- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 3,392
- Reaction score
- 971
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I think we need a strong third, fourth, fifth, and sixth party in the U.S. Unfortunately, nothing is ever going to change until we change our voting system. Plurality voting systems naturally tend to a two-party system (Duverger's Law). Change our system to something like Instant Run-off Voting and the chances for other parties to get elected increase dramatically.
But, then again, there's another problem with our government system. Only one politician can be elected to one congressional district, despite both Democrats, Republicans, and any other third-party members living there. So if a Green congressman gets elected he'll also have to represent the Republicans and Democrats who are constituents in his district. This is the problem with having single-member districts instead of a national proportional system.
Then again, I rather like districts since it allows local areas to have a say in national politics. It keeps national politics from being controlled by urban areas.
However, I think instituting IRV would be a great step forward in the right direction.
I think we need a strong third, fourth, fifth, and sixth party in the U.S. Unfortunately, nothing is ever going to change until we change our voting system. Plurality voting systems naturally tend to a two-party system (Duverger's Law). Change our system to something like Instant Run-off Voting and the chances for other parties to get elected increase dramatically.
But, then again, there's another problem with our government system. Only one politician can be elected to one congressional district, despite both Democrats, Republicans, and any other third-party members living there. So if a Green congressman gets elected he'll also have to represent the Republicans and Democrats who are constituents in his district. This is the problem with having single-member districts instead of a national proportional system.
Then again, I rather like districts since it allows local areas to have a say in national politics. It keeps national politics from being controlled by urban areas.
However, I think instituting IRV would be a great step forward in the right direction.
I think we do need a strong Third Party because it's something that'll keep the two major parties we have now honest.
Canada and the UK have more three or more main political parties (with two major ones each)
We have a voting system similar to the US ( the person with the most votes wins the district or seat)
There really is no reason for only two political parties in the US rather then three.
Other then the fact Americans dont like losing. People in the UK will vote for the Liberal Democrats despite that party having no chance of forming the government. The same occurs in Canada with the New Democrats, they will never likely form the government, but the do get some seats in government
Whatever I think it should be. Hmmm...
The Blackdog Party.
I like it!
It would depend on what the 3rd party was. I think we need a moderate, centrist alternative to the democrats and republicans. I don't think we need more tea partiers.
I think "moderate, centrist" is what we have with the Republocrats. Neither really push hard one way or the other. They support the status quo. We need something to shake the status quo, that will remove it so that we can push government in the proper direction...smaller and more constrained.
In other words, with what you perceive to be correct.
I think that the current system is set up well to exclude as much as possible the third parties so that they may perpetually be insignificant.
I think "moderate, centrist" is what we have with the Republocrats. Neither really push hard one way or the other. They support the status quo. We need something to shake the status quo, that will remove it so that we can push government in the proper direction...smaller and more constrained.
If you ask MOST people, they espouse libertarian ideals and values.
Really?
Does that have anything to do with the fact that you are a libertarian?
For myself, I think far more of the American people espouse rhetoric that is to the political right to me, including social policy, but at the same time, they like the Welfare state a la New Deal and some/most of the Great Society-or at least do little in regards to desire it being removed.
I think it is far more complicated, and perhaps indecisive, as maybe public opinion just shifts around from year to year month to month.
You dont think third parties sending up candidates like Smoky McPot for senator has anything to do with their own marginalization do you?
Believe me...thats the source of my frustration with the Libertarian party.
If you ask MOST people, they espouse libertarian ideals and values. So why cant the libertarians get people elected? Hell...we even have one avowed socialist in congress that caucuses with the democrats.
The reason is simply...the libertarians hitch their ponies to idiotic and fringe ideals like legalization of drugs as a primary party platform.
I think we do need a strong Third Party because it's something that'll keep the two major parties we have now honest.
No, people opposed to the platform try their damnedest to make it look that way. Yes, drug legalization is definitely in the libertarian platform as we'd remove the federal government from the position and let the states deal with it themselves. However, it's not the only thing which revolves around libertarian political philosophy. In fact, it is nothing more than a consequence of our overall philosophy. One built upon the minimization of government and maximization of freedom.
Sorry...been there...and recommending they drop the plank and focus on things that are actually rlevant will get you a shower of "no Libertarians could think that" and an invitation to not come back.
Look around...you dont see too many libertarians challenging...ANYWHERE. Change or die.
I see a lot of libertarian names on ballots. But they are specifically kept from things such as debates and are not treated equally or fairly in the press which definitely has significant negative effect on the ability to campaign on that party ticket.
So are the rest who have no chance of winning. When you have the support in the 1 to 2 % range, you are just in the way of real candidates.
The Libertarians need to stop whining about how unfair the system is and start actually trying to get people to support their platform. Until they do that, they have no room to cry about the system.
That's what we do. We campaign a lot on local levels, we can get some success there as well. But the system is corrupt and is specifically designed especially on the federal level to ensure that other parties are not presented to the people in order to cement the rule of the Republocrats.
And I have plenty of room to "cry" about the system. When the system is set up to isolate the parties from the will of the People, there is certainly room to complain. Sorry if you don't like the complaining, but I ain't making you listen or read. But I damned well have the right to complain about it, so piss off if you think I shouldn't exercise my rights.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?