Is a Three Party System a viable answer to today's political problems?

1. 37

   Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years ago

   I am not sure, but I think it is possible.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      earnestshubposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think a viable and constructive opposition would be more useful at this time.

      replyreport
   2. 51

      Shinkickerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Would not just be another faction of the One State Business Party?

      replyreport
2. 37

   Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years ago

   From which party???

   replyreport
3. 37

   Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years ago

   A weak democratic party or a weak republican party?

   replyreport
   1. 84

      earnestshubposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The incumbent party and an opposition with a constructive agenda would suffice.
      I don't disagree with a third party, but under our Westminster system in Australia that has resulted in a hung Parliament, I'm not sure how it would fit your system, I would need to think about it.

      replyreport
   2. 76

      Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      How about parties that actually compromise and work together?

      replyreport
4. 76

   Uninvited Writerposted 12 years ago

   Canada already has a 3, actually 4, party system

   replyreport
   1. 94

      thooghunposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      We have over 50 here, although in the end it makes no difference. All parties polarize and gravitate towards public opinion, which in essence leads to a two-party alliance system.

      replyreport
      1. 37

         Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         that's the point-  a mandatory three-party 'check' like our forefathers intended!

         replyreport
5. 63

   CASE1WORKERposted 12 years ago

   We used to have a three party system with the third party holding the balance of power. However last year the third party became  the balancing part and now we have really a two party system- them in government and them not in government. Unless of course them in government think that someone who was with the other party is quite intelligent and gifted and then they get them to work with them in government although obviously they are from the them not in government party!

   replyreport
   1. 59

      TMMasonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I agree, it is a one party system, has been for a long while, decades.
      
      I am not so sure about a 3 party systenm, but there are numorous parties situated within the structure of the Democrat party itself, and Progressives are a cross-over that infects our system for sure.
      
      We definitly have to re-claim the Republican Party and pull back to the right... it is the only choice I see. We have been drug too far to the left by the Socialist commie lovin Democrats and Progressive right.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         RooBeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Oh, my heavens! Run! Ring the bells! The commies are coming! Who do you blame when your Republicans are in office effing things up?

         replyreport
         1. 59

            TMMasonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            They are called Progressives... and yes, many a Conservative has sold us out also.

            replyreport
            1. 37

               Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               The Republican Party started this during the Carter/Reagan switch-a-roo.  The 'dinner-at-the-same-table; concept is the worst of it.
               
               -johnathan-
               
               We need another guest at the political dinner table!

               replyreport
6. 0

   Emile Rposted 12 years ago

   Two, three, five or one hundred. It won't make a difference until you change the system. Corporations will simply buy every candidate. Get them out of the mix and the politicians will have to change their tune and please the people who voted them in, not the big businesses who paid for them to get there.

   replyreport
   1. 37

      Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Having a Three-Party System hasn't been done before...

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, I realize we have two parties and you are suggesting three. My point is that will change nothing in Washington. It would feasibly make matters worse. As long as the manner in which candidates obtain financing remains intact you will never see positive change. It cannot be a government of the people, by the people or for the people as long as big business continues to call the shots.

         replyreport
7. 81

   RooBeeposted 12 years ago

   We have several political parties in this country. It's true that we always end up choosing between The Big Two. Sadly, the major parties serve the interests of their own business deals with huge corporations far and above any actual "public service." Y'know, that which they are actually elected to do? Their corruption is well-served, too, by the fact that most of the public is duped into thinking that one side or the other actually gives a rat's patoot about them. That the other side are wrong and are what's killing the country. If only MY side gets control back, then things will be alright.
   
   It's a crock. The U.S. has been spiraling out of control for decades and anyone who has said anything about it has been considered "unpatriotic" (when the Republicans are in office, anyway). We're blinded by our petty little arguments while we are milked dry. We rage over stupid, inconsequential crap while our freedoms, ideals, and future are squandered away in deals that "we the people" have absolutely no say in. Politicians today are merely looking toward the next election. Both sides do it with equal vigor. Whenever we actually get someone who seems honest or hungry to actually change things (notice that these people always belong to some obscure political party orare independent candidates), they are laughed at because they don't possess the slick, TV-friendly, sound-byte spewing, archetype that we as a society have come to accept as the only template from which a leader can be extracted.

   replyreport
   1. 37

      Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You are sooooo right!

      replyreport
8. 76

   Uninvited Writerposted 12 years ago

   Progress is a natural part of life. Those afraid of change are the problem, not those who believe in progress.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Hello Uninvited Writer, I always like to read your posts.
      
      But, how do you think the Native Americans feel about progressives?
      
      They were the original conservatives.

      replyreport
      1. 37

         Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         RooBee is awesome!  OK, and also ladies and getns, there are more than two sides to an issue sometimes, well, usually.  Also, there could be a native american party as well!
         
         Thanks guys!

         replyreport
      2. 76

         Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         You can't stop progress...the world is always changing and cultures evolve or die.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            But that's not the question. You feel progress is a wonderful thing I asked what you thought the Native American feels about the progress that steamrolled them.
            
            My point is that progress is not always a good thing.

            replyreport
            1. 76

               Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               But it happens whether or not some think it is a good thing or not.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  tTRUECRISTIANposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Deleted
                  1. 76

                     Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     I think you got lost...

                     replyreport
                  2. 61

                     Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Why?

                     replyreport
               2. 61

                  Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Ok, I'll concede that point.
                  
                  I will also ask you if you think progress is always a good thing?

                  replyreport
                  1. 76

                     Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Progress just is...

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Well, its always good to see you.

                        replyreport
                        1. 37

                           Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Progress can regress as well.  Hmmmm lol...
                           -johnathan-

                           replyreport
                  2. 60

                     tTRUECRISTIANposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Deleted
                     1. 76

                        Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Did your other account get banned?

                        replyreport
                        1. 67

                           Michael Willisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           I would think HP would follow the IP address and ban the IP address to keep from creating more accounts IF this is true.

                           replyreport
                           1. 89

                              mistyhorizon2003posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              Unfortunately HP don't follow IP addresses it seems, as new accounts are constantly created by Hubbers banned from forums in order for them to gain back forum posting privileges

                              replyreport
                              1. 67

                                 Michael Willisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 I have also seen that. You would think HP would follow their own policy on this issue!!!

                                 replyreport
                     2. 37

                        Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Relax!  Extremism rarely works as a strong opposing angle.
                        -johnathan-

                        replyreport
               3. 37

                  Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Most of us, in fact, all of us must rely on history in order to prove what the past has claimed to be true.  The idea is that we try not to repeat mistakes, whenever possible, and moving forward is most important to the future.  If society and culture has shown us we've made mistakes, then a three party system could be beneficial to America.  Also, the idea that reparations should lead to the forming of a new party leaves little political basis for that supposed third party involvement. 
                  
                  The United States needs to move forward, not backward.  Thank you Uninvited Writer!  Progress happens whether good or bad.
                  
                  -johnathan-

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     tTRUECRISTIANposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Deleted
                     1. 76

                        Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        This is a political thread...why are you spouting religion here. There is a special forum where people actually care.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           tTRUECRISTIANposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Deleted
                           1. 72

                              Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              Deleted
                              1. 61

                                 Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 And its spelled wrong too.

                                 replyreport
                           2. 61

                              Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              What in the world is a FAGOT?  What is a Cristian - true or not?

                              replyreport
                     2. 64

                        Daniel Carterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        According to what you wrote, if MANY people's homes were on fire, you'd simply let them burn. You want everyone you don't like to be in hell or "out of here" so that you can have your own little world the way you want it. And just because the world isn't the way you want it means you have to condemn everyone else who disagrees with you. Your world must be an incredibly awful place to live. No wonder you're so miserable you have to attack anyone who disagrees with you.
                        
                        How's all that working for you?
                        
                        
                        As for two party systems: pointed out earlier is that we have several parties. It's just that the present two dominant parties have the power to control. The Tea Party was an effort to break up that power and redistribute. It was only partially successful and is now waning because it's a haven for every conservative loon in this country. They are fighting against themselves. Perhaps in time, if they can truly get organized, they may have a solid power base, but not until.

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           TMMasonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           The only thing the Left and Progressives do not want to re-distribute, it would seem.

                           replyreport
                           1. 64

                              Daniel Carterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              I agree, and of course that's true. Who wants to lose power? No one. But obviously we do need a balancer, otherwise there is more and more room for corruption. Any organization, especially political ones, are extremely aggressive about gaining and retaining power. One of the important reasons for the three branches of govt. To balance. But even then, it isn't a silver bullet. But it would so much more disastrous if it wasn't there.

                              replyreport
                        2. 37

                           Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Being extreme has nothing to do w/ politcial or religious views!  If it does, then it should be an opinion, not a factually-based rant, as many have pursued.  The idea is that a political change is necessary, had been officially elected to office, and that if we do not unify we will fall.  I am tired of the negativity in some of these posts.  If we are intelligent, we should work together instead of blasting out ridiculous and impulsive comments.  While TMMason is a Republican (I assume), I always enjoy his responses and answers because, short or long, they make sense!  A three-party system is America hasn't been attempted, and neither has mandatory seating requirements in Congress.
                           
                           -johnathan-  (thanks guys!)

                           replyreport
9. 37

   Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years ago

   I began this forum and it was terrific.  Cagsil took the time to create a false profile under truechristian and has botched this interaction.  I apologize to the contributors of this forum.  We were on to something before a couple bad apples messed it up.  I will start another thread with the same name as its forum title.  Thanks a lot Cagsil...or truechristian or whatever.
   
   -johnathan-

   replyreport
   1. 76

      Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I very much doubt that Cagsil is truechristian

      replyreport
      1. 89

         mistyhorizon2003posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I agree, Cagsil just wouldn't do this, it is not his style and he is not that kind of a person.

         replyreport
   2. 72

      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Nice try. I do have two accounts, but my other accounts also says "Cagsil" on it.
      
      Do try to refrain from making defaming remarks against my character as a person. You can be held accountable, since you apparently refuse to hold yourself accountable, by making the remark in the first place.

      replyreport
      1. 37

         Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Cagsil, I began this thread w/ the intention of a good discussion.

         replyreport
         1. 72

            Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            That's nice. It appears as if you throw out good discussion when you decided to make claims about my actions, which are untrue.
            
            Go ahead with YOUR good discussion, if you can manage it.

            replyreport
            1. 37

               Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               thank you Cagsil!

               replyreport
10. 37

    Johnathan L Groomposted 12 years ago

    The truth is, we need a new three party system.  Regardless of the opinions, we need a different politcal arena to debate politics.  The idea that only two sides exist to debate is usually ridiculous, and a 3-party system would alleviate this.

    replyreport