Are most people not somewhere in the middle? Most people dislike bible bashing evangelicals and lazy lily livered liberals so why not have a middle party!
2006-08-30 03:14:18 · 17 answers · asked by marco_syco 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Oddly enough it is the only thing the Democrates and Republicans agree on; no third parties. The Constitution and voting laws say nothing of how many political parties can be in effect. In fact specific language makes that number as many citizens in the US. Over our history political parties emarged to give more power to ideas and causes. For a short time there was even only one. Over 75% of the population falls in the middle of issues, but it is the extreme left or right of the issue that gets the media attention and makes everyone feel you have to pick a side. I agree with starting a new party but there is little hope in fund raising plus voter recognition. Cards are stacked against such canidates.
2006-08-30 03:37:14 · answer #1 · answered by Mark S 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well you certainly put us into different camps didn't you .I am not "Lilly livered liberal"
and I don't think Ive ever seem or heard about an Evangelist that "bashes the bible" I have heard of "bible thumpers"that use the bible to prove or disprove any statement.I am none of these ,I am a strong livered Liberal
I oppose war just for the sake of war but would gladly fight for it in an instant.I am pro life but anti abortion when used as birth control.I believe in the death penalty and think welfare is needed but shouldn't be a free ride for people that use it as a way of life.I an against illegal immigration Period and against blanket amnesty. yes we need another viable party,but until we do I will vote to make my voice heard,I support my candidates with money and my volunteerism.I write letters make speeches and get out the vote.I do it for the Democrats because altho we differ greatly they are closest to my belief than the republicans.I will not splinter my vote by voting for any of the fringe party's,to do that is to waste my vote .A vote that is not for the Democrats is a vote for the republicans.I want my vote to count.
and for the person that said Americans aren't smart ,you are a fool ,you are the under educated one. Any generalization is ridiculous and inaccurate to an "educated" person
2006-08-30 10:42:33 · answer #2 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As other answerers have pointed out, there are many parties in the US. The predominance of two parties has to do with the US's choice to have one elected representative per geographic area per election, rather than many. Other countries with proportional representative systems- say, Japan- have multiple candidates elected from broader geographic areas. This means that candidates representing multiple points of views from the same area can win. If the US Senate were elected based on proportional representation, rather than 2 per state, the Democrats and Republicans would still be the biggest parties, but if 10% of the population voted for, say, Libertarians, then 10% of the Senate would be Libertarians.
2006-08-30 15:56:51 · answer #3 · answered by Tom 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
there is more than 2
2006-08-30 10:18:52 · answer #4 · answered by W E J 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
There are a lot of minor parties in the United States, but in any country a first past the post sytem forces people to choose the less bad candidate likely to win. The same thing happens in the United Kingdom.
2006-08-30 12:01:32 · answer #5 · answered by Philosophical Fred 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are actually more than two political parties in the US. There's the Libertarians, Reform, Constitution, Green, Communist, Freedom, and Progressive Parties, and dozens of other national minor parties, plus state minor parties, plus independents.
Why do only two parties hold all of the power? The Democraps and Repooplicans work very hard to keep the minor parties from taking any of their power.
2006-08-30 10:57:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
there are...they just can get enough people to switch voting from one party to the middle party... a few of these parties are libratariens and green...however, the green party I don't know what they want...I think they want us to stop living on electricity and we'd all eat nut's and berrys and live in grass huts. So that would explain why they can't get any support...but libratariens are for less government, less taxes and downsizing all the gov't programs.
Remember Ross Perot? He was independant or some other party...Liberman might run as an independant - since the DNC shunned him (for his support of the war)...
2006-08-30 10:20:54 · answer #7 · answered by DAVER 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are a bunch of parties.
Most of them are just not run by multi-billionaires like the main two.
I vote for the best guy for the job, regardless of what party he supports.
I quite often vote for the Constitution Party for one.
There are a bunch. Look into them. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
2006-08-30 10:57:40 · answer #8 · answered by trillo333 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is easier to let people be busy hating each other than to let them look at the real issues. It does not matter who gets into office, reps or dems, no difference. People have turned into sheep following and accepting lies. Congress and our administration, regardless of political affiliation, will always be controlled by lobbies and corporations.
2006-08-30 10:22:27 · answer #9 · answered by one voice 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The US can't have a 3rd party, they get in enough trouble with the 2 party system, just lok who they put in for a second term at the moment, who need to write comedy when the president is doing it hisself.....
2006-08-30 10:23:43 · answer #10 · answered by break 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋