Can any party replace Dems or Reps? Or they both here for next 100 yrs (party affiliation, generation)

[unseengundam]

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.

[DeanGuitarist]

The way that I've been seeing it is that we need a change. For years it has been both parties. For years they point fingers at each other. For years we've had problems with each party being more and more divisive. Instead of finding some kind of common ground and work together to build this nation great again, the further down this country goes.

It's time for a new approach. It's time for a new party that will be on both ends of the republican and democratic party. It won't happen overnight or in 4 years term, but it just might work better than what we have now.

[silibran]

I think most voters vote for the candidate who either speaks to them, or they vote to stop another candidate from winning the election. We know that a vote for a third party candidate can throw an election to the candidate we least want. Sometimes we hold our noses and vote for the least objectionable candidate.

We know a third part candidate can affect the outcome of an election in the “wrong” direction, because we’ve seen it happen.

So, it would take a giant change in attitudes for a third party to have a chance at winning a national election. I do see movement towards a Progressive party, and it is conceivable that this movement could continue to grow. But I also think it would weaken the Democratic party, and would likely be counter productive.

I also sense that there is some movement away from old style Republican politics toward a more aggressive, regressive culture and set of beliefs. It seems to me that the party has become a refuge for very extreme partisans who do not seem to understand constitutional principles. But the Senators Republicans elect seem rich and out of touch with the people who vote for them.

I think there might be a splinter group of extremely conservatives who either try to transform the Republican party, or who try to establish a different, more extreme party.

But ultimately, the only way I can see a third party gaining power is if we splinter into several parties. I don’t know if that will happen.

[thinkalot]

It doesn't happen because 3rd parties always reach too high. They run for POTUS and then they lose, again.

A new party would have to do the work. They would need candidates for every single office on the ballot in all areas of the country. School board, township trustee, city council, judges, mine inspector, coroner, sheriff, and all of the others.

They would need local party chairmen in every county in the country. They would need state chairmen. They would need people to get the signatures so they can get on the ballot. They would need talking heads at every level. They would need buildings for party headquarters, again in all areas of the country.

They would need money! Lots of money. They would have to hire people that have the experience of running campaigns including ballot access. This may be the easiest part.

They would need a platform and it would have to attract people from both parties. A splinter group from either party would have no chance.

[katharsis]

As a moderate, I would love to have another REAL choice, and I agree with the views of silibran and thinkalot.

The way I see it now, is that the Republicans are comprised of two factions (moderate conservatives and Trump supporters), and the Democrats are also comprised of two factions (Progressives/Extremists and those that are moderate liberals).

I think that until the moderates can get together and form their own party with a non-extremist stand involving some kind of compromise on every major issue, we are going to be stuck with candidates that about 50% of the population will strongly dislike.

[wizrap]

Maybe not in my lifetime, but in the next generation we might see it. NPA (No Party Affiliation) is now represents close to a third of registered voters.

I agree with USMC1984 and ThinkALot—Trump is neither a strong Democrat or Republican (just look at his voter history, as he’s been registered with both parties and has donated to candidates from both parties—Hillary and Kamala as a couple of examples). His takeover of the Republican Party was, and is, nothing short of remarkable. The Bush family really thought they had a dynastic path set up for power for decades and now they are considered irrelevant.

The Democrats are (slightly) smarter as they swerved their ship away from the Bernie Sanders wing twice and nominated two old horses. Wait until AOC is old enough to run. IMHO, she could very well be unstoppable. Depending on who the Republicans nominate, will we see a strong Independent emerge? Perhaps. Howard Shultz of Starbucks tried to enter this year’s race when Sanders was a threat to the Democrats. But Biden’s nomination gave him a chance to quietly slink away.

However it works, a third party will need money, and lots of it.

[Ruth4Truth]

The problem is, whenever alternative parties appear, the fear is, that they'll divide the vote against someone who should be ousted. The electoral system seems to be locked into two-party mode, because of this.

The other extreme is countries like Ecuador, which in the 90's, had 17 registered political parties. The result of that is, runoff elections, that cost the state money it can't afford to spend.

Somehow, some European countries are able to have a Green Party, without worrying about deflecting voters from the other candidates. Would be interesting to get opinions from those countries about that.

[phetaroi]

I think the two parties will continue to evolve, but that the Democrat and Republican parties are here to stay, even if in name only compared to the rest of their history.

I cast my first ballot in 1968 as a Republican. The Republican Party of today is NOTHING like the Republican Party of that era. The Democrat Party of today has evolved, as well, but in a more nuanced way.

[jertheber]

when I was young, most of the political talk was aimed at well defined issues. From the fifties forward, the tone began to change, TV brought a new force to US politics, a much shallower kind of news coverage and the introduction of the sound bite as a powerful tool. We went from talking about economics, education, labor demands, post war foreign policy, and gradually moved to the TV proffered, slickly packaged, forms of ideology. This was the rough draft of extreme politics, leaving both parties with a growing chasm of ideological differences within their ranks.

Today both parties are mainly made up of posturing types who simply want the perks of public office, and will play their part by reading from the party script, mostly denigrating the other candidate while making vague promises of their dedication to the notion of American prosperity, lowering taxes, promising jobs and unquestioningly backing the notion of military venturing.. But little if anything really gets done for the average American no matter who moves into the White House.

This bit of political theater is so rewarding to the actors, those smiling pols who have made a career out of pandering to the American public. But it's a system that is terribly broken, and lucrative, for those in high places. Money is the grease on the gears of policy making, the stuff that reduces the friction between the actors, and the insurance policy which allows the real rulers to move about, unmolested, in the shadows of our elected government. So no, we won't see any real change, simply because this two party system is working so well for those it was meant to serve...

[Mindraker]

My absentee ballot had candidates from 5 parties: Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, and Constitution (The Tea Party).