Why are people religiously stuck to a two party system?

Question

I'm rather confused here. It seems to me that we are stuck in a two party system, both parties staffed with individuals that who would qualify as being retarded on most accounts. Of these two parties we have red states, and blue states, and party lines...has anyone stopped to ask "Hey, whose establishing the parties ideals and addenda?" So my question is this...has everyone lost the capacity to think for themselves and is the ability to hold an open debate lost forever to be replaced by the lip service of a stogy party, which from where I sit is drastically outdated and out of step with America?

Answer 1

You're assuming that most people ever exercised their capacity of thinking for themselves. The problem with democratic republics is that in order for them to work effectively, an informed population is a necessity. We failed in that, and turned that job over to political parties, who anxiously agreed to do our thinking for us. Now we have two parties that operate the same way, but offer us only cosmetic differences.

The problem is, they are very much in step with America. We're asleep and they're robbing the house bare, so to speak. By the time enough people wake up and see what's happening, everything is liable to be gone. Most Americans couldn't care less about what is happening 100 yards beyond their back fence, let alone in Washington or their state capitals. But as long as there's a ball game on tv, a beer in their hand, and barbeque on the grill, they're content. No, right now we clearly have the government we deserve, and if we're not happy with the way things are going anymore, we've got off our backsides and see what's going on around us. Nap time is over.

Answer 2

the reason were pretty much stuck to a two party system is because when you throw a third party candidate in to the mix, they usually have some of the same ideals as the dems or repubs. All this third party candidate does is steal away votes from the side that he/she most closely resembles and typically won't win anyway. I consider myself a republican, because I can relate more closely with their views, but there are some ideas from dems that I do like as well. I would put myself closer to middle, but on the right side of the aisle. It will be years before a third party candidate will be able to win a big election. Until then, unless a democratic nominee can really sway me with their ideas and beliefs, I will probably continue voting republican. Right now, Obama, is as close to getting my vote as a democrat ever has, but it still too early to make that decision yet.

Answer 3

Its time for Reform. It worked once before to end the bribe system (which has returned in new ways), and it can work again.

The people are fed up, but unwilling to do anything about it.

Voting 3rd party isnt wasting your vote-its making a point. Do that and get others to do so as well. Even if the 3rd party doesnt get elected at least we'll show the two major parties that we're ready for a change. They will listen, or the numbers voting against them will increase.

Answer 4

not actually retarded, mostly they are pretending, it gets votes sometimes, its even more dangerous that way

those are the parties that have the money, in rare cases a third party person gets in for Governor (Jesse) or Independant Senators (Bernie) in VT.

Rich people and companies establish ideals mostly and the polls have some effect when adds and speaches don't work.

Yeah, most people have pretty much lost the capacity to think for themselves. I could list many examples as proof.

Just watch the money. It will explain a lot of what you are asking.

Answer 5

The electoral system contributes to the two-party system. The way elections are set up to choose winners, it makes it really hard for a 3rd party to enter the picture. If you look at third parties, they don't really win either. The only one ever to become a major party is the Republican Party.

Answer 6

The two major parties do have appeal to most people although not everyone will agree with said party. I feel the minor parties such as libertarian and the green party don't see the broader scope and are limited to their individual issues. For example Green party=environmental issues.

Answer 7

The Libertarian party is the worst party compared to the Democrats and Republicans. Anarchists and minarchists is what they are. For example, in business and labor relations Libertarian are similar to Republicans. However when it comes to issues like legalization of drugs, they are with the Democrats.

Answer 8

This is a dilemma faced by a very "frightened of change populace". The "don't rock the boaters" have a phobia and even though a Parliamentary form of government would better answer your posit and the needs of our society, the opposition to such a move would be overwhelming.

GlobalwarmingisREAL... Go to the Green Party websites and peruse the 10 key values for a better understanding. I'm a Green :-)

Answer 9

As many people say, the only thing Democrats and Republicans agree on is keeping third parties out of the political process.

However, this only serves to create a situation where you have to pick from only two candidates, a douche and a turd sandwich.

Answer 10

Change is Loss to most people. Change is difficult, painful and
if there is not an immediate net positive effect or at least a very high probability of a net positive effect of a factor of 10 or more people don't have the motivation to change.