Radical Centrism is the only REAL hope this country has.

a reply to: SpeakerofTruth

I would counter, that the centrist position is to do nothing in this situation. Maintain their illegal status, leave them as an underclass, and crack down on employers hiring illegals. Use that scenario as an incentive to come over here legally. Then allow a slow pathway to citizenship for the illegals that choose to remain, that could be phased in over a generation or two. Simutaneously, look at how many people we're allowing to come over legally and expand it.

I would say outright amnesty is a liberal plan, one that I think has merit, but also one that I don't think has any chance of happening with our current government. Mass deportation as the conservative plan might be attempted, but it's not going to be successful.

a reply to: Aazadan

Then you completely don't understand the centrist's mentality. The centrist is basically an amalgamation of both liberal and conservative ideology. Yes, legalizing is a liberal idea, but an inclusion of building a wall or placing troops on the border is very much a conservative stance. What you're proposing is essentially rightist ideology and will not fly in the current political structure.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I must not be a centrist.

oh well.

Must be why there is not a centrist position.
If we look to what happened during the Reagan amnesty and afterwards it shows to me nothing will be fixed.
I am against amnesty.

a reply to: jellyrev

I just told you the centrist's position. You obviously did not read it.

When a major political party is willing to turn on one of its own and rig primaries what chance does a non-party have? Even if we disbanded the democrats and republicans as they stand today they would still maintain the same affiliation with or without any label or title. TPTB will not change. Until they do we will be stuck with a dysfunctional two party system.

I thought once that with technology what it is today we could eliminate the need for congressmen altogether. Their job was to represent us in government. They continually fail to do so. As such, eliminating them and speaking for ourselves would seem to be a better option. But with technology comes the possibility of tampering. And with paper ballots cheating was happening. Even if every single person in the US cast their vote and a running score was kept there would still be the idea that the numbers were not tallied correctly in the end and the loser would inevitably challenge the results. Is this just an extension of never learning to lose? A trophy just for showing up? I don't know.

As a nation we deserve the best candidate we can get at any given time. Not the best this party or that party is willing to support. The best - period. Unfortunately, I do not believe that will ever happen in this country. Government has been too damaged by partisan politics and special interests to ever function properly again. When hillary clinton and Donald Trump are the best we can come up with we have a problem that no amount of party loyalty will ever solve. Trump ran basically as an independent but could not win without the endorsement of the republican party. The success he had with both parties attacking him showed just how sick people really are of the status quo.

I weep for the future for I know it will not be held gently in the hands of the major parties and will escape the grasp of the hands of the people.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

I weep for the future for I know it will not be held gently in the hands of the major parties and will escape the grasp of the hands of the people.

The problem is, there's no such thing as "gentle hands" of the two major parties in this country. They both have made a solid and unquestionable move to the extreme. When that happens, gentleness and rationality are tossed to the wind.
Which is essentially the point. Unless there's a balancing factor, the only alternative is civil conflict. It's really just that simple. As it currently stands, both sides demand that everything be done 100% the way they want. That doesn't and never will fly. It's the height of irrationality.
One of the biggest problems is that "leaders" aren't beholden to the populace, they're beholden to corporations, banks and special interests. Until that is remedied, it's going to be a continuous downward slope.

"For if ye are lukewarm, I will spew thee out of my mouth."

Strauss Howe. Its the answer to it all.

First, Obama would have been loved in the 90's. Had he been elected instead of Bush, he'd have been loved even more. Obama's problem is he came along when the rhetoric of the Bush years had widened political division, then he stuck his hand in all our pockets with ACA. His follow ups with things like Fast and Furious only served to put salt in the wound.

Nonetheless, during the 90's, or before 9/11, Obama would have been loved.

Trump would never be loved in any time.

Nonetheless, Strauss Howe predicted that we would see a rise in nationalism right about now.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Easy to predict. Us /=30 year olds hated the national anthem and the pledge of allegiance until we got out of high school and realized why it was important.

Generations before that didn't have a thought choice in the matter.

Nationalism comes from a generation that remembers a good time and wants it back. It's the children of the 80s that want America back. Most everyone else takes it for granted like we did when we were kids - the "A-dults" included.

I think a successful centrist platform would need to advocate a kicking of the more divisive social issues back to the states.

a reply to: TarzanBeta

OK, "Jesus."

a reply to: SpeakerofTruth


I got news for you. The centrists got Trump elected. There are many closer to center in both parties.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


Did something happen to you when you became a mod?

a reply to: SpeakerofTruth

OK, "Jesus."

And yeah, that's something else that won't work for a centrist. Given the number of people that profess a belief in God in this country, and specifically the large number of Christians, a centrist isn't going to get very far without a genuine respect for Christians and their beliefs.

originally posted by: SpeakerofTruth
a reply to: Aazadan

Then you completely don't understand the centrist's mentality. The centrist is basically an amalgamation of both liberal and conservative ideology. Yes, legalizing is a liberal idea, but an inclusion of building a wall or placing troops on the border is very much a conservative stance. What you're proposing is essentially rightist ideology and will not fly in the current political structure.

A "rightest ideology"......really? Having to put more eyes on the borders and building a security device is the result of the madness of 3 eight year terms of establishment boys. Its about scab workers, tax breaks, economic socialism, workers as mules transferring the $ into national economies ect.....republican and democrat self interest. But sure Trump may look like a rightest nationalist when held up alongside the last 3 POTUS.

a reply to: imwilliam

Most likely. Which, I tend to favor state's rights anyway, but rest assured, there'd be a problem with some people. Of course, that's a conundrum of the centrist movement. At a core level, it's an effort to please everyone. Heh. You can't.

a reply to: imwilliam

Who said anything about not respecting Jesus? "Tarzan" wants to interject theology into a political discussion. Personally I don't take kindly to it. If that "offends," sorry bout dat. Those who are easily offended should be offended more often by a great number of other things.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: SpeakerofTruth


I got news for you. The centrists got Trump elected.

Won't disagree with that. I have told a number of people that Trump's about the closest thing we're going to get to an Independent with the political system that currently exists.

a reply to: SpeakerofTruth

Who said anything about not respecting Jesus?

I don't know, not me.

Tarzan" wants to interject theology into a political discussion.

Lots of people's politics are influenced by their "theology" or lack there of. Enough so, and seriously enough so, that a centrist isn't going to be successful if he makes a habit of belittling them and offending them.

Personally I don't take kindly to it. If that "offends," sorry bout dat.

You don't have to be sorry about it. If you disagree and think a centrist can piss off some where upwards of 60% of the country and be successful, I'd be interested in hearing how you think that will work. Maybe you think religious people don't get pissed off when their beliefs aren't respected? I think they do, but I'd entertain theories to the contrary.

Those who are easily offended should be offended more often by a great number of other things.

As I said, belittling peoples religious beliefs is a non-starter for a successful national movement in the US at this point in time.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


Did something happen to you when you became a mod?

how so?