You are preaching to the choir with me! I could not agree more.
2007-01-18 16:24:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Wolfpacker 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
It forces a majority. If there were viable 10 candidates to running for the same position, you would have someone win with 25% of the total votes. Which would leave 75% of the country voting for someone else. you'd see a lot more hatred and anger if there were more REAL political parties. Our politics are very tame compared to other countries around the world.
2007-01-18 16:31:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Think about it for a minute: how practicable is your suggestion? With all the issues under consideration in Congress, to have 140 million voters involved every time a decision needs to be made? And how many of those voters will be knowledgeable enough to make an informed decision?
I am quite satisfied with the system of government put in place by Mssrs. Madison, Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, et. al.--even though I viscerally dislike and vehemently disagree with my own Congressman!
2007-01-18 16:37:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by sargon 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't know of any democratic society that does not have at least 2 viable parties. I don't know any theoretical arguments to proove that we need parties, I just know that they are part of every democratic society. The party system seems to work reasonably well. If it aint broke, don't fix it.
2007-01-18 16:25:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by yupchagee 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think what you are advocating is a national referendum process. I don't think it is a good idea.
But if you can explain how it fits into our constitution and its balance of powers and checks and balances, I'm willing to listen.
2007-01-18 16:32:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That's how I've been doing it for a long time now.
2007-01-18 16:35:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, I agree with you 100%!!!!
2007-01-18 16:23:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋