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.
In Ca the Rs are now the 3rd largest group, they've been overtaken by independents.*
The most likely way I think it could happen over time, is if the independents increase*in numbers to the point that both Rs and Ds feel the need to open their state primaries to independents.
That alone is insufficient. You would then need to have widespread*adoption of Ranked Choice Voting at the state and federal level. At that point electing a block of independents to Congress is less daunting.*
Until a grassroots group can form a 3rd party and start winning local elections, city/county/state. Spread across the nation after that, with a strong 3rd party platform, to potentially win Congressional and Senate seats. Can't shoot for the top spot time and time again, without a voting base built. In this time and age, it may take 20-25 years before a 3rd party is able to come together, start winning and challenge for the White House.
I think that the Democrat party is actually a consortium of parties...not just one monolithic private ideological club. That explains some of the resilience over the last 192 years. Factions move and evolve in response to change and there is often not one voice. That requires some internal compromise and negotiation. That also causes some confusion for those on the outside.
The Republican party is less tolerant of divergent or competing voices or factions. The RINO label was a GOP invention. The Democrats don't have a similar derogatory label that they use on each other. There is more of a 'winner take all' attitude and a need for conformity in the GOP. New GOP factions develop and try to take over the party rather than work with the total group. The idea of evolving with change is an alien concept.
The Democrats currently have an internal problem with the Sanders faction because Bernie has always claimed to be "independent" and then the Sanders supporters think they should be more "in control" of the party. Many of them sat out the 2016 election or voted 3rd party. They are more ideological and act more like a GOP faction.
I doubt the U.S. will have any thriving third party anytime soon. One of the reasons being is that the Dems and Repubs have passed legislation at the state level in many states (over the course of many decades) where third parties have tremendous difficulty of just simply getting on the ballot for state-wide or national elections. The major parties have essentially locked out any sustainable "third party."
USA needs 5 strong parties to get itself out of its dead-end 2 party rut. Having 4 - 6 parties works very well for other countries so I don't see why it couldn't work well for USA.
.
The differences between the US system and a parliamentary system make it so. A truly viable 3rd party in the US would mean the House would frequently be deciding presidential elections.
No, there is not going to be a viable third party in our lifetimes. Americans are locked into voting Republican or Democrat 95% of the time. Very few people are actually independent, no matter what they say.
The only time in recent memory that a third party gained traction was with Ross Perot. And the only thing he did was take votes away from George Bush. If Ross Perot hadn't been there, then Bill Clinton would never have become President.
I find it interesting the same two political parties has managed hold power in the USA for the last 150+ years. There have been some splinter groups and other parties that tried but hasn't managed to make any serious head away.
Seems both parties are very politically entrenched. And in fact, they always seem to be some clamoring how bad they both are. However, voters never seem to defect in mass to actually make either the Democratic or Republican party fall out of power.
Which makes me think is the United States destined to be stuck with the same two parties for the next 100 years or more?
Moderator's ground rules for all participating in this debate:
1. As per Administrator's rules for the Great Debates forum, "There will be no tolerance for insulting other posters, personal attacks on politicians or others, and trolling."
2. Let's not have this topic devolve into a typical conservatives vs liberals vs rightists vs leftists rage-fest. You have the Politics and Other Controversies forum for that, if that is your cup of tea.
Thank you.
They’ll likely be here for the next 100 years but likely change.
Ie: the republicans of the civil war aren’t the same as the republicans too.
Being someone who is relatively conservative, I have no party, which is why I like stuff like the Lincoln project and plan to vote straight democrat. The GOP is not the Conservative party, so why would I vote for it? Burn it down and make it take another look at its platform and maybe well have one.
[Moderator cut]
Last edited by Rachel NewYork; 09-15-2020 at 10:14 AM..
Reason: While I share your sentiments, please adhere to the ground rules so that this thread does not de-rail. Thank you.
I'd prefer to have a multi-party parliamentary system where parliament is supreme like in the UK. No, I don't see a serious multi-party system outside of that as the winner take all nature of our elections ensures that only one party will be elected to a seat. And we've already seen how disastrous for one of the major parties that a serious third party candidacy has been.
I'd prefer to have a multi-party parliamentary system where parliament is supreme like in the UK. No, I don't see a serious multi-party system outside of that as the winner take all nature of our elections ensures that only one party will be elected to a seat. And we've already seen how disastrous for one of the major parties that a serious third party candidacy has been.
The U.K. really doesn’t have a multi party system.
It’s still the top party controlling the agenda.
The main difference is our staggered elections often swings control of the house away from the same party in the White House causing gridlock as the the two bodies in our legislative branch are pretty equal in power vs U.K. can be rather concentrated.
I’d have to look it up but I believe there was points early on we had third parties with power, but it didn’t really change things.
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.
