percentage of StAs is significantly lower than ours. That alone gives me unlimited optimism for a 3+ party system.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Personally I think we should let the cities go to become their own sovereign city states under the auspices of a greater American confederation. Let the cities become the multicultural paradise with all the progressive policies and so forth so they don't soil the rest of America with it. Let them pay for the consequences of that as well without impacting the rest of us.

it's been shown to you multiple times that your beloved rural areas would suffer without the teets of large cities to suckle from. You can keep your fantasies of self-sufficiency, if it helps, but you're mostly a pile of welfare cases.

[SuburbanFarmer]

It's not going to change anything, and in any case, the division is mostly going to come down to the big cities versus the rest of the nation, which is by default a two-party divide.

The only reason undercover hacks like GCF advocate for more than one party is because they want to split the republican vote. When more than two parties meant Ralph Nader, these same people were screaming bloody murder. But when they have one of their own undercover hacks running as a libertarian (which is another liberal) and trying to split the republican vote, they are balls fucking in for that -- though I don't doubt he voted for Clinton behind the closed curtain either.

For better or worse, the democratic party is now the party of a handful of very large metropolitan areas. It's not enough.

The hilarious part is how they want to go to a popular vote, which would open up all the voters inside those cities who are now suppressed by the electoral college.

The democratic party is pretty much fucked.

I'd vote for Nader in a heartbeat. He's responsible for safety belts being a national thing (and a hell of a lot more)

[Speaker to Animals]

Personally I think we should let the cities go to become their own sovereign city states under the auspices of a greater American confederation. Let the cities become the multicultural paradise with all the progressive policies and so forth so they don't soil the rest of America with it. Let them pay for the consequences of that as well without impacting the rest of us.

it's been shown to you multiple times that your beloved rural areas would suffer without the teets of large cities to suckle from. You can keep your fantasies of self-sufficiency, if it helps, but you're mostly a pile of welfare cases.

LOL

Nope. It's been shown to you how that is demonstrably false as well. Not sure if you noticed, but industries are moving here. They don't want none of your progressive insanity any longer.

And as far as federal tax dollars getting spent in rural areas, that's usually for federal government things like military bases and interstates (that benefit everybody). People don't get the kinds of gibs here that they get in your city vote plantations. I have lived in both places now. Don't try to snow the snowman.

[StCapps]

Having more than two parties is no panacea, there is in fact little difference in having three or four. Take it from those who know first hand, you won't like the third or fourth party either and nothing will have really changed, it is not the big change you seem to expect it would be.

Your society's percentage of StAs is significantly lower than ours. That alone gives me unlimited optimism for a 3+ party system.

We have idiotic nanny staters to fill in, like I said, not some giant improvement. Besides more parties is not going to lead to less StA's in America, you just don't like Trailer Park Parliament brand of stupid more than you hate the nanny state liberal bullshit, and you are lashing out ineffectively if you think more political parties will neuter the influence on the brand of stupid that you least prefer on the political process.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Personally I think we should let the cities go to become their own sovereign city states under the auspices of a greater American confederation. Let the cities become the multicultural paradise with all the progressive policies and so forth so they don't soil the rest of America with it. Let them pay for the consequences of that as well without impacting the rest of us.

it's been shown to you multiple times that your beloved rural areas would suffer without the teets of large cities to suckle from. You can keep your fantasies of self-sufficiency, if it helps, but you're mostly a pile of welfare cases.

LOL

Nope. It's been shown to you how that is demonstrably false as well. Not sure if you noticed, but industries are moving here. They don't want none of your progressive insanity any longer.

And as far as federal tax dollars getting spent in rural areas, that's usually for federal government things like military bases and interstates (that benefit everybody). People don't get the kinds of gibs here that they get in your city vote plantations. I have lived in both places now. Don't try to snow the snowman.

LMFAOGJOISDGKJWENGNNGHAHAHAHHAHAA "Military Bases that benefit everybody"

hoooo baby, you are rollin' now. Keep on truckin', Red Ryder.

[Speaker to Animals]

it's been shown to you multiple times that your beloved rural areas would suffer without the teets of large cities to suckle from. You can keep your fantasies of self-sufficiency, if it helps, but you're mostly a pile of welfare cases.

LOL

Nope. It's been shown to you how that is demonstrably false as well. Not sure if you noticed, but industries are moving here. They don't want none of your progressive insanity any longer.

And as far as federal tax dollars getting spent in rural areas, that's usually for federal government things like military bases and interstates (that benefit everybody). People don't get the kinds of gibs here that they get in your city vote plantations. I have lived in both places now. Don't try to snow the snowman.

LMFAOGJOISDGKJWENGNNGHAHAHAHHAHAA "Military Bases that benefit everybody"

hoooo baby, you are rollin' now. Keep on truckin', Red Ryder.

Well it sure is shit isn't the "federal welfare" you make it out to be, genius.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Having more than two parties is no panacea, there is in fact little difference in having three or four. Take it from those who know first hand, you won't like the third or fourth party either and nothing will have really changed, it is not the big change you seem to expect it would be.

Your society's percentage of StAs is significantly lower than ours. That alone gives me unlimited optimism for a 3+ party system.

We have idiotic nanny staters to fill in, like I said, not some giant improvement. Besides more parties is not going to lead to less StA's in America, you just don't like Trailer Park Parliament brand of stupid more than you hate the nanny state liberal bullshit, and you are lashing out ineffectively if you think more political parties will neuter the influence on the brand of stupid that you least prefer on the political process.

Valid point. I do prefer Nanny-State-Stupid, because it can (usually) be reasoned with, or ignored. Also, I get a little kick out of blowing smoke in their faces.

[SuburbanFarmer]

LOL

Nope. It's been shown to you how that is demonstrably false as well. Not sure if you noticed, but industries are moving here. They don't want none of your progressive insanity any longer.

And as far as federal tax dollars getting spent in rural areas, that's usually for federal government things like military bases and interstates (that benefit everybody). People don't get the kinds of gibs here that they get in your city vote plantations. I have lived in both places now. Don't try to snow the snowman.

LMFAOGJOISDGKJWENGNNGHAHAHAHHAHAA "Military Bases that benefit everybody"

hoooo baby, you are rollin' now. Keep on truckin', Red Ryder.

Well it sure is shit isn't the "federal welfare" you make it out to be, genius.

No, dude, you're right. We'll toss a couple billion out to the countryside in military funding and Big Ag subsidies, but you guys are TOTALLY making it on your own. You'd be just fine without all that stuff, so we'll just quit wasting the money.

[StCapps]

The same voting blocs divided between more than two political parties, equals little functional difference from those voting blocs being divided between only two parties, that's what you don't seem to get GCF.

Just because you think there are less crazies in Canada doesn't mean less political parties is the cause of that reduced level of crazy, correlation doesn't equal causation. Don't make the mistake of thinking more political parties is the reason that Canadian political discourse isn't as fucked up as it is in America, that actually has little to do with it. Besides the third party actually splits the left up here in Canada, while the right remains united, so in Canada your strategy leads to more political success for the Conservatives, not more success for Liberals, which appears to be the opposite of the desired effect you are going for. Be careful what you wish for.