Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hate the political parties in the USA, I think America would be better off if they simply passed some law forbidding political party affiliation be denoted on ballots. No more straight party voting - if your political party matters to you, go research every candidate so you know their party in the booth. I suspect most Americans won't (research) and would begin to vote their conscience, not which team they belong to.
I hate the political parties in the USA, I think America would be better off if they simply passed some law forbidding political party affiliation be denoted on ballots. No more straight party voting - if your political party matters to you, go research every candidate so you know their party in the booth. I suspect most Americans won't (research) and would begin to vote their conscience, not which team they belong to.
The political party system is designed this way on purpose. It's much easier for the elite to dominate two parties as opposed to say, 8 of them. The elite know what they are doing!!! They want Americans fighting amongst themselves in a "horizontal battle." What better way of dividing the masses than feed us constant media coverage of CNN vs. Fox ie Republicans vs. Democrats?
As a nation, we are so fixated on this "horizontal battle" that few of us realize that Americans should be uniting and fighting a "vertical battle" in which we question and oppose the true leaders of the world. It's all done by design!!! True rulers of the world prefer to remain cloaked behind the curtain and the less the world snoops in their business ordeals the better.
The problem with a multi party system is that you could end up with a party that 66% of the people would be opposed to if the third party got 34% of the vote with the other two splitting the 66% evenly.
...
I don't think you've thought this out very well?
Dozens of nations function just fine with a multitude of parties, so... It would of course have to be coupled with proportional representation and multi-seat districts, otherwise you're back to two-party rule. 34% of the seats in a voting body isn't a lot. Which means you have to compromise and strike the occasional deal. The minority point of view actually stands a chance of being heard.
Dozens of nations function just fine with a multitude of parties, so... It would of course have to be coupled with proportional representation and multi-seat districts, otherwise you're back to two-party rule. 34% of the seats in a voting body isn't a lot. Which means you have to compromise and strike the occasional deal. The minority point of view actually stands a chance of being heard.
That would be pretty difficult when you've got 10 different parties fighting for 10 different things. The point I was trying to make is that you'd still end up with 34% of the population voting for a political party that 66% would oppose. Suppose 34% of the people decided to vote for another Nazi party, the KKK, BLM or ANTIFA? Suppose that party told the other 66% to go to hell, we're now in charge of the government and there's not a GD thing you can do about it? With 10 different parties there's even more of a possibility that a radical party could run the government as they would only need 11% of the total vote.
Quote:
In the thirteen years the Weimar Republic was in existence, some forty parties were represented in the Reichstag. This fragmentation of political power was in part due to the peculiar parliamentary system of the Weimar Republic, and in part due to the many challenges facing German democracy in this period.---https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_political_parties
See how well that worked out? ^^^
Who cares what dozens of other nations do? We are not like dozens of other nations and rightly so, nor should we want to emulate them. Having that many different political parties vying for political power would be absolute chaos. Indeed there may be problems with a 2 party system but having multiple parties sure as hell is not the answer. People have to just identify themselves with one of the two political parties that best represents their views and vote accordingly.
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 11-20-2018 at 06:10 PM..
Whatever side you go to, do you want your party, your side to rule in dominance now and forever? Like what we see is happening in California? If your side goes unchallenged nothing but good things from now on right? This question goes out to those on the left and right.
For instance in California Republicans are basically shut down, shut out for the seeable future, liberals in California should be rejoicing.
Well. We have periodic elections in this country. The people decide and sometimes they overwhelmingly reject a particular party and create a long standing majority. It’s the democratic process. What kind of government do you want an authoritarian one party rule ?
BTW my personal answer is no , because two sides are needed to balance the other out even though I tend to go against liberals but the phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" comes to mind.
That saying is true for a reason. The most Corrupt cities are almost always Democrat, Chicago, NYC, Detroit, Baltimore, and more. Once they get firmly entrenched in power they have a lock.
That would be pretty difficult when you've got 10 different parties fighting for 10 different things.
Happens all the time. People vote for representatives that assign different priorities to different subjects and those representatives form voting blocks accordingly.
Quote:
The point I was trying to make is that you'd still end up with 34% of the population voting for a political party that 66% would oppose.
And that party would control 34% of the seats in the legislative voting body. That's what is known as a "minority".
Quote:
Suppose that party told the other 66% to go to hell, we're now in charge of the government and there's not a GD thing you can do about it?
If you don't understand how proportional representation works, there are resources online.
Quote:
With 10 different parties there's even more of a possibility that a radical party could run the government as they would only need 11% of the total vote.
The remaining 89% of the seats would not be able to pool their votes?
Quote:
Who cares what dozens of other nations do? We are not like dozens of other nations and rightly so, nor should we want to emulate them. Having that many different political parties vying for political power would be absolute chaos.
It would allow people to actually vote for a party that closer represents their actual viewpoints. I for one do not think it would be too hard to figure out, but then again I think well of the US electorate in general.
Quote:
Indeed there may be problems with a 2 party system...
Ya think?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
