The current 2 party political system in the U.S.

[modest mouse]

I, for one, am radically against the established two party system. I am no anarchist as I engage the system which I would like to improve. I also have ideas that do not follow party lines and i vote accordingly. If you don't vote, please don't bother to reply.

And p_p_man... stay out of this thread.

Opinions?
Thoughts?

(Yes, inspired by Lavender's facetious thread and the reply by patient1)

 

[Mellon Collie]

I am no anarchist as I engage the system which I would like to improve.

Hey, I want to improve it too, the only difference is I see the lack of government being the improvement.

Punk.

 

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

Re: Re: The current 2 party political system in the U.S.

Hey, I want to improve it too, the only difference is I see the lack of government being the improvement.

Punk.

Vote Libertarian

Seriously though I agree witht he premise of this thread regardless of country, you need more than 2 parties.

 

[miles]

modest mouse

What issues are important to you?

 

[erosman]

aw, geez, MM

Can't we all just live in peaceful harmony. Like...like...it's all just one big fucking conspiracy anyways...know what I mean? Why don't we just take numbers and let everyone take turns at steering this here big ole country. I mean, fuck and let fuck, that's my motto.

 

[kotori]

the irish have an interesting system of proportional representation. every district elects at least three and as many as five members to the Dáil Éireann. In some districts, there may be as many as fifteen candidates standing, and you put a number beside each name, and then they tally the highest selections. Top three win. This way, the little parties get some seats, and you don't have an entire delegation being given to one party. This way, the people who support minority parties don't feel disenfranchised.

 

[patient1]

Sometimes the 2 party "sytem" seems to be more of an incumbent power protection scheme as anything.

Some issues like gun freedom or reproductive freedom seem to be more about fundraising & motivating campaign workers than changing the status quo .

 

[Mellon Collie]

the irish have an interesting system of proportional representation. every district elects at least three and as many as five members to the Dáil Éireann. In some districts, there may be as many as fifteen candidates standing, and you put a number beside each name, and then they tally the highest selections. Top three win. This way, the little parties get some seats, and you don't have an entire delegation being given to one party. This way, the people who support minority parties don't feel disenfranchised.

Sheesh, will you just stop knowing stuff.

 

[morninggirl5]

The current 2 party system isn't working, simply because they cannot address the complete range of opinions and beliefs of the many, many different groups in the country. Yet, they try to, because they each need to draw votes from the many different groups.

In my opinion, we would be much better off if we had 5 or 6 different parties as we did in the infancy of the nation. If politicians were dependent upon actually serving those that elected them for reelection rather than serving the interests of donors who allow them to buy huge chunks of media time to be elected, we would have a more responsible government.

 

[kotori]

Sheesh, will you just stop knowing stuff.

Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour (that's my party), Green, Sinn Féin, etc.

 

[KillerMuffin]

A list of parties in the last few elections

*ahem*

Republican
Democrat
Reform
Green
Libertarian
U.S. Taxpayers
Natural Law
Workers World
Peace and Freedom
Socialist Workers
Grassroots
Socialist
Socialist Equality
American
Prohibition
America First
Looking Back
New Alliance
Economic Recovery
Workers League
Take Back America
Apathy
Third World Assembly
Right to Life
National Economic
American Independent
Consumer
Populist
United Sovereign Citizens
Big Deal
National Unity Pary
Citizens
Natural Peoples
Down With Lawyers
Middle Class
Statesman
Communist
United States Labor


Obviously the lack of political parties isn't the problem. We don't actually have a two party system. We don't have a mandated party system anywhere. The party system is de facto and can be changed.

What's the problem? Funding. Soft money, hard money, medium-rare money goes to the candidates that big business, lobbyists, PACs, and foreigners hope to win.

We need massive campaign finance reform.

 

[miles]

I don't buy any of the usual excuses for lousy government. Big business, soft money, hard money, funny money, campaign reform, and so on ad nauseum, are nothing but a smokescreen. The fact is that many Americans couldn't care less about politics. How many people even know the names of their representatives in state legislatures or in Congress, much less even bother to vote at all?

 

[sigh]

We have (in practice, at least) a two party system that most likely will never go away. Remember, these are the two parties who control virtually all the votes required to change the system and why would they do that when it could only weaken their power?

And miles, I agree with you to a point. We do have a huge number of apathetic citizens in our country but even if they were to become involved it wouldn't change the system a bit. That they are so disillusioned may simply be a reflection of the problem. They truly believe that regardless of how they vote, nothing will really change.

And you know what? I fear they're right.

No offense, hon, but blaming apathy is just another smokescreen.

 

[Problem Child]

I don't buy any of the usual excuses for lousy government. Big business, soft money, hard money, funny money, campaign reform, and so on ad nauseum, are nothing but a smokescreen. The fact is that many Americans couldn't care less about politics. How many people even know the names of their representatives in state legislatures or in Congress, much less even bother to vote at all?

You've got it backwards Miles. The exact reason people are so apathetic is because no one thinks their vote counts, and that's because we all know that big money controls the candidates.

We are given exactly two choices in every election, aside from the primaries. No one votes libertarian or green or any of the minor parties because they know they have no financial backing and can't win.

Get rid of the big money in politics and let individuals support candidates, not corporations and special interest groups, and you will start to see more choice, and you will see more good things get done because some of these shitty politicians will start losing elections instead of remaining incumbents forever.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Get rid of the big money in politics and let individuals support candidates, not corporations and special interest groups, and you will start to see more choice, and you will see more good things get done because some of these shitty politicians will start losing elections instead of remaining incumbents forever.

Exactly.

 

[LMT]

Without a constitutional amendment having viable third parties would cause elections to become messier than the average American would likely be willing to put up with.

The Constitution [Article II, and Amendment XII] says: “The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.”

Concider the last election, and assume for a moment that instead of Florida being contested that Nader had won the state outright. None of the candidates would have had a majority of the [total number of] electoral votes. The election would have been decided by the house of representatives. If there are truly viable third parties: where the votes are split almost evenly between the candidates, then this type of election result would become the norm.

Democracy is not about everyone getting what they want, it is about compermise. The time for voting your concious is in the primaries when there are lots of choices. Your vote in the final election will always be a compermise.

 

[miles]

I still don't buy it. The special interest group with potentially the most power is the American voter. If your guy fucks up, fire him, as in Bush 92.

It reminds me of the BS about term limits. We already have them, people are just too fucking lazy to exercise it.

 

[Problem Child]

I still don't buy it. The special interest group with potentially the most power is the American voter. If your guy fucks up, fire him, as in Bush 92.

It reminds me of the BS about term limits. We already have them, people are just too fucking lazy to exercise it.

Do you really think George W. Bush and Al Gore were the two most qualified candidates in 2000, or could it be that they were the most generic, homogeneous, and marketable candidates? Wouldn't you like a better choice next time?

Don't you think John McCain would have beaten both of those bozos if the playing field had been equal? He nearly did, before the Republicans dumped millions into defeating McCain.

If we keep allowing Exxon, GM, and RJR to provide 90% of the campaign funding for our candidates, we get what Exxon, GM, and RJR want, not what the people want.

In political America, the people don't really choose the president anymore, and you know it.

 

[Laurel]

Problem Child in 2002

http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/images/usflag.jpg

 

[Problem Child]

I'll vote democrat if McCain runs again.

That's a promise.

 

[miles]

Do you really think George W. Bush and Al Gore were the two most qualified candidates in 2000, or could it be that they were the most generic, homogeneous, and marketable candidates? Wouldn't you like a better choice next time?

Don't you think John McCain would have beaten both of those bozos if the playing field had been equal? He nearly did, before the Republicans dumped millions into defeating McCain.

If we keep allowing Exxon, GM, and RJR to provide 90% of the campaign funding for our candidates, we get what Exxon, GM, and RJR want, not what the people want.

In political America, the people don't really choose the president anymore, and you know it.

Why are you asking me if those guys were qualified? Did I say they were? And yes, McCain would have crushed Gore, but is he really any better than Bush? .

If the people want change, they vote. But they are too fucking lazy to do anything. Besides, last time I looked, Exxon couldn't vote.

Hell, I know they bribe the bastards and grease the wheels. But the bottom line is they work for us, and we can fire them every two or four years.

 

[miles]

pc

I'll vote democrat if McCain runs again.

Is there any difference if he's a Dem or Rep?

Besides, he'll probably switch parties before then anyway.

 

[Problem Child]

Why are you asking me if those guys were qualified? Did I say they were? And yes, McCain would have crushed Gore, but is he really any better than Bush? .

If the people want change, they vote. But they are too fucking lazy to do anything. Besides, last time I looked, Exxon couldn't vote.

Hell, I know they bribe the bastards and grease the wheels. But the bottom line is they work for us, and we can fire them every two or four years.

Uh, yeah, he is better than Bush.

I know that we have elections and that people get voted out. That's not the point. The point is that in this country, we speak politically with the money we give to candidates as well as with our votes. And if the vast majority of money that candidates get comes from big business instead of from individual americans, they are not being well-represented.

You agree that our campaign finance system is fucked up, yet you don't want to fix it.

I find that odd.

 

[coolr]

damn weirdos, stick with tradition and long live the US lol

 

[Problem Child]

Re: pc

I'll vote democrat if McCain runs again.

Is there any difference if he's a Dem or Rep?

Besides, he'll probably switch parties before then anyway.

I meant I would vote for him whether he runs as a Democrat or Republican. Right now I would be inclined to think he'll switch parties, especially since he could clean Gore's clock a lot easier than he could go up against an incumbent Bush.