That is, in theory, a good idea. But for a third party to play a meaningful role, the first thing that would have to change is that first-past-the-post had to be abandoned. Else, all the effort you take to establish a third power will be void soon, history shows that a potential third power immediately results in one of the former two powers becoming irrelevant quickly and the power you established replacing it, resulting in a new, but by no means different, two party system.

The only ones that could change the system itself are, though, exactly the same entities that have no interest at all in changing it. If there is one thing that two parties in a FPTP system agree on, independent of possible differences, is that the system is great. Because it does exactly what is in their interest, ensure that they have only one potential competitor instead of many. And eventually the two competitors become so similar (for the simple reason that they want to appeal to as many voters as possible, I can get into detail but I guess it's self explanatory why the two parties become very similar over time) that it doesn't really matter which one you support.

The system ensures that you have two near identical groups to choose from and both of them have no interest in changing the election system to one that allows more variety in the political landscape.

The main reason that it works for most of Europe is that few countries in Europe actually have a first-past-the-post system in place. Coalitions are very common in most European countries, with parties needing usually between 3 and 6 percent of the votes to make it into parliament. And it's far from impossible that such comparably small parties can become part of the government if a big party needs just a few more seats to get a working majority. That's why the Greens actually made it into governments in Europe.

And now tell me how this should possibly happen in the US.

The difference is that the homeless person did not CHOOSE to be homeless. He didn't get up one day and ponder that it would be so much nicer for him to abandon his home and live on the street.

The bully has always the choice NOT to bully someone. Instead he deliberately took the choice to be a bully.

Unless someone forces a bully to be a bully, I cannot follow your argument.

There is exactly zero reason for someone to be a bully, and exactly zero excuse to be one. The earlier kids learn that actions have consequences, the better.

If you have any ideas that offer anything that could end in a success, I'm all ears. But I'm done riding against windmills.

Hmm... fleeing the country and be free or staying and getting locked up but having your full moral support ... decisions, decisions...

Someone should've told that prick Washington and his cronies, then the Brits would still have a nice big colony.

You're right, I guess there are a few too many "nots" in the construct to be clear.

I should not write my messages the way I write my code for the IOCCC. :)

As I stated before, of course these indies exist. On a municipal level where they have little, if any, influence on the grand scheme of things, or if at a higher level, then they're embedded in enough members of The Party to be kept under control. How many independent senators/congressmen are there? And, please, REALLY independent ones only, not some R or D that decides to go "indie" because he lost the primaries.

If you suggest that kids are little angels, pure and unable to be sinister little bastards, then yes, you are. They are quite capable of being little scheming assholes worthy of being kicked hard enough to fly half a week past Wednesday.

Sadly, yes, the problem has arrived on this side of the pond, too. For quite a while now, voting meant that you vote for a predetermined coalition. Though I already see this trend in decline, at the very least since the German FDP dropped out of the Bundestag (their Parliament) completely because they tied themselves for good or ill to the CDU/CSU. The reaction from voters was mostly to shift over to the CDU/CSU entirely, essentially cutting the FDP out of the parliament altogether.

The German Greens were facing a similar fate and are already trying very hard to present themselves as something other than the "SPD-light". Which is admittedly easier now that they got a big coalition government.

I can't talk about France, since I don't know whether there has been any movement over there as well, but there are quite a few countries where you don't really have predetermined coalitions, where voting for "your" party does actually make sense.

It loses a bit in the translation but essentially it says "When you're living with wolves, you better learn fast how to howl, lest they might think you're a sheep".

Content "owners".

A comparable example would be to go against Smith&Wesson for robbery and murder.

Technology is neither good nor evil. Its application is.

I can't speak for the detective, but I'd have approved.

Oh yes, please send the poor little bully into counceling, the poor little misguided soul should be shown just how much pain he caused his victim so he learns just how much better it would be not to hurt someone. But we shouldn't make him apologize, it would probably humiliate him too much and shatter his precious little soul.

Like that?