Oh, they definitely envisioned it. They wanted the press to anoint candidates. They were trying to make sure their rags could advocate for their chosen agents. But that doesn’t make them right.
If the press is just another part of a corrupt racket, it needs to be judged as such, not “defended” as if it were somehow trustworthy by virtue of the “sacred” First Amendment.
Yeah, I guess I agree with you here. IRV might’ve helped too.
I’m not sure the anti-gay rights backlash I used to anticipate is coming.
I think economic issues are going to be more important, because they are more important intrinsically. But the really environmental issues are economic issues as well.
I see things differently. Third parties and independent candidates are common in the US: successful ones are very rare. Cantor can run in November if he receives sufficient signatures: he just can’t run under the Republican brand. He chose not to run because he is a conservative apparatchik, and his opportunities outside of the House are greater as a loyalist.
The most successful recent third party has been the Reform Party, the banner Perot ran under in 1992; Jesse Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota with them. But they were more a vehicle for outsized personalities than anything else.
Senator Lieberman formed a one man party named Connecticut for Liberman after he lost the 2006 Democratic Primary. Amusingly, that party was later taken over by his political opponents.
That’s what I’m talking about, though: successful third parties. They are common in Canada, to the point of supplanting another party and having a realistic shot at forming government. FPTP doesn’t stop that in our system.
[Quote=Measure for Measure]
Cantor can run in November if he receives sufficient signatures: he just can’t run under the Republican brand.
[/Quote]
not if the quotes up-thread about Virginia’s “sore loser” law are accurate. Other posters are saying that Virginia law bars him from being on the ballot, because he tried for a party nomination and failed.
Cantor could run as a write-in candidate, any eligible person can, and party affiliation doesn’t enter into it. But he can’t have his name preprinted on the ballot; only the major parties’ nominees can.
Except that, even in politically benighted places like Georgia,Democratic progressives are uniting with Tea Partiers to get money out of politics at the state level. If it can happen here, it can happen anywhere … and everywhere.
Eventually there will be things that can’t be ignored. E.g., right now Texas has been in drought for years and there’s no sign of an end, there’s extreme weather all over the place, etc., etc. When it reaches a certain point, public opinion will flip so hard that the torches and pitchforks will come out.
If the doomsayers are right, and the general public is seeing the problem the same way they are seeing it, then yes, things will change very fast.
But as long as it’s just something people read about in the news, it’s not going to resonate. The sense of purpose people get from Newsweek is nothing compared to the sense of purpose people get from the issues their family and friends experience personally. So until coasts have to be evacuated, I just don’t see the average voter prioritizing climate change.
It will happen MUCH sooner than that. You forget who owns all those buildings you see crowding every beach on the East and West Gulf coasts of America. (Hint: it ain’t poor people.) When rising sea levels cause massive beach erosion and wealthy landowners watch their beach properties lose all their value, our politicians are gonna get on board! The message WILL be heard!
But when does that happen? Does the IPCC have any predictions on when beachfront property is no longer liveable, and how much the temperature has to rise globally for it to happen?
I’m trying to find out when it starts to destroy beachfront property. And I’m not talking about storm surges. I’m talking about the seas claiming beachfront property during normal weather.
It is and it isn’t. Ask an average person if climate change is important, they’ll say yes. Ask them to rank climate change with a bunch of other issues and it’s nearly always close to last.
Since climate change competes with issues like economic growth and jobs, if those are a higher priority climate change won’t be addressed.
So there’s no possibility of an independent candidate on the ballot in Virginia? The only way to get on the ballot is by nomination from a major party?
There is nothing in law barring someone otherwise eligible for the office from trying a write-in campaign, no. They sometimes, though rarely, even succeed. There are no *plausible *write-in candidacies for that office this year, though, unless Cantor changes his mind.
Yes, the only way to get your name *pre-printed *on the ballot is via party nomination. That’s what all this legal and electoral foofaraw is about - getting your name pre-printed. That’s it. Party nomination is the only way to get party funding and organizational support too, obviously.