General Discussion Thread

[Xevross]

Oh I just heard an interesting political idea. Make votes in congress anonymous, in the same way public votes are anonymous. Then buying off politicians wouldn't really be financially viable since there's no way to know if the bribe worked or not.

I think the idea has some merit, but imo it fixes a smaller problem at the expense of a larger one. Corruption is something that certainly exists in Washington, but I think ignorance in DC is the bigger cause of issues. With anonymous votes we'd lose the ability to hold them accountable.

Done.

I feel like our political system is the one of the only ones that still works well

[Legend]

I feel like our political system is the one of the only ones that still works well

I think the opposite. Our system has worked great, but as of late other systems have grown and rivaled it.

Also being the best system doesn't mean it's without flaws.

[Xevross]

I think the opposite. Our system has worked great, but as of late other systems have grown and rivaled it.

Also being the best system doesn't mean it's without flaws.

I don't get how being limited to a choice of two is great in any regard.

[the-pi-guy]

I don't get how being limited to a choice of two is great in any regard.

Political parties?
We're not "limited" to 2. 
There are just always 2 most dominant. 

[Legend]

Cray cray nature

[Xevross]

Political parties?
We're not "limited" to 2. 
There are just always 2 most dominant.

Well other parties barely exist. At least here there's quite a few who have a good chance of some power, although its been mostly dominated by 2 as well.

I don't understand how the voting for congress and president work separately. And it can't be good that the system works so most ideas put forward by the president can be blocked

[Legend]

Well other parties barely exist. At least here there's quite a few who have a good chance of some power, although its been mostly dominated by 2 as well.

I don't understand how the voting for congress and president work separately. And it can't be good that the system works so most ideas put forward by the president can be blocked

The president isn't designed to put forward ideas and make bills. It's good that congress holds that power mostly over him. Checks and balances yo.

[the-pi-guy]

Spoiler for Image:

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/ZCJDqs1.gif" alt="" class="bbc_img" loading="lazy">

Cray cray nature

Thats so weird. 

I don't understand how the voting for congress and president work separately. And it can't be good that the system works so most ideas put forward by the president can be blocked

What do you mean voting for congress and president separately?  How do you guys do it? 

[Xevross]

Thats so weird. 
What do you mean voting for congress and president separately?  How do you guys do it?

General election every 5 years makes up 650 MPs to represent constituencies. A majority of 326 seats are needed to form a government and once that is formed (either outright majority, coalition or confidence and supply) the prime minister is the leader of the largest party in power.

Almost always either Labour or the Conservatives win 326 seats in the election, so the prime minister is the party leader at that time. Whatever ideas and policies they and their cabinet ministers come up with is then usually passed because they have the majority, so nothing can be blocked. In this election though due to the rise of the SNP in Scotland it seems neither will reach a majority and deals will need to be made.

[Xevross]

And the house of commons is set up so that the opposition seats face those of the seats in power, the prime minister (Lab or Con leader) and its cabinet face the opposition leader (Lab or Con leader) and the shadow cabinet on the front bench. This means there's always heated debates. Sometimes members of a party can rebel against their leader and vote against a new policy but this doesn't usually happen.

Right now we have a coalition between the conservatives and the liberal democrats, because the conservatives fell 20 seats short of a majority last election.

[the-pi-guy]

Almost always either Labour or the Conservatives win 326 seats in the election, so the prime minister is the party leader at that time. Whatever ideas and policies they and their cabinet ministers come up with is then usually passed because they have the majority, so nothing can be blocked.

This can be good or bad though.  Having opposition might mean that half the population doesn't want something to happen and if that much of the population doesn't want something to happen, it might not be a good thing. 
So having the president on the opposite side of the majority of congress can be a good thing.  If they both agree, it's clearly something that needs to happen.  If congress disagrees overall, they can make things happen themselves and over ride the president.  President has a huge amount of power, but congress can still veto him/her.  President isn't there to make unanimous decisions, but he does have the power to sway or give suggestions and bills to congress.

[Xevross]

This can be good or bad though.  Having opposition might mean that half the population doesn't want something to happen and if that much of the population doesn't want something to happen, it might not be a good thing. 
So having the president on the opposite side of the majority of congress can be a good thing.  If they both agree, it's clearly something that needs to happen.  If congress disagrees overall, they can make things happen themselves and over ride the president.  President has a huge amount of power, but congress can still veto him/her.  President isn't there to make unanimous decisions, but he does have the power to sway or give suggestions and bills to congress.

Well both congress and the house of commons represent the population, so the PM is usually the guy who most of the population prefer.

That being said, because of how our first past the post voting system works, even though parties can get 50% of seats in the commons they very rarely get 50% of the vote. Labour tend to get a lot of seats for the votes they get. For example, in the 2005 election Labour got 35.3% of votes, Conservatives got 32.3% yet Labour won 55% of the seats and the Conservatives only 30%.

At the last election Labour got 29% of votes and won 258 seats, while the Lib Dems won 57 seats with 23% of votes. That's one thing I don't like about the system

[Dr. Pezus]

http://www.gamespot.com/videos/exploring-the-vast-world-of-the-witcher-3-wild-hun/2300-6424516/

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VFD_oxpVPk

[Dr. Pezus]

[Dr. Pezus]

@Legend: Can you fix the The Order thread for me? It's always blue due to the same kind of bug you fixed for me recently. It links to the "what makes a game worth it" thread