This two party system sucks badly

Restricting choice to two parties is undemocratic. What if you are pro-life, but support gay marriage? Or, for that matter, what if you support the right to own assault rifles but also support nationalized health care? A two party system unnecessarily and arbitrarily forces people to make too many compromise & only enforce the power of lobby group over that of the voter. Not to mention that every-time someone come with unconventional idea for their own party they irremediably turn their hat & follow the wave as the dog follow the tail or vice-verso ex: Rawn Pawl...A 3-or-more party system is seriously needed. At least in America, there is no Constitutional basis for a two party system. Since neither the Constitution nor any of it's amendments allows us to restrict political parties, permitting only two to exist should be illegal.

Who really want more politicians? who else after Romney, Obama, Donald Trump? Celine Dion?

Do the 2 parties work together to rub the opposition out?Are there winks and nods behind closed doors?I hear from old timers that things changed for the worst since JFK was taken out.Look at the dingballs they put out to grease the engines of the other party,and vice versa.
It is a hard realization to accept,and what if it was just the tip of a very bloody iceberg???

nice cover for a rawn pawl thread.

and i count way more than two parties.

UncleBuck said:

and i count way more than two parties.

Click to expand...

Lol is that in Mexican too? How "inclusive" of you.

Harrekin said:

Lol is that in Mexican too? How "inclusive" of you.

Click to expand...

no official language here. no one is required to speak english. your country having fought the english as well, one would think you would welcome this policy.

and "mexican" is not a language, it is a nationality. we offer a lot of services in spanish language as well, since we have a growing number of legal hispanics and latinos flocking to our shores, and as a nation, we strive to include everybody.

at least one party does.

UncleBuck said:

no official language here. no one is required to speak english. your country having fought the english as well, one would think you would welcome this policy.

and "mexican" is not a language, it is a nationality. we offer a lot of services in spanish language as well, since we have a growing number of legal hispanics and latinos flocking to our shores, and as a nation, we strive to include everybody.

at least one party does.

Click to expand...

Hispanics spend Money and Vote
Companies realize this
The Goverment realizes this
So we make accomodations for them
Just like Canada and the French speaking people

I always get a kick out of the racists saying "why do I have to press 1 for English"
I take this as
"I'm too fucking lazy to press a number on the phone, but i like complaining about foreigners taking my job"

UncleBuck said:

nice cover for a rawn pawl thread.

Click to expand...

What make you think that?...hahaha

View attachment 2274426

ChesusRice said:

Hispanics spend Money and Vote
Companies realize this
The Goverment realizes this
So we make accomodations for them
Just like Canada and the French speaking people

I always get a kick out of the racists saying "why do I have to press 1 for English"
I take this as
"I'm too fucking lazy to press a number on the phone, but i like complaining about foreigners taking my job"

Click to expand...

Canada use to be a french colony that France didn't care too much about so the English came & take over. They let the french locals kept their religion & language to win their sympathy as the were the majority at the time.

UncleBuck said:

and i count way more than two parties.

Click to expand...

I'm gonna have to admit you're right there is more than 2 party at least officially, I doubt anybody else than REP & DEM will elect any candidate. Maybe what's really missing is a third MAJOR party active in every states.

Even if there were 3 popular registered parties, do you really think that would change anything? What number of political parties is the magic number for global happiness? Such a figure does not exist. Its like asking, how many more gangs do u need before finally they all cooperate and gangs members, and leaders, collectively hold the same values to be important( lol what? zero gangs).

It seems obvious that neither party really has the interest of the average American at the forefront of their thoughts. Both parties have been there while all these negative things have gone on -from the Savings and loan scandal, NAFTA and other things right up to now. One blames the other and so on. All the while both of them get rich and many average Americans in our nation suffer without relief which I believe could be provided by competent uncorrupt leadership that would just do it's job. Imagine a construction project where there are carpenters, electricians, plumbers and hvac guys. Now the job starts off good then they all start arguing after about the third week and nothing can really be acomplished. A couple of more weeks go by and still the same - "Hey guys how come nothing is getting done?" they reply "We have gridlock" Are you kidding me, seriously there is an agenda at hand but it's one where they get richer and richer while we all struggle more and more. It's the individuals we have in office and what drives them - that's where the problem lies. Heres a quote from Thomas Jefferson -

Magic number = 3 or 0 I'm hesitating actually

3 : A 3-or-more party system is more responsive to change + many voters have centrist opinions & are inadequately represented by DEM or REP.

0 : The ideal situation may be the one that most of our founders supported; a system with no parties. Where every Representative is it's own party or that's of it's voters if you prefer. Failing this, a multi party system is the second best.

Geronimo420 said:

Magic number = 3 or 0 I'm hesitating actually

3 : A 3-or-more party system is more responsive to change + many voters have centrist opinions & are inadequately represented by DEM or REP.

0 : The ideal situation may be the one that most of our founders supported; a system with no parties. Where every Representative is it's own party or that's of it's voters if you prefer. Failing this, a multi party system is the second best.

Click to expand...

I understand your theory, and its a great theory. However, every "party" has leaders and agendas that their followers have either willingly or unwillingly supported, including agendas that not every citizen agrees with. This would mean there would have to be damn near an infinite amount of parties to truly coincide with the different belief systems of individuals. Bureaucratic, organizational nightmare. People can already identify as themselves, why must they also identify with a political party's (gang) agenda?

The Republicans and Democrats have enacted the legislation that essentially keeps any third party out. If a 3rd party received any fed money it would have a chance, but the legislation makes that near impossible. It has to do with 5% of the vote, and that is why the Libertarians did the "Free State Project" which has been planned for 25 years, and is hopefully near success.

The basic premise of the Free State Project is one step at a time.

ChesusRice said:

Hispanics spend Money and Vote
Companies realize this
The Goverment realizes this
So we make accomodations for them
Just like Canada and the French speaking people

I always get a kick out of the racists saying "why do I have to press 1 for English"
I take this as
"I'm too fucking lazy to press a number on the phone, but i like complaining about foreigners taking my job"

Click to expand...

They're just offended because they have to press something in Arabic to get to English. cn

dtp5150 said:

I understand your theory, and its a great theory. However, every "party" has leaders and agendas that their followers have either willingly or unwillingly supported, including agendas that not every citizen agrees with. This would mean there would have to be damn near an infinite amount of parties to truly coincide with the different belief systems of individuals. Bureaucratic, organizational nightmare. People can already identify as themselves, why must they also identify with a political party's (gang) agenda?

Click to expand...

A system with no parties would be fine also but what would be the structure of such government, how do you select a president ?, vice-president? and all the rest unless you have multiple round election with the most popular candidates this could be a mess

rollitup said:

The Republicans and Democrats have enacted the legislation that essentially keeps any third party out. If a 3rd party received any fed money it would have a chance, but the legislation makes that near impossible. It has to do with 5% of the vote, and that is why the Libertarians did the "Free State Project" which has been planned for 25 years, and is hopefully near success.

The basic premise of the Free State Project is one step at a time.

Click to expand...

that pretty much sums it up, the two party system has seized control through legislation. You should all be against this if we want a true representative government.

GARY JOHNSON 2012


i don't bitch about the two party system.. i do something about it.. and you an too!!!