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

7 answers

Unfortunitly the term Team is more pertinant then the parties. We grow up wanting to be picked for the winning team. So as adults if we veiw politics as a team then who would want to be a part of the underdog team. We need to take the term team out of politics and start focusing on whats best for the country as a whole.

2007-02-03 00:57:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Recognize Team Red but follow Team Blue.

2007-02-03 09:12:19 · answer #2 · answered by Kwan Kong 5 · 0 1

Not a good solution in the US as we now have it. Both teams now are destroying the country with excess spending and we could facing a catastrophic depression as the economy slows per the Fed Chairman:


http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/bernanke-urges-congress-promptly-tackle/story.aspx?guid=%7B04B74938%2D845C%2D4C30%2D8621%2D75868101149E%7D

2007-02-03 09:04:39 · answer #3 · answered by Lighthearted 3 · 0 0

No,it is very harm to us if the parties will come for a settle ment between them.The people will be made fools if such things mentioned in above happen

2007-02-03 08:55:07 · answer #4 · answered by sripan83 1 · 0 0

yes, it is required ..as u know..condition of south india, there r no. of small regional parties , which diversified voters mind from main issues of india, at the time of election , and after election they take money to help major party to form government, so this system is also encourage corruption at highest level of india..i agree , there should be only 2 parties.

2007-02-06 04:29:04 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

We only have two or three major parties - others are just puppets or insignificant players in the field wasting their time in pursuit of an unreachable goal post!

2007-02-03 09:47:18 · answer #6 · answered by Sami V 7 · 0 1

YES c and d or not important!

2007-02-03 08:52:18 · answer #7 · answered by Hunter 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers