Every candidate would have to run on his or her voting record and their stance on the issues. Do you think it would improve the quality of our elected leaders?
2006-08-07 13:06:55 · 9 answers · asked by Ethan M 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
What would prevent people from forming political parties? If we didn't have any, I think what would happen is a bunch of politicians would get together and form parties.
2006-08-07 13:10:50 · answer #1 · answered by Charles D 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Political parties allow for an effective government. Endless concensus building would paralyze political process.
There should actually be four to six parties. Right, Left, Up, Down, Communist and Anarchist. Anarchy, is what you're suggesting. It might seem like a good idea, but it is human nature to join. We're social creatures. Communism may be a social utopia, but we're not disciplined or altruistic enough to make it work. Right is conservative, they want to legislate your behavior, and leave your money alone. Left they want to legislate your economics and leave your behavior alone. Up, or Liberatarian is similar to anarchy, but recognizes the need for some services. They want to have their economics and behavior left alone (I subscribe to this, as do some 50% of Amercians, but with out a real unifying force we aren't well organized and never seem to get into power anywhere). Finally down or the Stateists. They control your economics and your behavior. The Nazi party was a good example. They're also known as fascists, which has become a derogatory term in American English.
2006-08-07 20:17:39 · answer #2 · answered by Wicked Mickey 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be difficult and you would find a great deal of disorder because more candidates means more opinions on different people. It means that you could see 200 people all recieve votes and the Elected would only pull 10% of the Pop Vote. It would be hard...
But I think we should do away with Bi-Partisan politics.... two parties have enabled a stranglehold on America for too long....More Parties and More Options... GO PolyPartisan Politics!!!
2006-08-07 20:12:00 · answer #3 · answered by whydothedumboutnumberthesmart? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A better solution would be to remove all special intrest groups from washington .
THEY have been electing local politicians and grooming them for a place in congrees.
THEN once there they are owned by the people who hired them and not the voters .
HUGE money is spent to spin up the politicians in each community and districts to get them elected .
LOCAL papers and ads do tremendous harm .
After elected by the people , politicians do as they are told by the people who invested in the elections and not those who voted them in .
NO matter which party you are the money comes from the same places .
SO ending parties is what we have done with special intrests buying and paying for politicians ..
2006-08-08 12:30:47 · answer #4 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do think it would be better. It would likely slow the entire system down, but that would probably be better, too. That way it would prevent knee-jerk reaction bills. It would also lead to strengthening the moderates.
Ahhh...it's like a utopia that clearly will never happen.
2006-08-07 20:29:14 · answer #5 · answered by WBrian_28 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
just not having liberals is good enough. lets make these 2 parties. Republicans and Conservative!
2006-08-07 20:11:18 · answer #6 · answered by Ah Ha 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am all for it. A liberal free America would be just absolutely beautiful.
2006-08-08 12:46:40 · answer #7 · answered by Bucfan 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Life might be easier.
2006-08-07 20:11:27 · answer #8 · answered by redneck 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
COMPLETELY agree with playtoofast.
2006-08-08 12:34:07 · answer #9 · answered by one voice 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋