Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
it would be nice in theory to have more choices and ideas. Of course, if you look at it for the elections and congress you find it would not work.
in elections you need 50 percent of the votes, or 50 percent of the electoral votes. With just three parties you have trouble getting that with a split, or you kill two of the parties right off the bat.
.
Lots of folks I've spoken to have criticized our two-party system, and I've even read a few posts concerning that here.
Does anyone support this layout anymore?
But, if we are going to expand to more than two major parties, it needs to at least be 4 parties. Three party system will just syphon off liberals or syphon off conservatives, leaving the existing major party to reap the benefits of splintering the other party into two.
Lots of folks I've spoken to have criticized our two-party system, and I've even read a few posts concerning that here.
Does anyone support this layout anymore?
i
in elections you need 50 percent of the votes, or 50 percent of the electoral votes. With just three parties you have trouble getting that with a split, or you kill two of the parties right off the bat.
I think that there should be no parties....Zero, zilch, nada...you want to run for office? Do it on your own dime and with your own beliefs.
There is no need for a national party.
I don't support that the system supports a two party system. If it came down to two parties... I'm ok with that. But this system we have encourages only two parties. And the two parties want to keep it that way.Lots of folks I've spoken to have criticized our two-party system, and I've even read a few posts concerning that here.
Does anyone support this layout anymore?
I think that there should be no parties....Zero, zilch, nada...you want to run for office? Do it on your own dime and with your own beliefs.
There is no need for a national party.
I've heard it said that more than 2 parties isn't exactly a panacea either.
Here is an overview of how multi-party democracy could look in the US:
This system is called MMP (Mixed Member Proportional).
Voters have 2 votes: 1 for the party/President they wish to form a government, and one for their local representative. Those 2 votes can be made for different parties.
In an election, the results for Wyoming are based on the party vote as follows:
Social Democrats 32%
Republicans 25%
Tea Party 15%
Greens 10%
Centrist Democracts 9%
Christians 9%
Socialists 4%
Wyoming sends 10 people to the House of Reps, which are based on those proportions:
Social Democrats 3
Republicans 2
Tea Party 2
Greens 1
Centrists 1
Christians 1
Wyoming selects 2 Senators, which are based on those proportions:
Social Democrats 1
Republicans 1
As no party can achieve an absolute majority, both the Senate and House of Reps will need to form working coalitions. The parties forming a majority working coalition then form the government, and their leader of the largest party in the two houses will be the President.
It could also be that the makeup of the Senate is balanced nationally, so that if the Greens poll 10% nationwide, they would also hold 10 of the 100 senate seats regardless of whether or not they 'won' any senate seats on a state-by-state basis.
This is complicated, but works in Germany, New Zealand and Israel much as it is presented here.
That is an entirely different form of representation though and would require an entire rework of our current system.
I think that there should be no parties....Zero, zilch, nada...you want to run for office? Do it on your own dime and with your own beliefs.
There is no need for a national party.
This. The party system does nothing but stifle progress. The current system in congress is a good example of this. People vote according to party, NOT for or against the merits of each bill in itself. If people were running on actual beliefs and issues, I believe that many of the problems we are facing today would not be an issue. Hell, most of the time politicians don’t do a damn thing they say. Without the party covering for them, this simply would not work. It would also go a long way to decentralizing the power and cooperate interests. It is easier to control the government direction when there is only one entity (the party) that you have to bribe rather than 536 individual politicians.
Lots of folks I've spoken to have criticized our two-party system, and I've even read a few posts concerning that here.
Does anyone support this layout anymore?