Pennsylvania's Untold Story: Ron Paul
I don't know what's the more amazing: that so many Republicans voted or that Ron Paul (R-TX) continues to run a visible campaign. John McCain (R-AZ) could use Paul's online money-raising machine.
As I wrote last week, if the Republican nomination process were more like the Democratic one, it's very doubtful that McCain would have sewn up the nomination early.
Digital communication technologies are changing how the game of politics is played. These technologies reduce the "cost " (time, effort, organizational overhead) required to mobilize supporters, as both Paul and Obama have demonstrated. Thus the two parties no longer have an organizational advantage -- something which may have contributed to the US having only two viable national parties.
Digital communication technologies are disrupting the status quo in other parts of society. Why should the parties be immune? An argument could be made that our two-party system no longer meets the needs of the populace, and we now have tools to render their duopoly status obsolete. What do you think?
Related: Ron Paul Raises $4.2 Million On The 5th
All Eyes On Pennsylvania
The Relevance of Ron Paul
Comments
Thank you, Kathy.
I think you are completely right. Modern technologies should push towards more representativity and more “direct” democracy. A two party system is actually a reinforcement of the representative system at the expense of democratic processes. It is only human: the more representation there is, the more representants are tempted to confiscate power to themselves. And the less variations in the expression of this representation (i.e. two party system instead of a multiparty system) the easier it is for representants to ignore various opinions.
You’re welcome, Tim.
Thanks, Alphast. I’m not sure I think 100% “direct” democracy is a “good” thing, at least not at the scale of national or even state politics. It’s bad enough that people can vote without knowing a bloody thing about the issues or candidates.
No way do I want every citizen to be responsible for voting on every piece of legislation or every budget. Heck, I don’t want that level of responsibility myself!
It’s long past time! The two parties are run by Establishment insiders who pay lip service to welcoming newcomers, but in reality they want nothing to challenge their status or power. Ron Paul’s campaign, and the thousands of followers he has inspired to become active in the party, and the reception they are getting from the party heads, who are using all kinds of dirty tricks to disenfranchise these newcomers, is blatant and disturbing. The sooner this duopoly is finished, the better!
The mainstream media did not report this. Fox did not even have Paul’s name on the station. It seems like propaganda censorship. Last week internet censorship bills passed. Nevada uprising in the GOP is a sign of things to come.. The problem is the to party system gives you a choice of the lesser of two evils but in fact they are both evil.
Pure democracy is actually a pretty bad system, as it allows 51% of the population to enforce its will upon the other 49%. The United States is a Constitutional Republic, which helps protects the rights of minorities (in the sense of racial/ethnic/cultural as well as in the sense of political).
There are two major issues that I believe need to be addressed: A. “winner take all” and B. ballot access. “winner take all” elections almost demand a two-party system because third parties are only likely to get a small percentage of the votes, so they end up with nothing to show for their efforts while merely acting as spoilers. And a two-party system allows the powers that be to control access to the ballots which means they can ensure that third parties are always marginalized.
Solve those two issues and you’ll get better representation without all the risks inherent in a pure democracy….
Hi, Liz — the party system reflects humna nature re power structures. We (the US) have had only two major parties pretty much from the get-go. Would love to see any theories as to why that’s the case. Washington, IIRC, warned against political parties.
Hi, John — I don’t remember where I first read the factoid about Paul’s standing — but it was from traditional media. I agree, however, that the focus of major reporting was on Clinton-Obama, logically since that is still a horse race.
Hi, LC — I agree with you that the winner-take-all system seems to enable the two-party system. I personally like hte concept of ranked voting.
Hi, Kathy!
I’m glad you picked up on Ron Paul’s significant showing in the Pennsylvania GOP primary. As a PA resident myself, I can tell you before the campaign, there were so many Ron Paul signs in conservative Lancaster County that you’d have thought Ron Paul was the presumptive nominee. A friend of mine who was visiting Lancaster after a prolonged absence said before the election, “That’s SO Lancaster!”
He couldn’t have been more right. Lancaster County voters have a habit of voting for the most conservative person on the ballot (if Alan Keyes had been on the ballot in Lancaster County, for example, he probably would have won). It’s worth mentioning, of course, that Paul only got 21% of the vote in Lancaster, as opposed to McCain’s 66%. The real story, though, might be that Republicans cast 42,860 votes, while DEMOCRATS in Lancaster County cast 49,978! Here’s the fine-print: if, say, Romney had still been on the ballot more Republicans probably would have showed up. Pubs outnumber Dems here 2-1. Still, that’s considerably less than the 3-1 lead they had several years ago.
Just thought you might be interested at going inside the numbers a little bit!
Justin Quinn
Thank you, Kathy. But it’s arguable that the mainstream media lets anything ’slip under the rader’, where Ron Paul is concerned. Rather, it’s all blatantly ignored. But thanks, again, all the same.
Hi Kathy,
I completely agree with your concern about 100% direct democracy and I share it. I just think that the US system is the opposite extreme which is not good either. Of course, some representativity is good because not every citizen can be a specialist about everything. But democracy is not only about the majority rule. It is also about the respect of civil rights, minority rights and it is all about counter-powers. Last but not least, democracy is about the responsibility of the citizens. The problem in the USA (and in Europe in a lesser extent) is that citizen levels of general culture and information are not very good. Without proper information and education, citizens lack the basic necessary tools to use their rights and responsibilities in the political process.
The “two-party system” is a complete fabrication and consists of two private entities that have consumed the election system in America. In the 2004 election, the Libertarian and Green Party candidates, who were on nearly all state ballots for the presidential seat, were summarily refused participation in the presidential debates by the privately-held “Committee for the Presidential Debate (CPD), who restricted media access and had the audacity to have these two fine Americans (Badnarik and Cobb) ARRESTED outside the venue in St. Louis! This is largely the fault of a media that is controlling the real news and fabricating entertainment for the masses.
Wake up SHEEPLE - the Revolution is just getting started!
McCain doesn’t need Ron Paul’s money raising capabilities. He has the MSM special interest groups and the military industrial complex taking care of him.
http://mediamattersaction.org/freeride/lobbyists/
Anyway, whatever money McCain raised he’d just blow.
Not that he’d get it online: ordinary people just don’t get excited about John McCain the way they do about Ron Paul. See many McCain yard signs/bumperstickers? Maybe that’s because Paul represents a true change to how Washington behaves, and John McCain does not. I expect a very low GOP turnout.
Justin - thanks for your PA details.
Michale, you’re welcome!
Alphast, Sean — you each make excellent points. Sean, I think the debates should be returned to the League of Women Voters - NOT the media, Dems and Rs.