English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I mean, one that actually has candidates to run in primaries. I know many people that don't concider being either Republican or Democrat, I am a moderate and feel that one is way too conservative and the other too liberal.
Wasn't our democratic system set up to be three parties?

2006-12-22 06:46:25 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

10 answers

Our democratic system was originally setup to involve as many parties as possible. In fact, George Washington warned in his farewell address about the establishment of parties at all and advised that they not be formed. In practice, however, two parties were able to dominate by the mid-19th century.

Today, the most viable option for third parties exist in states that allow candidates to run on multiple party tickets. A great example of this is the Working Families party in New York State. The Working Families party nominates candidates, usually on the democratic line, who can be voted for under the Working Families ticket instead of Democratic -- to give the politicians the message that they care about social issues for working families. The party is able to exert significant influence by refusing to endorse candidates who do not stand up for working families -- and has cost several candidates their seats because of their failure to earn the party's endorsement.

Note that these third parties have primaries of their own that are sanctioned by the state.

That said, parties like this are the ones paving the way towards BALLOT REFORM, which if instituted would open up the field to more parties who can gain real influence. Vermont or New Hampshire are seen as the states most likely to institute this first.

2006-12-22 06:57:06 · answer #1 · answered by Nalak 2 · 1 0

There will never be a viable third party as the American political system was designed in such a way that coaltions (like those found in the parliamentary systems) don't work.

The two party system is actually beneficial in a lot of ways as it prevents candidates with extreme right or left political views from taking power. The two party system requires that you have to appeal to the widest possible cross-section of society.

The recent elections in Nicaragua are a perfect example. Daniel Ortega, the former dicatator, ran against four moderate candidates and ended up winning the election with only 39% of the vote because the four moderates split the remaining 61%.

2006-12-22 06:55:58 · answer #2 · answered by Tinymogul 2 · 1 0

Actually George Washington warned about having any parties and said something to the effect that it would destroy America. But as with a 3rd party I dont think so. Americas politics are to divided. You are either Republican or Democrate and most people are afraid to "throw" their vote away by voting 3rd party and jeapordizing the Dem or Rep candidate from losing.
The most a 3rd Party can do is hurt the other candidate from winning, Like in the Bush Clinton electon, when Pero stole all the votes from bush and Clinton took the whitehouse. Or with Gore and Bush.

2006-12-22 06:53:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

When the American People wake up and realize that both the Democratic and Republican Parties are both Socialist Parties.
And become willing to risk their vote on an Alternative.
Single Issue parties like the Green Party et al. never win.

People should look into the Libertarian Party which is slowing growing. and will one day become the only viable alternative to
what we have today.

2006-12-22 06:58:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The guy with the reference to G.W. was right. Political parties really got started after Washington was President and people started lining up behind Jefferson and Hamilton.

I'm definitely with you on being in the middle and feeling like there are no decent options. I think what it would take is some folks with big money (like Ross Perot had, or Bill Gates, or someone like that) to decide to establish it. I think there'd be plenty of people who are now R's & D's that would gladly switch to a new party and I think they could find plenty of good candidates (like Colin Powell and Joe Lieberman). It takes backing ($$$$) though.

2006-12-22 06:56:55 · answer #5 · answered by DGS 6 · 0 0

Electoral College was to prevent party politicking. But Politics prevailed.
If you are sincere about Three Party Primaries, then here's a suggestion. Join the party you believe deserves equal spot on primary ballots. Start a petition to have that party represented on primary ballots.
Takes a lotta effort and dedication. Are you (or anyone) up to it?

2006-12-22 08:06:34 · answer #6 · answered by joehicswa 2 · 0 0

Not unless we go to a two-round, run-off election system, where the top two vote-getters from the first round vote square off in the second and final round to determine the winner. This would increase the likelihood that talented, third-party candidates get a real shot at elective office. It would also eliminate the Perot-Buchanon effect on the right and the Nader effect on the left. Otherwise, the two major parties will continue to dominate the political scene, much to our detriment.

2016-05-23 16:18:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I'm in your group.Neither party seems to get it.It seems like a waste of a vote to vote for the independants,but IF enough people did,maybe we could end this childish partisan crap,and also if we could actually elect on the number of votes instead of that electoral b.s.that would make a difference too.I don't see any solution.

2006-12-22 06:52:40 · answer #8 · answered by festeringhump 4 · 1 2

i doubt it, but i would like to see a democratic socialist party

2006-12-22 06:48:37 · answer #9 · answered by 2010 CWS Champs! 3 · 0 3

i don't know, when the government was set up it was set up as a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.

2006-12-22 06:55:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers