[ClaireSolt]

Once, I was taking a grad course on 19th century France and England. The former had a very turbulent revoutionary history whereas the Brits adapted to the times and expanded democracy peacefully. The professor noted that had something to do with the way delegates were seated in their legislatures. The House of commons has two sides and MP's choose what side to sit on, either the party in power or the opposition. That produced peace and stability. However the French chamber was circular. Each man could pick his spot on a gradient from left to right. This produced fracturing and constant upheaval.

America has a history of a two party system. Normally, all politicians are looking for an edge in elections. That means that the big parties coopt any good people and ideas as they come up. That is the main reason they don't go anywhere.

Too many here at FR don't understand the difference between political philosophy and practical politics. So they pay way too much attention to what candidates say and whether it coincides with what they themselves believe. That matters most when hiring professors. Elections are about choosing people to lead and manage constrained by checks and balances. So we should look at what people can do. If we would look at candidates that way we would stop electing so many lawyers who only know how to argue and find better executives and managers to straighten out the largest enterprise on earth, the US government.

[davidosborne]

I never took any grad courses.. just high school and some here and there classes.. mostly proffessional development.. but I have a MASTERS from the school of “hard-knocks” :)

Daivd

[Paperdoll]

>they pay way too much attention to what a candidate says and whether it coincides with what they themselves believe.
That matters most with hiring professors. Elections are about choosing people and manage constrained with checks and balances. So we should look at what people can do.<

You are so right! it is not only what a politician says that should count with the electorate, but what a politician has accomplished. Anyone can say anything, but past actions leading to failures and successes are a good barometer to determine future actions. Caveat emptor.

[Marine_Uncle]

Well put. And to often some at FR get down on some demowit loney tune, and do not realize some in their party are not better. We need solid patriotic well educated leaders who are not afraid to go against the grain when required.
Few in todays world appear to have the resolve. And those that do, often are shunted. Of course that has always been the case. No different then the politics played in the world of capitalism and business sector in general. To often the wrong people end up running the show.