Posted on 11/01/2006 6:21:31 AM PST by ruffedgrouse
No young person who has ever followed politics with the ferocity of a sports fan, no citizen who has been an idealist for at least a few hours, hasn't daydreamed about a third party or independent candidate – a third party winner, actually. At some point everyone with a civic soul, no matter what their ideological flavor, has yearned for an independent spirit to break through the homogenized, cuisinarted horse manure that is modern American politics.
Yet we are stuck with the same two parties, ad nauseam. It's like a world where there are two baseball teams, the Yankees and the Dodgers. Every year since the 1800s they have played 162 games against each other, and then played each other in the playoffs, and then the World Series. The players change, but never the teams.
The Constitution says nothing about parties. The great and wise founding elders detested political parties, and promptly formed them and divided up. Thanks so much.
The Civil War gave birth to the current two-party setup of Democrats and Republicans. That should have been a warning.
In 1942, an early and eminent political scientist named E.E. Schattschneider declared flatly that the two parties had a "monopoly on power" in America. Nothing has changed since then. Absolutely nothing.
Third parties do not exist because the two big parties don't want them to. It's bad for business and it's that simple.
There are three kinds of barriers to third parties, two of them created by the monopoly parties. The Constitution, however, is a problem. The American system is winner take all: you win a plurality of votes; you win the whole state or congressional district. Most other democracies have various forms of proportional representation where parties are represented in proportion to the percentage of the vote. So in Italy, for a rough example with fake parties, if in a national election got the Conservatives got 60 percent, the Socialists 30 percent and the Liberals got 10 percent, the seats in the parliament would by divvied up almost in that exact proportion. In America, it's win or lose.
Still, that doesn't mean third parties candidates are prevented from winning elections at any level. So here's where the monopoly parties come in. First, they set up rules where Democrats and Republicans automatically get on ballots, but third parties have to jump through petitioning hoops. There are 51 different sets of laws to get on the ballot in this country, one for every state, plus Washington, D.C. Next they make it hard for third parties to raise money. Then they sleep well at night.
It's "Groundhog Day" meets Sartre. No wonder people tune out.
"and the electorate is split 50-50. "
Not exactly. Independents far outnumber either "dems" or "pubbies." The days of one party having a solid majority the way the "democrats" did with the Iwo Jima generation are long gone.
"Everyone in this room is now dumber for having heard it. God have mercy on your soul."
Two party systems work better in that a majority of the voters are behind one party or the other. There have been a few instances when a third party candidate caused a candidate to be below 50 % (Clinton). Many states require run offs in elections where a candidate did not get 50 % of the vote. Multiple party systems allow governments to be formed which do not represent the people. In recent history, this has benefitted leftists far more than conservatives (think Canada). I believe in the two party system and would not wish to have a multiple party system.
--Multiple party systems allow governments to be formed which do not represent the people.--
And you think the present government DOES?
Two party systems work better in that a majority of the voters are behind one party or the other. There have been a few instances when a third party candidate caused a candidate to be below 50 % (Clinton). Many states require run offs in elections where a candidate did not get 50 % of the vote. Multiple party systems allow governments to be formed which do not represent the people. In recent history, this has benefitted leftists far more than conservatives (think Canada). I believe in the two party system and would not wish to have a multiple party system.
I WISH we were expanding imperially abroad; at least we'd get SOMETHING for all the soldiers we've lost. Unfortunately, we just try to build a viable nation then go home when it seems too hard.
For example, I think we don't need Arabs to cash the oil checks - we can pump the oil and cash the checks ourselves. And the Arabs (or the survivors) can go hide in the desert and hope we don't get P.O.'d at them again.
Likewise, we should be firm (if not outright savage) and self-centered in our dealings with all other countries.
The American government needs to be pro-American at home and abroad. Firing (or imprisoning) the entire State Department would probably be a good start...
Yes, I do. No party will ever represent an individual 100%, but there is a clear division between Repubs and Dems. In our history, one party goes away and another takes its place. I believe a two party system is much more stable than multiple partys which will represent narrow interests. Look at Europe, you have governments formed where the party in power has 30 % or less of the votes. I do not believe such a system promotes stability.
--Unfortunately, we just try to build a viable nation then go home when it seems too hard. --
And that's why nation building is a fool's errand.
Sorry for the double post...don't know how I managed that!
You nailed it, the two parties are actually many parties and factions under big tents. It forces the compromises to be made at the party level. It's better than the alternative.
"I do not believe such a system promotes stability."
It injects new ideas. Our system is sclerotic and ossified. It's also in the firm grip of lobbies and special interests. Neither wing (i.e. "party") really cares about the needs of the average american.
I would not say the independents outnumber. Who's an independent? Lieberman? We all know he's a Democrat.
If the independents outnumber Dems and GOPers, then why don't they vote independent? Why are there few independent candidates?
What exactly is the political philosophy of an independent anyway? Is he for big government or small government? High taxes or low?
The idea of voting independent in this country really doesn't get you anywhere. The two parties know the issues, and have contrasting positions on them. You're not going to get new ideas by voting for a third party. Nor are you going to get more personal character from a third party. It's just that the electorate is split as to which way to go.
If you really want to change something in Washington, what you really need to do is pass a constitutional amendment cutting the size of the Congress in half. Fewer people means they work together better, and let's face it, we can't find enough qualified people to fill the seats in Congress as it is.
--It forces the compromises to be made at the party level.--
Compromise in politics is like cowardice on the battlefield.
You are quoting you?
Take it up with the Constitution. So far, I'd vote no to that proposal.
--If the independents outnumber Dems and GOPers, then why don't they vote independent? Why are there few independent candidates? --
Because the "parties" (I'll use the plural for your sake) have set such high hurdles it is darned near impossible for them to get on a state ballot, and if by some miracle they do, then they can't get in a debate. Cynical but clever.
I don't.
There is a third party. It is called the Communist party. Soros and company just haven't yet figured out how to come out of the closet with it.
Great Billy Madison quote.
It was the third party candidate H. Ross Perot that gave us 8 years of William Jefferson "hummer" Jefferson.
Work within the system. With the way our political system is set up, a third party candidate has more of a chance of splitting conservative votes (as Perot did) and handing the election to the Liberal than they do in actually getting elected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.