Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Is it possible for America to move away from a 2-party system?


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Cript

Cript
  • 1940 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 October 2012 - 05:59 PM

I think everyone notices that both parties are heading further away from the middle. My simple reasoning for this:

1. Elections cost shit tons of money.
2. People don't donate money if they're not passionate about something.
3. Moderates aren't typically passionate enough about something to donate.

#2 Guest_idonotexist_*

Guest_idonotexist_*

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:02 PM

<-- A moderate that is passionate and donates

Then again, I'm most in line with the Green Party :p

Edited by Gorix, 03 October 2012 - 06:03 PM.


#3 infecthead

infecthead
  • 91 posts

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:12 PM

And what do you suggest in its place?

I agree with you on this btw, right now it's pretty much choosing the lesser of two evils, and when you think about that in context of America and how powerful it is, it's quite daunting.

#4 Abradix

Abradix
  • 769 posts

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:13 PM

Both parties are in line with each other, and not moving anywhere... They're perfectly happy slightly left and right of center.

Elections cost shit tons of money, which is given by Zionists through lobbies and PACs, to the candidate most likely to bend to their agenda. The only way to change the state of politics in America is to get a Third Party candidate into office who might repeal some of the terrible shit that has been passed in the last decade (Patriot Act, NDAA). But in all honesty, it's probably too late for America... If not now, then soon.

#5 Cript

Cript
  • 1940 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 October 2012 - 06:29 PM

And what do you suggest in its place?.


Campaign finance reform is probably the first place to start. That and having the FCC do it's job and fact check the bullshit it allows onto the air. Yep, the Republican is asking for more regulation. Sigh.

If you take the money out of politics, you solve a lot of problems.

#6 Bone

Bone
  • no

  • 3638 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 October 2012 - 07:29 PM

moderate


the Green Party


Posted Image


On topic:
Possible? Yes. Preferable? Yes. Likely in our lifetimes? Absolutely not.

Campaign finance reform is probably the first place to start. That and having the FCC do it's job and fact check the bullshit it allows onto the air. Yep, the Republican is asking for more regulation. Sigh.

If you take the money out of politics, you solve a lot of problems.


I wish there was McCain x Feingold fanfiction. :wub:

#7 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 01:18 AM

I think everyone notices that both parties are heading further away from the middle. My simple reasoning for this:

1. Elections cost shit tons of money.
2. People don't donate money if they're not passionate about something.
3. Moderates aren't typically passionate enough about something to donate.


I've never really understood why American politics insists on spending billions of dollars on election campaigns. Our last General Election cost around $50 million in total and the result was still the same in the end. :p

#8 Bone

Bone
  • no

  • 3638 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 09:56 AM

I've never really understood why American politics insists on spending billions of dollars on election campaigns. Our last General Election cost around $50 million in total and the result was still the same in the end. :p


Because it's ~freedom of speech~!

(The current supreme court is conservative. Conservatives have more money to spend on campaigns. Their thought is that more money= more votes. So the court decided that spending money is a form of free speech.)

(As silly as that is)

#9 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 10:00 AM

Because it's ~freedom of speech~!

(The current supreme court is conservative. Conservatives have more money to spend on campaigns. Their thought is that more money= more votes. So the court decided that spending money is a form of free speech.)

(As silly as that is)


I just don't understand how it is actually possible to spend $6 billion (the estimate for the 2012 election) on an election campaign...what is that money being spent on? O_o

#10 Waser Lave

Waser Lave

  • 25516 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 11:05 AM

Paying off the media? I kid, I kid.

Mostly traveling, and promoting their 'causes' if I was to hazard a guess.


Does nobody over there complain about how much is being spent on it though? Surely it would make more sense to spend that money on something more useful like paying off some debt, paying for some school kids to get educated or for healthcare for a few thousand people than paying millionaires to travel around for a few months promising things they inevitably won't deliver? O_o

#11 Mishelle

Mishelle
  • Bitch Of The Boards

  • 2245 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 October 2012 - 12:13 PM

I don't believe it's possible to move away from a 2 party system with our electoral college in place. The Democrats and Republicans have been the popular parties for years and since most states have a winner take all policy with electoral votes I find it hard for a 3rd party to stand a chance unless there's a huge shift in civic engagement overall in America. In my opinion there isn't as much as there should be.

#12 infecthead

infecthead
  • 91 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:11 PM

I just don't understand how it is actually possible to spend $6 billion (the estimate for the 2012 election) on an election campaign...what is that money being spent on? O_o


Professionals to cover up any scandals, and hitmen to take out any "complications". They don't come cheap, ya know (I dunno why I said that considering I live in Australia :p)!

#13 Kaitan

Kaitan
  • 82 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:26 PM

I think if we were able to take on "bi -partisan" ideals that it would be pretty good. By that I mean we have no parties, we look at everyone and make our vote or donation to the person who would run the office best, not vote because they are this or that. But I might be biased because I am Bi - Partisan because I dont want to be forced into just one party and one strict set of ideals.

#14 WharfRat

WharfRat
  • 11157 posts


Users Awards

Posted 21 October 2012 - 02:53 PM

Does nobody over there complain about how much is being spent on it though? Surely it would make more sense to spend that money on something more useful like paying off some debt, paying for some school kids to get educated or for healthcare for a few thousand people than paying millionaires to travel around for a few months promising things they inevitably won't deliver? O_o

Well... sort of... People complain here and think it is ridiculous but it isn't government tax money that is being spent. It (nearly) all comes from private donations to campaigns and super-PACs.

I hope to see the rise of a third party in America and I think that tackling campaign finance is probably the only way that will ever happen. I'm not sure why we don't just set a budget for an election season and split it up amongst each candidates campaign. (Not just Republican and Democrat either.... All candidates!) That will at least help get a third party message to the mainstream. (SN:I still think it is absurd that none of the third party candidates that will appear on the ballot are invited to the highly publicized debates....) The other problem with the rise of the third party candidate is the way the electoral college works and the "winner takes all" approach that most states follow. That will likely be the battle that takes decades to win.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users