Thread: Form new parties.

the U.S. people have two big parties, of which one is;
-gay loving,
-pansy,
-socialistic,
-pinko commie,
-atheistic,
-and all other nice names the republicans call them.

Other is;
-bible toating,
-hillbilly,
-gun-happy,
-conservative(ultra),
-ignorant,
-and all other names democrats call them.

While it's a little bit amusing for an outsider to see the two sides bashing eachothers with zeal, it's also very sad.

-Form new parties, have the;
¤conservative bible-swingers(aka religious),
¤Socialistic,
¤Liberals,
¤conservative...
form their own parties, because your current way is clearly not working all that well.
(and now await the bashing to commence)

We have more than just the two (Repubs and Dems) here in the US. The problem is that those two are the overwhelming favorites. The reason? Well, I honestly think a lot of it has to do with American culture. Americans love a winner. I think all that talk of "try your best" or "everyone who plays wins" only goes so far here in America. Deep down inside, we all want to win. Therefore, IMO, that is why we see these too parties getting the most support. Americans, by and large, back who they think can win. That, of course, writes off many of the smaller parties.

Still, this 'two party system' has its upside. It is easier to get things done when a government doesn't have to worry about coalition building after every election, and then governments collapsing when they can't.

Originally Posted by Fennica

form their own parties, because your current way is clearly not working all that well.
(and now await the bashing to commence)

Actually, I think most Americans would love for there to be a at least viable third party.

Dems and Rebs indeed are the mere headlines of huge amounts of opinions and political winds.

The third party might actually be a very good for the political field in the U.S.
-Should enough people leave both parties and form a third power, the two would have to actually accomplish something to justify their existance.

The primary reason that there only are two parties represented at the federal level in america must be the 5% voting limit.

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

The primary reason that there only are two parties represented at the federal level in america must be the 5% voting limit.

I would say it boils down to advertising budgets. The two parties might as well be called Coke and Pepsi.

The primary flaw of the Parliamentary system is that it gives coalition making and breaking power to fringe groups that have no business anywhere near power.

A three party system with one holding a healthy majority, and a couple on each end to keep it honest, could work. But not 4-5 with 20% each.

The primary flaw of our current system is it's too easy to "accomplish" shitty legislation and to actually get it passed. They pass shit through congress now without reading it AND NOBODY CARES.

It would be exceptionally difficult for a viable 3rd party to gain any seats/positions whatsoever.
The "cooperated corruption" between senior house and senate members that created the meandering precincts make it all but impossible to overthrow an incumbent. (of either party)

Originally Posted by wiggidy

The primary flaw of our current system is it's too easy to "accomplish" shitty legislation and to actually get it passed. They pass shit through congress now without reading it AND NOBODY CARES.

Originally Posted by iamwhatiseem

The "cooperated corruption" between senior house and senate members that created the meandering precincts make it all but impossible to overthrow an incumbent. (of either party)

Both could be solved with a system of cooperative federalism based around geographic borders. When Federal representatives and state legislators answer to local county councils and voters to have the legal power to censure and force hands on particular bills, they take the time to read the bill.