<p>I agree that we need more than two parties. You could make the case for at least 4 parties now (maybe 5 if there really is such a thing as a centrist these days). Actually, after watching some of the Kos convention this weekend I’m beginning to think I could live with HRC for 4 years. Sure beats the other Dem alternatives.</p>
<p>There are lots of centrists…but their centrism takes on different flavors that do not lend themselves to forming a unified party.</p>
<p>I actually prefer the two-party system to the multi-party messes. I look at places like Israel and Italy (what is it about countries whose names begin with “I”) where the maneuvering to put together a legislative majority is excruciating.</p>
<p>Particularly where many small parties become focused on single issues. In the USA I can see the Green Party, the Gun Nut Party, the No Tax Party, the Pro-Life Party, the Send the Illegals Back Party, etc. all capturing a seat or three here and there. You wind up in positions where an extreme minority can wag the legislative dog if it is the party that puts a coalition over the top. Thank you, no.</p>
<p>In Britain, I’d be a registered Liberal by whatever name they’re calling themselves these days. How I’d vote is a different question.</p>
<p>It would be hard to imagine a multi-party system messing up the world as badly as the last two Presidents, though I don’t put beyond American ingenuity to manage it. ;)</p>
<p>There are a lot of centrists…but Hillary’s not one of them.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200508080811.asp[/url]”>http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200508080811.asp</a></p>
<p>This is the beauty of proportional representation. mini, I do see the point you keep making, but in a winner-takes-all system I don’t see third parties as the saviors.</p>
<p>HH, in some circles a National Review article which starts off with a bunch of zingers like “Senator Fake…The Duchess of Chappaqua…Exacta-grade thoroughbred to statist liberals…” might be viewed as a less than “fair and balanced” assessment. Not surprised to see you cite it as gospel, though…</p>
<p>I got that, kluge. However, follow the links. </p>
<p>Once and a while I like to get you guys all worked up by posting a National Review article. :)</p>
<p>I thought the writer’s phraseology was pretty well put. :)</p>
<p>Usually I try to steer clear of any “right-wing” journals, because I know what’s coming from you. :)</p>
<p>However, her record is what it is–spin machine aside. </p>
<p>I didn’t feel like taking the time to search for “neutral” assessments, since here the ratings were presented in one place.</p>
<p>In post 168 I said….</p>
<p>“I see nothing that would make the claim made in post number 157 “Several recent polls have actually shown that the population is moving more and more each day toward the belief that we can achieve success in Iraq” is accurate.”</p>
<p>I went on to say….</p>
<p>“If anyone can tell me where to find the “we can achieve success in Iraq” polling information I would appreciate it.”</p>
<p>The 8/2/07 Pew Poll asks the success/fail question, and has done so several times in the past, below is the result of the question. The whole poll can be found at <a href=“http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/345.pdf[/url]”>http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/345.pdf</a></p>
<p>Aug 06 Succeed 54% Fail 40%</p>
<p>Sept 06 Succeed 57% Fail 35%</p>
<p>Nov 06 Succeed 53% Fail 41%</p>
<p>Feb 07 Succeed 47% Fail 46%</p>
<p>April 07 Succeed 45% Fail 46%</p>
<p>July 07 Succeed 43% Fail 49%</p>
<p>This clearly shows the claim made in post # 157 by hereshoping is factually incorrect.</p>
<p>Thanks, tommybill.</p>
<p>It would be a terrible thing if more people wanted us to succeed in Iraq, wouldn’t it? 
</p>
<p>That’s not the issue, you made a statement and you made it as if your statement was a fact. Your statement has been show to be incorrect. So the issue is, when you made this statement, did you make a mistake, or did you deliberately try to mislead us. </p>
<p>This is of course the same problem we have with this administration on going to war, did they make a mistake or did they deliberately mislead us.</p>
<p>Now to the point, please answer this question, did you make a mistake, or did you deliberately try to mislead us in post # 157.</p>
<p>Early yesterday morning I read this article by Michael Barone:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/perceptions_of_iraq_war_are_st.html[/url]”>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/perceptions_of_iraq_war_are_st.html</a></p>
<p>I posted what I did off the top of my head. I will be more careful not to use the word “success” next time. I can see that’s a no-no.</p>
<p>Speaking of misleading, let’s look at the Pew poll as an examle. The poll is probably funded by the Pew foundation. This foundation has clearly supported some pretty left-winged organizations. Can they manipulate the polls? Maybe. Is that misleading? Maybe. </p>
<p>Google “Pew” and in ten seconds, you can find information about an organization called “Tides” that Pew donated milions and millions of dollars to.</p>
<p>""Tides was founded in 1976 by Drummond Pike as “a convenient vehicle with squeaky clean books.” While the former is undoubtedly true, the latter is, at best, questionable. The Foundation is a foundation in name, only. Legally, it is a public charity; allowed under IRS rules to solicit contributions and distribute them, which is exactly what the group does. It has distributed over $300 million dollars in grants to various groups for the full array of neo-Com activities: anti-globalism, anti-war, gun control, etc.</p>
<p>The Tides Center, although distinct from the Foundation by the letter of the law, itself takes in substantial amounts of money to “manage” various radical-left projects. Of course, each project managed by the Center is subject to a substantial fee – usually 8 percent of all funds collected. Additionally, the Foundation, itself, may rake off another amount as a “Program Advisory fee” between 1 and 13 percent of the donation.</p>
<p>For example, if someone wants to fund a left-wing movement, they make a fully tax-deductible donation to the Tides Foundation, for which the Foundation will take its share as mentioned. The Foundation will pass the funding along to the Tides Center, which will manage the organization, including hiring program and support staff, providing office space, financial management, employee benefits and legal advice; all for an 8 percent fee. “”</p>
<p>Gosh, sounds like the American Enterprise Institute! Fancy that!</p>
<p>“This is the beauty of proportional representation. mini, I do see the point you keep making, but in a winner-takes-all system I don’t see third parties as the saviors.”</p>
<p>If both the Dems and Reps self-destruct, they might not be “third parties” at all. ;)</p>
<p>If you want multiple parties that can actually win elections, you have to change our basic government structure. You need a parliamentary system, preferably with multi-member electoral districts. There’s an excellent site on the subject, <a href=“http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/Bibliography/prbibht2.htm[/url]”>http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/Bibliography/prbibht2.htm</a></p>
<p>Oh, and you’d need to change the U.S. constitution to do it.</p>
<p>I have never heard of or read about anyone saying the Pew Poll is unreliable. If you have any information to the contraire I would like to have an opportunity to read it.</p>
<p>There are so many polls on Iraq, you can throw out the Pew one (which, by the way, is universally respected by professional pollsters and survey researchers) and you’d have plenty more with similar results. See <a href=“http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm[/url]”>http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm</a></p>
<p>hereshoping post 191 </p>
<p>the artical you refer to says: “A couple of recent polls showed increased support for the decision to go to war and belief that the surge is working.” </p>
<p>That statment is correct…</p>
<p>the Pew Poll is the only one i found so far asking the success/fail question…
in any event the question I had of hereshoping has been cleared up. S/he was mistakne in the use of the word success…somthing we have all done…me perhaps more than most…</p>
<p>Hey tommybill,</p>
<p>Maybe Interested Dad has some poll information. He seems to like certain polls too. ;)</p>
<p>You seem to have a lot in common with him. Where is he today I wonder? 
</p>
<p>The Pew poll is funded by the Pew foundation. The Pew foundation has a political slant. Does it impact the poll results? Who knows?</p>
<p>Please don’t impugn someone else by linking me to them, it’s not fair to them. </p>
<p>The Gallup Poll is owned and run by people who are for the most part Republicans, and their poll favors the Republicans by 3 or 4 points up till late September. Does this mean they are dishonest and their poll should be discredited? No! Gallup is a very reputable organization run by professionals who take pride in their work. What I have just said about Gallup and their integrity can also be say about the Pew Poll and others such as Harris, ABC, CBS, NBC, and ECT. </p>
<p>You are wrong, very wrong, if you sincerely think Pew is anything other than one of the best in the field.</p>