» Home » Politics
Break The Two-Party System NOW!
It is high time we break the two-party political system that has been failing for the past several decades. Albert Einstein once said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." The two-party system is nothing more than insanity! If we do not intentionally break it by either voting for a different party or by writing in a different person, i.e. Ron Paul, then we are simply perpetuating the current insanity. Let's break the current craziness by voting our values rather than for a party. Ron Paul '08
 TMBerman  19 Sep 2008 14:01
                           (What's this?)  Add to Firefox  RSS
The two-party system closes people's minds to new political ideas. Its going to be very hard for anyone to truly bring change to the American government under the two-party system.
 
 ur_wrong  19 Sep 2008 17:21
 Add a Comment
 
 
We don’t officially have a two party system but we effectively do. By far the majority of voters don’t even consider anyone outside the Dems or Rep. There is a strong well fostered feeling among most voters that to vote for a third party is to waste your vote, one step away from voting for the other side.
Whether it’s through a third party or some other method we need to instill fear in our major parties, fear of their constituency because right now they’re pretty sure they have us neatly in their pocket, and they’re right.
 
 finsch  19 Sep 2008 16:11
 1 Comment
 
 Well said. That is exactly what I am talking about. So many times I've heard, "If you vote for a write-in or anybody else besides (either front-runner) then you are voting for (the other)"

This really is a travesty and simply proves that, even people with some intelligence can be duped by the mainstream leftist media. If you listen to lies long enough, then you will believe that the lies are truth. Sad but true.
by  TMBerman
 20 Sep 2008 08:40
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Real democracies have multi-party democracies. A minority government does not create "political gridlock", it forces people to reach a consensus that is best for all and makes lobbying by wealthy special interests impossible. Many other democracies have lobbyists, but only in the US do they have the ability to bribe and influence politicians into writing laws for the benefit of those they lobby for.

Edit:

If it's a "republic", then the US has no business telling other nations how to run a democracy. Historically, when the US "exports democracy", they remove it from (or prevent it in) the country they are meddling with - Iran (1953), Cuba (1960s), Nicaragua (1980s/90s/2000s), Brazil (1970s), Greece (1970s), Chile (1970s), Argentina (1970s), Bolivia (now), Venezuela (now), England (1968), Indonesia (1980s), South Korea (1950s/1960s/1970s/1980s), Pakistan (1980s/1990s), as well as many other countries.

As for "electing those who represent you", it requires wilful blindness to think that's actually happening.
 
 K9  19 Sep 2008 14:54
 1 Comment
 
 I agree with most of what you are saying here but we need to understand that we do not live in a democracy, but a Republic. In a democracy, it is basically a mob-rule situation, whereas in a republic, we elect people who we believe will best represent our values and standards.

[EDIT]

Quite true. The US of A has no place instructing any other country in democracy. Also correct on the "exports democracy" statement.

As for "willful blindness," I believe that it is more an issue of studying the person you vote for to the extent that you have a reasonable basis for trusting them, not simply taking the "information" from the boob-tube box heads. Most Americans do not do any research on the people they waste their vote on outside of watching the news and the debates. We should all consider the history of each candidate, not just in public office (We should change politicians often just like we change diapers, and for the same reason.) but more so in their private and business lives. That is where we find their true character.
by  TMBerman
 19 Sep 2008 15:04
Comment
  
Comment
  
Come on its funny watching them fight over the country plus a one party ruling often leads to a dictatorship or oligarchy. Look up hitler and the nazi regime in germany
 
 Persian1  07 Dec 2008 03:14
 Add a Comment
 
 
Then by all means, VOTE FOR A THIRD PARTY! We already have multiple third parties that don't appeal to a majority of voters. People act like we only have two parties and that's not true by any means. We have probably five parties, it's just that only two happen to attract the majority of voters.

This is a problem?
 
 Cephus  19 Sep 2008 15:24
 1 Comment
 
 YES ! ! ! ! !
by  TMBerman
 20 Sep 2008 08:51
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
THIST IS IN RESPONSE TO THE FIRST AGAINST VOTE BY damien. NOT AN AGAINST VOTE.

This was actually supposed to be a response to the I agree that we will never bring the Reps and Dems together under one party, and I wouldn't want that simply because that would mean that individual values would suffer for the sake of "unity." One should never have to compromise their beliefs simply for unity. We were all created equal, yet different. Our Creator gave us the right to choose what to believe, and with that right comes the responsibility to stand by those convictions at least until they are proven incorrect to our satisfaction.
 
 TMBerman  19 Sep 2008 14:58
 Add a Comment
 
 
As much as I would like all of the U.S. To be unified, it will never happen. We're just lucky there are only two main parties; if you look closely, you've got sub-parties in the main parties. Plus the fact that there are too many differences between Americans to have everyone come together for one party. Heck, even bipartisan stuff is sometimes an illusion (at least with presidential nominees) to make people vote for that candidate.

The bottom line is I'm relating the two-party system to religion; when you figure out how to get multiple denominations down to one, you apply that same concept to the two-party system and let me know. Trying to bring Democrats and Republicans under one party is like trying to get Redskin fans and Cowboy fans to like each other. It just ain't gonna work.
 
 Damien  19 Sep 2008 14:20
 1 Comment
 
 This was actually supposed to be a response to the I agree that we will never bring the Reps and Dems together under one party, and I wouldn't want that simply because that would mean that individual values would suffer for the sake of "unity." One should never have to compromise their beliefs simply for unity. We were all created equal, yet different. Our Creator gave us the right to choose what to believe, and with that right comes the responsibility to stand by those convictions at least until they are proven incorrect to our satisfaction.
by  TMBerman
 19 Sep 2008 15:05
Comment
  
Comment
  
Sign In / Sign Up
 For and Against Recent Activity
Related Debates
If The British And US Soldiers Left Afghanistan Then Afghanistan Would Be In Taliban Hands
The Only Reason People Hated Bush So Much Is Because Of The Liberal Media.
The Rothschild Dynasty's Influence Over The World Has Resulted In Them, In Effect, Ruling The World.
The Veto Powers Of The P5 Should Be Abolished
JFK Was The Best President The US Ever Had
President Obama Will Help Build This Nation
If You Don't Pay Taxes You Shouldn't Vote.
Tony Bliar Is So Crazy That He Probably Believes That He Was Being Honest When Committing Our Country...
Prices Should Include Sales Taxes.
Our System (our Government) Is Caving In On Itself?
New Debates
Is Hydrogen Poroxide A Good Ingredien For Experiments Like Elephant Toothpaste.
MacDonalds Should Be Banned
Porche 911 Turbo Is A Noticable Car On The Streets.
If You Meet An Alien It Will Suck Out Your Brains.
Chicken Is Nice
That My Brother Doesn't Have A Dick
That Modern Technology Is A Plague On Human Relationships
Technology Is Tearing Us A Criminal
Technology Is Tearing Us A Part
Diet Coke And Mentos Is One Of The Best Experiments.