Everyone says vote em out of office, if both pparties are eseentially acting with their individaul best interest should we vote BOTH parties out and replace them with say moderates who are Americans VS Politicans?
Like the Repuicrats.
2007-10-04 07:13:52 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sound good to me.
Ron paul should dump the Repubs and run independent-he's sure got my vote so far.
2007-10-04 07:17:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Interesting idea. Of course, we already have other parties who run for office. I can't see myself voting for anyone in Ross Perot's party, which has had some success. I know the conservative Reps are thinking of voting for a third party candidate. All that will do is divide the Rep vote. I wish that we had a different system, but people who aren't either Reps or Dems have been running for president for decades and losing (obviously). I don't think you'd find any ideas that could unify enough people and get them to vote out of the "norm".
2007-10-04 07:22:24 · answer #2 · answered by Serena 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People who say they have to vote for the winning parties are ridiculous...That is like having a crappy football team and sitting on the visitors section because you don't want to support your own...I always have voted Green or Libertarian (Go Nadier) but this year I am considering voting for Obama for the same reasons I usually vote 3rd party.
O8AMA
2007-10-04 07:20:54 · answer #3 · answered by klover_dso 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely! The Republican party went from being born to being in the White House in 12 years!
There is only one party now, the Democrats and the Democrats Light.
2007-10-04 07:17:02 · answer #4 · answered by Warren W- a Mormon engineer 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, you can't go by party affiliation. You have to check their voting records cause they just lie when they campaign. There are a few good ones in each party, unfortunately there are more bad ones than good ones.
2007-10-04 07:18:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is a great idea, but the problem comes when the D&R tell people by voting for a 3rd party is wasting your vote. the sad part is people actually beilve them.
2007-10-04 07:47:47 · answer #6 · answered by bored 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm an independent, but I have to vote for one of the parties because they will always win. There is no way around it.
2007-10-04 07:17:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ron Paul is Republican on the 2d so i visit probally finally end up balloting republican. If he makes a decision to bypass 0.33 social gathering i visit bypass 0.33 social gathering. by no ability understood the full balloting alongside social gathering strains element. the guy concerns not the social gathering.
2016-10-21 01:05:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
absolutley. who says we should vote for two parties only? I am a neutralist so Im not partial to either party im totally there with you.
2007-10-04 07:17:43 · answer #9 · answered by Hatsuharu 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
replacing them isn't the answer, letting others with differing opinions into the debate is what is needed.
2007-10-04 07:19:09 · answer #10 · answered by Greg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋