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

People continue to vote Democrat or Republican, even tho, neither of these 2 parties represent their political views. Why with soo much discontent with the 2 party system, has there been no push for a realistic 3rd party canidate that would force the other 2, to deal with the other, and actually represent the people, instead of their pocket books?

2007-05-16 11:42:24 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

6 answers

(1) Because the two-party system does work well in some respects (managing chaotic election systems, especially when we do not have a parliamentary system)
(2) Because no party would precisely represent your opinions -- if they did, it' wouldn't be "one person one vote" it would be "one person one party."
(3) Because oftentimes people vote for individuals, not party affiliation. This is different from the way it is in many parts of the world.

2007-05-16 11:50:44 · answer #1 · answered by Perdendosi 7 · 0 0

The nature of our electoral system forces the emergence of two dominant parties. This is because each election, at each level, is winner-take-all. If you vote for a candidate that fits your views most closely, but there's another that's not quite as close, and a third that is radically opposed to your beliefs, then you're 'splitting' the vote of people with about the same beliefs as you, and making the election of someone with radically opposed views that much more likely.

An example would be the 2000 election. The Green party garnered a larger than usual (usual is a trivial amount, BTW), share of the votes, and many argue that this 'split' the votes for Gore, allowing Bush to eke out one of the narrowest victories in US history. In 2004, the Greens got very few votes.

2007-05-16 11:53:27 · answer #2 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0 0

the 2 parties know how to manipulate the populace with hot button topics like abortion, gay marriage and other stupid things that get people argueing over things that have little if anything to do with thier actual lives. Thus they are distracted from the real problems we have like the trade imbalance, the 9 trillion dollar national debt, and a billion muslims who will eventually kill us all if we dont kill them first. While we are argueing over stupid things like men humping each other Iran is building nuclear bombs which they have every intention of using on American cities. When Americans get blown to hell and go a few months without any food and watch thier kids die of radiation poisoning they might wake up to the real and actual problems we face. In the mean time the establishment keeps us at odds with each other while they and thier friends line thier pockets with America's wealth. Also if anyone had the money to start a third party "and it would take many millions of dollars" they are likely already part of the establishment so why help us we are considered the poor suckers who do what they are told and think what the establishment wants you to think.

2007-05-16 11:58:37 · answer #3 · answered by terl 1 · 0 0

I never vote for the party, I vote for individuals. I'm disgusted with both parties, and the only reason I'm currently registered as a Democrat is so that I can vote in the Primaries for Sen. Mike Gravel, who is the only candidate who separates himself from the rest of the slick, smug, hypocritical vote-whores who call themselves Democrats. Gravel is as opposed as I am to the politics-as-usual bullsh*t that all the other candidates openly embrace.


www.Gravel2008.us

2007-05-16 11:50:15 · answer #4 · answered by Jesus W. 6 · 0 0

Because there is not a 3rd party that is strong enough to do anything

2007-05-16 12:50:40 · answer #5 · answered by Sweet Tea & Lemons 6 · 0 0

'Cause the guy from the 3rd party is usually the one who lives in the mountains and eats cats. :p

2007-05-16 11:49:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers