jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (10 posts)

Should we abandon the two party system?

  1. collegedad profile image75
    collegedadposted 5 years ago

    Should we abandon the two party system?

    Over the past 8 years (maybe longer) I've notice a growing confusions as to what the two part system actually accomplishes. Personally I feel that we should dismantle this system and allow politicians to earn their place in congress independently. There is no need for parties as they both look the same anyway. Thoughts?

  2. davenmidtown profile image87
    davenmidtownposted 5 years ago

    We have more than two parties already. Voters are so afriad that one of the major parties may gain influence if people vote for a third or other party that they just continue to vote for the same crappy line or reasoning that they have always voted for (mostly.) What needs to happen is that the voters need to wake up and demand more from their representitive than they currantly do. The bad should be thrown out of office and replaced with quality and qualified representatives.

    1. collegedad profile image75
      collegedadposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I hear ya. I think that we should demand term limits in congress also.

  3. Bob Zermop profile image91
    Bob Zermopposted 5 years ago

    Yes. The two party system no longer really works, as the "party" becomes more important than the ideology, defeating the entire purpose.

    1. collegedad profile image75
      collegedadposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It's like watching organized sports isn't it. You pick your team and back them no matter what!

    2. Bob Zermop profile image91
      Bob Zermopposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Ha, exactly, except the Giants (i'm from Bay Area) won't disrupt the world and ruin lives no matter how many times they choke. Well... a few big_smile , but nearly as many as the GOP clowns and the Dums.

  4. Attikos profile image78
    Attikosposted 5 years ago

    Jefferson invented two-party politics to counter a growing threat of tyranny from the one-party rule favored by the Federalists. The alternative is not partyless politics, it is either return to that single party rule or government by multiparty coalitions of the sort you see in parliamentary systems. In the US structure with its independent process for choosing the executive leader, it would necessarily be the former of those two.
    The problem with US parties today is an overconcentration of control in the political class. That has taken root in the two major parties as well as in the government overall. Both the demwits and the retardicans now represent the national status quo, and their party establishments along with an allied media control politics. The only genuine grass roots movement we have seen in a long time is the TEA party, which arose spontaneously from an outraged public as Washington showed its true colors once one-party rule was reestablished. That reform movement has now been subverted, institutionalized and coopted. Doing so was the only bipartisan work done during the last three years. The demwits' role was to demonize it to destroy its effectiveness, the retardicans' was to draw it into their fold. They succeeded, and the TEA Party is no longer a threat to the status quo.

    US politics without the two-party system would be similar to what we saw during the first two years of the Obama administration, but more so. It would be rule by one party, unrestrained by political competition and, since the Constitution is now dead as the men who wrote it, unlimited by legal boundaries. It would be totalitarianism. No, thank you. Bad as it can be, the two-party system is far better than that.

  5. CHRIS57 profile image61
    CHRIS57posted 5 years ago

    ArenĀ“t political parties supposed to reflect the political issues of interest to the people? People take interest in different matters like economic well being, personal safety, environmental issues, employment issues. In a functioning democracy no party will be able to reflect all nuances of interest of the people. If new issues come up, new parties can emerge, grow, get a hold of the cleavages between multiple political issues. And parties may also disappear if that specific issue disappears or cleavages loose their importance.
    The US bipartisan system is kind of not natural. It appears to me that the parties and their members are somehow not part of society. The parties and society are separated by Teflon. And it seems that boths parties pay much attention to keeping the Teflon functional.

  6. hockey8mn profile image75
    hockey8mnposted 5 years ago

    Political parties in the United States of America have been around nearly since this country was founded, but have they really made this a better nation?  Where could the U.S. be if there were no party affiliations? read more

  7. tamarawilhite profile image90
    tamarawilhiteposted 5 years ago

    Not without changes to the US electoral system to handle multiple parties, like a shift to the parliamentary system.