with democrats and republicans... From campaign finance reform to media and advertising requirements that would remove the lock of the dem and rep parties on our political 2 party system?
2007-09-19 14:29:02 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Many keep saying if you cant get enough support you cant win... I don't think it is a matter of getting the support, its a matter of a system that is going to defeat a third party candidate because the system has all the power, they control all branches of government, regardless of the support.
Im not talking about nut cases or people not being able to get the vote, Im talking about opening up a closed system.
2007-09-19 17:28:16 · update #1
I would support it, we need new blood, new choices, a new direction....this bypartisan cr@p is dragging us down.
2007-09-19 14:35:28 · answer #1 · answered by TranquilStar 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe. Normally I would say no but because the two parties have become so powerful that no one else can come close to competing with them your idea could be a good one. However a billionaire like Mike Bloomberg with Chuck Hagel on his 3rd party ticket might give the Dems/GOP a real scare in 2009 & might be able to win since Americans seem so fed up with them right now.
2007-09-19 14:35:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Where would the money come from to put them on an equal playing field? More taxes?
Really I'm not against the idea of having 3 parties, but what it really comes down to is how rich the candidate is and how much attention they can get.
2007-09-19 14:36:54 · answer #3 · answered by Petrushka's Ghost 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO! If you pull up past voting results, you will see every name that a vote was cast for (including Elvis Presley, Mickey Mouse, and Adolf Hitler). We have the freedom to elect anyone we chose to by majority, and if a third party candidate works hard enough, he or she just might be the David that conquers the Goliaths of the right and left majorities.
Additionally, to reply to the addition to your question, I will ask you a question. How many Independants have been elected to congress? It has been, and can be done.
2007-09-19 14:59:33 · answer #4 · answered by Mickey S 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No I wouldn't. I beleive there should be 3rd party canidates, but until they can garner the support to level the playing field themselves they need to operate on the budget they get.
Why should we fund people who are not going to win anyway. If they are that good they will get support on their own.
I believe they should be invited to all of the debates just as the rep/dems are, but as far as funding goes they are on their own.
2007-09-19 14:35:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
faith is a distinctive situation than gay marriage - they are able to't be lumped mutually. we ought to continually carry on with the motive of the form... I an helpful the Founders would not approve of gay marriage ( i'm helpful they won't have imagined it) - yet they did have self belief in freedom of non secular decision so we ought to continually no longer ban atheism. God would not rigidity faith or ideals on us the two.
2016-11-05 21:57:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, you get enough support you can win. That is the way it should be. No special favors for any party.
2007-09-19 14:33:23 · answer #7 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No I will not support a constitutional amendment that gives any loony nutcase with a cause equal time and funds.
If they cannot sell themselves that's thier problem.
2007-09-19 14:35:43 · answer #8 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
yes, from the sound of it
we do need more options
2007-09-19 14:34:02 · answer #9 · answered by soulsearcher 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋