• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Question from a foreigner.

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Exactly - it's happened a lot, and sometime it *stays split* but often it's reabsorbed.

The Tea Party, however - isn't an official split from the Reps, it's a movement that became more than that.

Well, I see it as less of a split and more of a faction within the GOP. I think the Tea Partiers will be a more-or-less permanent faction that will mostly register with the Republican Party and vote for the Republican, except when they decide to vote for Independent Tea Partiers who don't get past the GOP primary. That's my prediction for them.
 

Hoplite

Technomancer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
3,779
Reaction score
1,077
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
They kinda do that already through other means but for the sake of argument lets say it's made illegal, for now.
Under our current set of laws, you couldnt really make it illegal. We've decided that corporations are somehow endowed with constitutional rights, the argument would be made that political parties have the same protections.

Ahh, this is where that is different.

A party only gets one seat or a predefined set of seats.
None more than what was originally designated, no matter how many additional members they get.
Again, my concern would be ending up with hundreds of parties in the government, all fighting with each other.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Under our current set of laws, you couldnt really make it illegal. We've decided that corporations are somehow endowed with constitutional rights, the argument would be made that political parties have the same protections.

That's possible no doubt, but in the long run, I don't think it would be viable to get someone to do that.

Again, my concern would be ending up with hundreds of parties in the government, all fighting with each other.

Well I think we would end up with probably a similar distribution to the membership here.
Most of us fall into one of the specific parties, although not all of us, but don't forget that the House of Reps already has 375(?) members as it is.

I haven't totally thought this out yet but I thought it was interesting.
Ideas being more important, than numbers.
 

dclx88

New member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
31
Reaction score
10
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It seems to me, through my observations on here, and of the media, that the biggest problem in American politics is the two party system, and I'm curious to know just how it is enshrined in law, is it on the constitution, and what would have to happen to get it revoked?

Well, foreigner, our current two-party system was not created by the words of the Constitution, or any other federal laws. However, during the time when the Constitution was being drafted and while the States were deciding whether or not to ratify it, there were two political parties: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The point of difference between these two parties was the breadth of power which ought to be placed in the Central Government. Interestingly, that same argument is alive and well between Democrats and Republicans. Actually, the Bill of Rights, or the first ten Articles of Amendment to the U.S. Constitution are a consequence of the controversy between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. So, one can say the Constitution is the work-product of compromise between the conservative and liberal political factions of the late 18th century.
 

GPS_Flex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
2,726
Reaction score
648
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, foreigner, our current two-party system was not created by the words of the Constitution, or any other federal laws. However, during the time when the Constitution was being drafted and while the States were deciding whether or not to ratify it, there were two political parties: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The point of difference between these two parties was the breadth of power which ought to be placed in the Central Government. Interestingly, that same argument is alive and well between Democrats and Republicans. Actually, the Bill of Rights, or the first ten Articles of Amendment to the U.S. Constitution are a consequence of the controversy between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. So, one can say the Constitution is the work-product of compromise between the conservative and liberal political factions of the late 18th century.

Best answer
 

gslack18

New member
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I agree with you and that is why I vote for Republican and Democratic candidates who I most closely agree with and I know will get elected. The thing is that a party system was not actually in development and there is nothingthat the constitution has to say about it. It stems from an arguement that arose over federal and state allocation of power during the drafting of our current constitution during 1787. The federalist and then anti-federalist parties were born. Then during the era of good feelings, (1820s-30s) The Democratic-Republican party was born, the whigs and the democrats. The whig party fell apart and the Democratic republican party fell apart before that giving rise to the Republicans. The republicans were against slavery and were based in the north and the Democrats were for slavery and based in the south, and every since the late 1840s fighting between the Republicans And democrats sent everything to hell and eventually started the civil war. Even today you can see the federalist and anti federalist roots in both of the parties. The problem in america isn't the parties per say, its what they believe. It all comes down to civil beliefs and a struggle between states rights and federal authority.
 

Patrickt

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
3,579
Reaction score
1,082
Location
Oaxaca, Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If you're interested, here's a list of U.S. political parties. I was surprised the Communist Party of the U.S. was founded in 1919 and it's still plugging away.

List of political parties in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the occasions where I can't bring myself to vote for either a Democrat or a Republican in a federal election I usually go with the Prohibition Party. Now that I live outside the U.S. I only get to vote for President.
 
Last edited:

bennymac5151

New member
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
40
Reaction score
25
Location
St. Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It seems to me, through my observations on here, and of the media, that the biggest problem in American politics is the two party system, and I'm curious to know just how it is enshrined in law, is it on the constitution, and what would have to happen to get it revoked?

If we had proportional representation I could see a third party gaining some seats. Also, its hard to get on the ballot in many states as a third party contender, so a lot of money is spent just on that aspect, putting them at a disadvantage. The electoral college also plays a roll, since nobody can win without a majority of the electoral votes (270 I think).

I'm on the fence as to whether or not altering it would be a good thing...
 
Top Bottom