Could the US be a one-party state?

Post Reply New Topic

I think people will get tired, really quickly, of the reactionary nature of Trump's statements.

As for Congress and the Judiciary: they hemmed in Obama when he wanted to do "radical" things.

Let's keep our fingers crossed:

The US, through 240 years of sometime great turmoil, has never had a serious coup attempt (I don't think Aaron Burr's "conspiracy" really counts). We've ALWAYS had a peaceful transfer of power from one person to another. Part of the reason is because we have a strong system of checks and balances.

The Constitution, while imperfect, was a work of genius, the work of people who were thinking people.

I don't see any sort of dictatorship happening here even if Trump becomes president.

My concerns are that if either party remains in power for decades on end, there might be a greater propensity for corruption, as with the PRI in Mexico, but I don't foresee a massive stripping of human rights.

If that's the case, it very well may be due to the older generation dying off, and being replaced by younger people who aren't as threatened by science, or who think Darwin was the devil.
Just the same, many denominations both evangelical and even some mainline still endorse creationism as church bodies.

I don't know about you, Bill, but I had a LCMS pastor tell me over 30 years ago that he has no problem with creationism and evolution being complementary to each other. It's the hard-line fundamentalists in the Baptist and Pentacostal traditions that are absolutists when it comes to creationism in any of its forms (intelligent design, etc.)

Yes. Its hard to say which way American Protestants are trending.

Back in the 1960's Grandma was a staunch Kansas methodist. We would hide the liguor cabinent when she visited back in the Sixties. But she had no problem with Darwin, and with taking us kids to see the dinosaurs at the Smithsonian.

This making a cause celeb out of strictly literal Young Earth Creationism seems to be a modern thing that started in the Seventies.

So will younger Evangelicals quietly abandon YEC, or will they loudly cling to it more than ever? Or will there be a split among them because both things will trend? Hard to say.

It will not happen because it has never happened is the worst type of assumption to make. Plenty of other countries that were considered "civilized" succumbed to authoritarianism during times of change and economic stress. Americans are humans vulnarable to the same psychological appeals as anybody else. To think otherwise is arrogant.

First his candicacy was an just a temporary ego trip, then for seemingly endless times it was said Trump finally made such an outragous statement people will come to thier senses and his candadicy will implode, then unlike Cruz he had no organization so Cruz will deny him enough delegates for a majority throwing the convention open, then the never trump movement will find an alternative, well however reluctantly with the execption of a few outliers the party fell right in line, then a loss to Clinton is inevitable he is 15 points behind now he is 3 points behind, now a loss to Clinton is likely because of demographics or the electoral college map, so he might win but it won't be that bad has little credibility with me at this point.

Like I said before because it has happened does not mean it will happen, so him winning and destroying America as we knew it is not inventable. But I can not understand complancy and denial that the biggest existential threat to America as we know it is real at this point.

I was a Dem for over 50 years. Not anymore! Why wont Hillary choose Warren? She wont because Wall Street told her not to! The Dems are for deregulating the pay day loan industry ( Wasserman's #1 priority) , indefinite detention ( you no longer have a right to a trial) , TPP, fracking, rigging elections... And now Hillary is calling the terrorists " Muslim extremists". Which is what the terrorists want. ISIS is not Islamic! It is Satanic! If I said that I am a Christian and I believe that Jesus has the characteristics of Manson, am I a Christian? Of course not! The Democratic party is republican lite, same policies, less right wing rhetoric.

Now...I'm not saying we shouldn't watch out for signs of tyranny in Trump. I'm not saying we should turn a blind eye to what Trump is doing.

But the US is not Germany circa 1933, with the hyperinflation and all that. The bread costing wheelbarrows full of money PER LOAF.

But I'm optimistic that his excesses will be held down by members of both parties in Congress, as well as the Supreme Court.

We have been in FAR worse times, especially the Depression of the 1930s. In the 1930s, the Communist and Fascist elements had a much better chance of holding sway than a "hyper-Trump" does today.

Time to cue up a Wagnerian Theme: How about The Ride of the Cronies?

One party rule might be attainable on a state level, look at California, but I could never envision it on the federal level. Although the democrats continually dream of such a prospect.

Having a single party in any nation is a democratic nightmare. Even a duel party system suffers from a lack of political flexibility and voter choice. A duel party system, such as the one in the states, is indeed circumscribed by a lack of platform variety, and indeed harmful to Democracy as a whole. I certainly concur with saying that a duel party system is indeed light years ahead of a single party system, but it too is limited in the range of political ideals that any democratic enterprise truly requires, a notion that one can analogize to a political oligopoly.

I honestly think we should elect multiple presidents each year, one from each party. Even though this means Trump would get in this year, at least his effect would be diluted by Clinton and the Libertarians and the Independents.

Having a single president was never a good idea to begin with and is still a bad idea. Half the population or more always feels that they aren't being represented. This isn't democracy, it's a lottery.

I am also Lutheran, and it's never bothered anyone. I am an ELCA Lutheran, and we were among the first to ordain female pastors, and among the very few to ordain LGBT pastors.

What do you mean?
Do you mean have rotating presidents? Each party has their person head nation for one year each?

Every time I hear Aaron Burr's name, I immediately think of that Got Milk commercial.

I was a member of an ELCA congregation for over 25 years. I absolutely deplore the decisions the ELCA have taken since the merger in 1987. Before becoming a member, I served in this congregation's choir as a paid soloist since 1977. Like my current pastor, I was not brought up in the Lutheran church. I was brought up Churches of God General Conference, which is one step below the Baptists and one step above the Pentecostals, and even lower than the Amish and Mennonites. I am now firmly convinced, for the most part, the ordination of women, as well as gay and lesbian clerics. I'm more than convinced that the ELCA, since they have gotten in bed with the Reformed tradition, the Presbyterians, and the Catholics, have repudiated their heritage.