Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-01-2018, 03:21 AM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,219 posts, read 22,380,933 times
Reputation: 23858

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NJmann View Post
If we abolished those completely and started fresh
Abolishment can never happen. People won't change their political convictions by degree or by force. Just ask any older or frequent voter about that question, and you'll get that answer.

A decree would only change the name of the party at the most.. But in America, a decree wouldn't even get far enough to do that much.

We have had many other parties in our past, and neither present major party is anything at all like it once was. The reason why the Republican and Democratic parties survived, and the Grangers, the Liberal Democrats, and the Whigs, along with dozens of other now-dead parties did not is because they adapted to changing times and changing voters.
The last major change came in my living history, but I'm older than you. It occurred about 50 years ago.

But this is no certainty that either or both of our major parties can survive, despite their long successful histories. Age alone had no inherent political advantages. If it did, then the Whigs would still exist, as they were the most successful party that died out.
Age brings on brittleness and unwillingness to change, and change depends on new ideas that have enough validity to be able to prove their worth to all opposing voters.

This means any of the present third parties could overcome the Republicans or the Democrats if their platforms caught enough voters' imaginations. And if their candidates captured the voter's hearts. And if that party could also capture the imaginations of the big money contributors who now keep our elections turning as they must turn.

It also means that a brand-new party could also arise and overtake all the others, old and younger. An independent party that is beholden to neither can always cherry-pick the best fruit from the tree once.

It happens in state politics and non-partisan politics, where the individual candidate's abilities often count for more than a party platform's adherence. The trick is to make it happen more than once, and more than just one candidate.

But when the right candidate comes along, it can happen quickly. The Republican party started very small as a group of radical independents with more extreme positions that were stronger than the entrenched positions of the Democrats and the Whigs, and all it took was Abraham Lincoln to make it happen for the Republicans.

Within 4 years, during an election in the midst of America's worst war, enough Whigs jumped over to the Republicans to make the party a dominant force.
The Whigs didn't just vanish afterward, but they died on the vine pretty quickly, and the rise of the Republicans forced the Democratic party into massive change to survive a possible overthrow of its own.

None of this happed due to abolishment. A decree will never change a person's deeply held beliefs. Ask the Catholic Church about that one. Or a Whig, if you can find one to ask.

 
Old 09-01-2018, 04:20 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
31,340 posts, read 14,281,167 times
Reputation: 27863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob702 View Post
I think it would make more sense to just abolish the electoral college and the "the winner takes it all" system. That way, the already existing smaller parties can have more of chance to be actually represented.
No, I don't think so, as California, Illinois, and NYC would effectively run the country and ensure the democrats never lose.

Better keep things as they are -- at least now, the Democrats have to campaign in the rest of the country.
 
Old 09-01-2018, 01:23 PM
 
Location: Florida
7,779 posts, read 6,394,423 times
Reputation: 15804
There was a Conservative party in NY in the 60s.

Teddy Roosevelt ran on the Bull Moose party ticket over a century ago.

Changing the Electoral College would require amending the constitution, NO chance.
 
Old 09-01-2018, 01:47 PM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,419,437 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJmann View Post
If we abolished those completely and started fresh

And HOW do you propose we do this? Do you really believe the two entrenched major parties would allow it to happen?
 
Old 09-01-2018, 06:15 PM
 
2,924 posts, read 1,589,004 times
Reputation: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastwardBound View Post
We already have multiple parties, including the Libertarian and Green but most people simply have never entertained voting for them. Gary Johnson did the best a minor party candidate has done in recent memory, scoring 3% in 2016.
Not true, there actually was a notable independent who won a US Senate seat:





So it IS possible that someone who is not a Dem or a Republican wins a major election.
 
Old 09-01-2018, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Eugene, Oregon
11,122 posts, read 5,596,621 times
Reputation: 16596
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJmann View Post
Should we simply abolish the two party system we currently have and start fresh with new multiple political parties?

- Social Democrats
- Green party
- Liberal party
- Christian (right) party
- Conservative party
- ?

Similar to other Western countries. This is much better and will also stop the fight basically between republicans and democrats, and basically more choices for the people.
Most of those other countries have great instability in their governments. The Italians seem to have a new government, every year or so. Any one party in control, can have its power dissolve overnight, as coalitions fall apart.
 
Old 09-01-2018, 06:48 PM
 
Location: Richmond, VA
5,047 posts, read 6,350,838 times
Reputation: 7204
The real explanation why we are stuck with 2 parties, and cannot get to multiple, is found in Duverger’s Law (actually a political theory). If it’s accurate, no amount of wishing or percentage adjustments will get us past this effect under our current system. Google it and there are a wide variety of good explanations and videos. My favorite is

‘The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained’


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
 
Old 09-01-2018, 10:31 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,851 posts, read 5,881,216 times
Reputation: 11467
They should just get rid of parties all together. So many people vote exclusively based on party lines without even looking at the issues. If you got rid of the party titles, people would actually have to put in some effort to understand who and what they are actually voting for.
 
Old 09-02-2018, 12:13 AM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,612,875 times
Reputation: 15341
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJmann View Post
If we abolished those completely and started fresh
The country is too far gone for that to even work at this point. The people need to step up and REMOVE this govt from power completely and permanently, and start over from scratch.

This would include all the Govt agencies, which are truly the problem anyway, presidents and administrations come and go every 4-8 yrs, the people and these agencies are LIFERS, thats where the problem starts.
 
Old 09-02-2018, 12:39 AM
 
435 posts, read 176,352 times
Reputation: 395
This all or nothing two party nonsense where the two parties collude to keep third parties off ballots and out of debates is a slap in the face to democracy.

I would prefer a parliamentary system after Trump where a vote of no confidence could replace a leader or government. I think it should be much easier to replace an incompetent and damaging leader rather than having to wait for a serious enough crime to be committed or 4 years.

It would be great if it could be left to the people in a recall vote since neither party can be trusted with the responsibility. I think the bar should be high. It shouldn't be easy, but it shouldn't be impossible either.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:41 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top