I hear people complain about the two party system... (1 Viewer)

Thorin

Idle
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
7,800
Reaction score
957
Age
48
Location
Shreveport, Tx.
Offline
... but look at this list, it's always been this way. There has never really been a viable third party contender candidate for the presidency. Just an observation, I know that hopefuls didn't walk the hard party line agendas back then as tightly as they do today, but still. No third candidate really got a close percentage since 1800.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

LSSpam

Practice Squad
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
28,419
Reaction score
8,141
Age
38
Location
Oxford, MS
Offline
Good catch, I missed that one. Such a rarity though.
Was an exception that proved the rule anyways. Roosevelt, of course, was a Republican who split to independent when Taft got the nomination. His "success" of course gave Wilson the election, thereby proving the rule (there's only room for 2 parties so you're better off stepping in line and getting behind the candidate closest to your values rather then splitting the vote and handing it to the guy all the way on the otherside of the isle).


But a different way to think about is there is room for a third party, just not with any staying power.

As the Taft/Roosevelt example proves a third party is a great way to play "spoiler" and therefore force your "party" to pay attention to a core constituency in it. Wallace's "American" party in 68 is an example, Nader in 2000 a much lesser example, and of course there still exists the potential for a Social-Conservative spoiler this year as well.

PS This thread can't go anymore posts without mentioning Ross Perot. So "Ross Perot".
 

bclemms

More than 15K posts served!
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
33,522
Reaction score
43,939
Age
13
Location
Jackson, ms
Offline
I see nothing wrong with the two party system.

If you want out of Iraq then you have to vote to raise taxes, increase the size of government, socialized medicine, increased foreign aid and many other excellent policies.

/sarcasm, lots and lots of sarcasm
 

Bayouboy

Football Genius
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 30, 2000
Messages
10,681
Reaction score
2,322
Age
47
Location
Vacherie, LA
Offline
So because it's been that way for upteen years....it makes it right? I hate the idea of choosing between ONLY two candidates.....with the same tired platform.

Liberatarians RISE!!!!!!!!!!!
 

easydave

Tap-in
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 8, 2001
Messages
1,716
Reaction score
148
Age
85
Location
Shreveport
Offline
In my opinion we do not have a two party system. We have one single party with two factions. This one party has a monopoly in the Congress that destroys the possibility of any reasonable competition. The Republicans and Democrats both want the same thing: to confiscate our money and spend it. The only thing they differ on is how to spend it.
 

primadox

Hurricane Bear Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 1, 1997
Messages
16,940
Reaction score
5,158
Age
56
Location
Houston TX, via Parsippany, NJ and New Orleans
Offline
As I said in another thread, I'm for the National Radical Meadow Party:




:worthy: :worthy: :worthy: :worthy:

Seriously, I wish there would consistantly be a legitimate third party contender. I think it would make both other parties focus more on providing a good candidate who will deal with the true issues, and less on providing a cookie-cutter, good Democrat/Republican candidate with the same old tired agendas.
 

geauxboy

Boo Boo Bear
VIP Subscribing Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2001
Messages
19,176
Reaction score
3,805
Location
Right chere
Offline
So because it's been that way for upteen years....it makes it right? I hate the idea of choosing between ONLY two candidates.....with the same tired platform.

Liberatarians RISE!!!!!!!!!!!
Why not? It's working SO well now.


/sarcasm

If it's broke, fix it. But, of course they won't let that happen. They'll continue to suppress anyone that isn't "with" them. Look at Paul. Anything to keep the guy off the airwaves.
 

cruize

Account closed at user request
Joined
Apr 3, 2005
Messages
5,866
Reaction score
0
Offline
With no parties, you judge a candidate by what he/she says and eventually by their record of service. Candidates don't get any votes just because they're a member of a certain party. Nice and simple.
 

geauxboy

Boo Boo Bear
VIP Subscribing Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2001
Messages
19,176
Reaction score
3,805
Location
Right chere
Offline
With no parties, you judge a candidate by what he/she says and eventually by their record of service. Candidates don't get any votes just because they're a member of a certain party. Nice and simple.
True. Look at McCain. There wouldn't be so much indecision about his stance on certain subjects if he weren't labeled a Conservative or Republican. Get the confusion of labels (parties) out of the equation and let them run as individuals.

What's in a party anyway? When one party is elected, they dog the other. I equate this to the Sunni - Shiite issues. One party doesn't like the other. So now, instead of having just one person representing themselves with their individual views on what they deem important, you have an entire party pressuring you into decisions that you may not agree with therefor compromising your entire agenda and individual campaign.

Peer pressure is not a healthy tool for decision making. An advisory committee, yes. An entire party telling you what to do and think, isn't.

You're supposed to be elected more on your individual goals, ideals, and visions, etc or for the party they represent?
 
Last edited:

Hedon James

the agitant f/k/a Jekylz Hyde
Joined
Sep 1, 1997
Messages
2,196
Reaction score
2,610
Location
Garden of Hedon...wherever I am, there I are...
Offline
In my opinion we do not have a two party system. We have one single party with two factions. This one party has a monopoly in the Congress that destroys the possibility of any reasonable competition. The Republicans and Democrats both want the same thing: to confiscate our money and spend it. The only thing they differ on is how to spend it.
That's an interesting way to look at it. I hadn't thought of it that way, but when I do, I agree with you.

I'd prefer a "no-party" system, where the candidate runs on their merit/platform. If a majority like what you stand for, you're in........none of this ***-kissing coalition crap where you say whatever you have to in order to get what you want. I'm sick of it...

At heart, I'm an anarchist, but I'm also practical enough to know that SOME rules are good, even if you don't like them. So, along those lines I've also wondered, if NOBODY voted, does that mean NOBODY wins, and the country is leaderless by default? Then, can we start over and rebuild from scratch and get it RIGHT this time?!

I'm sick of white collar criminals and their cronies running the show for their own personal gains and agendas. What's it gonna take for the message to get through?!
 

bclemms

More than 15K posts served!
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
33,522
Reaction score
43,939
Age
13
Location
Jackson, ms
Offline
There are third parties out there and the simple solution is to vote for them. I bet many of the people that complain about the two party system will vote Republicrat in the next election.

If a third candidate wants to be elected he/she will have to overcome.

1) Media bias and even censorship or blackout.

2) Somehow get the people that want to vote for him to actually vote for him and not vote for Joe Blow because they think he has a better chance of winnnig.

3) Harness the power of the internet and turn the online support into real life votes.

4) Find a way to get the elderly to change which is nearly impossible.

5) Be able to face attacks from both Republicans, Democrats and media smear attempts.

I really believe we are closer than most expect. The one thing that really holds us back is the baby boom generation. They vote nearly 100% for R or D. If the younger generations can avoid falling into that trap when they get older then we have a legit shot. The internet opens a lot of doors and in a couple more elections will likely have as much, if not more power than television.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

Headlines

Top Bottom