What do you think of the (more or less) Two Party System of American Politics?

I personally think that its very limiting and forces people to follow these pre-conceived ideals and principles which essentially shut out anyone who doesn't belong to either party. I mean, when's the last time that we had a President who wasn't a Democrat or a Replublican? It's a shame because anyone who's neither a Democrat or a Republican stands no chance of attaining high positions like that of the President or a member of Congress. It also creates this opposition which turns Americans against one another and makes passing bills and policies more difficult than it needs to be. Anyhow, what do you guys think?

First of all, it is a pleasure to meet you. My name is Dylan what is yours? I hope you are enjoying your time here in OT and I'm sure it will continue for an extended period of time.

Secondly, I'm Canadian. I have very limited knowledge of American politics, or Canadian politics for that matter. I hope you understand.

I wish they got rid of the political systems. It would force peopleto follow what is going on etc, inside of voting strictly for a certain party,etc.

I was under the impression that people in America vote for candidates and not really worried about party alligiences. I'm studying US politics btw.

I was under the impression that people in America vote for candidates and not really worried about party alligiences. I'm studying US politics btw.

Ilovegames1992

Unfortunately, this is not the case.

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

I was under the impression that people in America vote for candidates and not really worried about party alligiences. I'm studying US politics btw.

TechTrek

Unfortunately, this is not the case.

I was under the impression that people in America vote for candidates and not really worried about party alligiences. I'm studying US politics btw.

Ilovegames1992

That is the correct concept, people can run independently and you vote for candidates not parties however the entire political system is dominated by the bi-partisan system, i will explain why:

recognizable platform: By politicians grouping into republican or democrat you are able to get a base knowledge of their beliefs, conservative or liberal swinging. This will be the easiest for the average american who does not keep up with politics, they will see "republican" on a candidate and think ok i will vote for him in the elections because i'm conservative. This also works in the political system itself, in the senate and house it is party dominated, the major party has more power, and the two parties give general allegiances and make the bill writer be able to judge whether his bill will pass based on the party climate in the congress.

Backing for candidates: The republican and Democratic parties can provide the candidate with huge financial support, running for an office in america is extremely expensive, you would more or less need to be a billionare to run for president independently. The parties can afford to put up someone they want to run. The parties also give you established connections to other politicians and interest groups.

Winner takes all elections: I assume you know how the president gets elected, with the electoral college and each senate and house member from a state qualifies that state for an electoral vote district, where the voter sfrom the congresional district vote for a pres. The party that gets the majorty of districts in a state won, wins all the electoral votes, regardless if some districts voted against that candidate. This can have a third party candidate have 0 electoral votes, but 30% of the popular vote for example.

I think if we had everyone actually working together that it would benefit us

both sides are mostly the same, both sides mostly want to do what they think is best for the country, and both sides have been hijacked by radicals, i see the left extreme as worse for the population than the right extreme but both extremes are unacceptable

Secondly, I'm Canadian. I have very limited knowledge of American politics, or Canadian politics for that matter. I hope you understand.

Dylan_11

[QUOTE="TechTrek"]

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

I was under the impression that people in America vote for candidates and not really worried about party alligiences. I'm studying US politics btw.

LJS9502_basic

Unfortunately, this is not the case.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="TechTrek"]

Unfortunately, this is not the case.

surrealnumber5

I couldn't help but laugh. :lol: If I ran for the Presidency, my slogan would be "I'm just going to be frank about this...".

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Actually the case is that generally one party is more in line with their political views than the other....and thus they favor said candidate.

I couldn't help but laugh. :lol: If I ran for the Presidency, my slogan would be "I'm just going to be frank about this...".

Both parties are made up of moron.SF_KiLLaMaN

Crooks to the left of me, crooks to my right.

Crooks to the left of me, crooks to my right.

YellowOneKinobi

[QUOTE="Dylan_11"]

Secondly, I'm Canadian. I have very limited knowledge of American politics, or Canadian politics for that matter. I hope you understand.

XilePrincess

I do not believe that the two party system is as bad as many would like to think. The presidential election is decided by independent voters whom vote on which candidate they feel is better, not which party. This also explains how the Republicans have held the mayor seat of NYC since 1994 (blah blah blah Bloomberg is not an Independent). Our system tends to highlight the person and not the party.

"United we stand, divided we fall."

I'd love to say that the two party system sucks, because it does, but what is the alternative? A three part system? Five?

The more you split up the country, the worse off it is, but you can't "unify" the entire nation either. It just isn't possible.

The only time our nation is ever MOSTLY in agreement is when we ALL have a common enemy. Someone attacks America? We all join hands. Natural disaster? Most of us come to each others aid. When everything is daily routine, we are just a nation divided.

What causes all of the issues is the necessity of breaking the nation down into different status types. Each body then wants something different, and each body has a different representation.

It is crap, but how else can it be?

I think my dislike of the political system has less to do with the number of parties and more to do with the overall any democratic system works. Often times the "right" thing to do is not always the most popular thing to do. For instance, in order to balance a budget you either need to raise taxes or cut entitlements. Neither is going to be popular with the voters, but it needs to be done. Politicans often care more about pleasing voters than doing what they feel is the right thing. It's not always there fault - you can't enact policy if you're not elected. So in a sense, it's a broken system. However, I don't know what I would do to change that.

I think a lot of the trouble lies with the voters themselves. They often stick their heads in the ground and don't follow the issues. Or worse, they knowa little bit about things but not enough to fully understand and make erroneous assumptions.

It's not a system without it's problems, but if we didn't have it, it could easily create for a one-party dominance. As an example, lets say that the USA has an equal distribution among the political spectrum, but the liberal left has a far left party, and a more conservative center-left party. Because those parties would split all the votes from the center to the left, the conservative right party would win in a 50-25-25 landslide, which, as a republican, I would totally go for.

I think my dislike of the political system has less to do with the number of parties and more to do with the overall any democratic system works. Often times the "right" thing to do is not always the most popular thing to do. For instance, in order to balance a budget you either need to raise taxes or cut entitlements. Neither is going to be popular with the voters, but it needs to be done. Politicans often care more about pleasing voters than doing what they feel is the right thing. It's not always there fault - you can't enact policy if you're not elected. So in a sense, it's a broken system. However, I don't know what I would do to change that.

I think a lot of the trouble lies with the voters themselves. They often stick their heads in the ground and don't follow the issues. Or worse, they knowa little bit about things but not enough to fully understand and make erroneous assumptions.

sonicare

I personally think that its very limiting and forces people to follow these pre-conceived ideals and principles which essentially shut out anyone who doesn't belong to either party. I mean, when's the last time that we had a President who wasn't a Democrat or a Replublican? It's a shame because anyone who's neither a Democrat or a Republican stands no chance of attaining high positions like that of the President or a member of Congress. It also creates this opposition which turns Americans against one another and makes passing bills and policies more difficult than it needs to be. Anyhow, what do you guys think?

TechTrek

It doesn't force people to do anything. Most people are just to dumb or lazy to think outside the box and support anything that isn't being force fed to them by the media. If the people were more reasonable we wouldn't have this problem.

The best option, under ideal circumstances, would be to get rid of political parties altogether. They serve no beneficial purpose, only psychologically at most. Have people start vooting solely based on what views they support and what views the candidates support, not by party lines. That's innately biased and can't possible have thegreatest outcome because it puts affiliation over the greater good. Even if only happens rarely, which I think we can agree is not the case, it's too often.

I want a successful moderate 3rd party badly...

Our government's built around the principle of balance in 3s.

Sadly that likely won't happen.

[QUOTE="XilePrincess"][QUOTE="Dylan_11"]

Secondly, I'm Canadian. I have very limited knowledge of American politics, or Canadian politics for that matter. I hope you understand.

limpbizkit818

I do not believe that the two party system is as bad as many would like to think. The presidential election is decided by independent voters whom vote on which candidate they feel is better, not which party. This also explains how the Republicans have held the mayor seat of NYC since 1994 (blah blah blah Bloomberg is not an Independent). Our system tends to highlight the person and not the party.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I think my dislike of the political system has less to do with the number of parties and more to do with the overall any democratic system works. Often times the "right" thing to do is not always the most popular thing to do. For instance, in order to balance a budget you either need to raise taxes or cut entitlements. Neither is going to be popular with the voters, but it needs to be done. Politicans often care more about pleasing voters than doing what they feel is the right thing. It's not always there fault - you can't enact policy if you're not elected. So in a sense, it's a broken system. However, I don't know what I would do to change that.

I think a lot of the trouble lies with the voters themselves. They often stick their heads in the ground and don't follow the issues. Or worse, they knowa little bit about things but not enough to fully understand and make erroneous assumptions.

bi-partisan system has less party discipline....funsohng

The Two Party system is a joke that causes more harm than good.

The Two Party system is a joke that causes more harm than good.

genfactor

[QUOTE="genfactor"]

The Two Party system is a joke that causes more harm than good.

Theokhoth

I never claimed to be smart enough to have an alternative. I'm mostly speaking out of frustration that our only options are the infrared or the ultraviolet. There are no viable 3rd, 4th or 5th party options because the big two use their power and influence to limit the ability of alternative parties to be credible threats to the political monopolies that the Democrats and Republicans have created for themselves.

The only way the government can work is with two parties. It doesn't have to be the Democrats and Republicans, but unfortunately, a party in power is easier to keep in power. If our elections were held with a bunch of major parties then nothing could possibly get done in our government or elections. Theokhoth

Exactly. When the Federalists held office they thought that the best thing was that as long as there were many minorities there could never be a majority.

And then when the Federalists fell the only part that was left was the Democratic party led by Jackson. But even though now there was one party there was still a part of the country that didn't like Jackson and what his policies were so they went and created the Whig party. No matter what you do there is always going to be someone who wants something different and will have people behind them.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="genfactor"]

The Two Party system is a joke that causes more harm than good.

genfactor

I never claimed to be smart enough to have an alternative. I'm mostly speaking out of frustration that our only options are the infrared or the ultraviolet. There are no viable 3rd, 4th or 5th party options because the big two use their power and influence to limit the ability of alternative parties to be credible threats to the political monopolies that the Democrats and Republicans have created for themselves.

This is in fact WRONG.. Our system can hardly be considered two party system like the rest of the world.. Our two party system is candidate based where one candidate's views can radically be different from another in the same party.. While if we look at systems in the world that are multi party systems.. Most times you don't vote for the candidate.. You vote for the party on the ballot and the party picks who they wish to be put in that position.. This means that the parties in that system are far more narrow and extreme.. Furthermore most of these multi party systems have to create coloiations half the time to get anything done with other parties.. Leading right back to where they began.. To me the major criticisms I here about the system seem to be by people who have never opened a book regarding political science when it comes to the US's party system.. It is by no means the best.. But I would like to see where people think are the best.. Because they all can be picked a part and shown huge flaws in them.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]The only way the government can work is with two parties. It doesn't have to be the Democrats and Republicans, but unfortunately, a party in power is easier to keep in power. If our elections were held with a bunch of major parties then nothing could possibly get done in our government or elections. Hatiko

Exactly. When the Federalists held office they thought that the best thing was that as long as there were many minorities there could never be a majority.

And then when the Federalists fell the only part that was left was the Democratic party led by Jackson. But even though now there was one party there was still a part of the country that didn't like Jackson and what his policies were so they went and created the Whig party. No matter what you do there is always going to be someone who wants something different and will have people behind them.

But yet again the two parties are a party of candidates.. If we look at both parties or the equivlents back 100 years.. They are just about unrecognizable from today's.. Sometimes where viewpoints have taken a complete 180 in policy..