I really wish their was a strong third party.

Vedderlution_Baby

Commy wrote:

yes, lets pass that on to future generations.

I never said it was fair, or right. But it's not much different from what's been going on. And it's really not that hard to see a kid look around himself and think "What's the fucking point. Look at this mess."

Pacomc79

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

It's hard to care about cleaning up after previous generations when you've become disillusioned after seeing some of the choices they made that fucked you over before you had a chance to stand.

True, I just mean our generations are the ones who will or will not choose to vote for these "alternative" canidates rather than the status quo. I'm not convinced more than 10% of the population cares enough about politics to go that route.

Vedderlution_Baby

Pacomc79 wrote:

True, I just mean our generations are the ones who will or will not choose to vote for these "alternative" canidates rather than the status quo. I'm not convinced more than 10% of the population cares enough about politics to go that route.

I'm with you. If I had it my way, there would be no party titles at all, that way people would actually have to do research to find out where a candidate stands.

beachdweller

Why? What would a third party do? First of all, it won't happen anytime soon, for the same reason it wouldn't make a difference. As a whole, the majority of American's don't know crap about what or who they are voting for. If we are remain ignorant, then 5 parties won't help us.

The only thing that will help us is holding those in power accountable. If we can't hold them accountable, then adding more won't matter. We can't just accept that a third party would be ethically and morally responsible, and accountable to the people if WE don't change.

Commy

if voting could change the system it would be illegal.

sweetpotato

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

It's all about me...or is it about you?

I can't tell...

what do you do for a living besides doing the same thing you're accusing me of?

lol...

try not to let the ugly out all at once...

another gem from the prince of the non-answer. :rolleyes:

OutOfBreath

You could go a long way with ending the 1 man per district scheme that vastly favours the big parties. Start having, say, 10 men districts that would allow the 10% party to actually get one inside. The way you are set up now, it doesnt matter if you get 10% of the national vote, unless you get 51% in any single location. More men pr district would quickly bring you a libertarian or green congressman or two, since there now would be a point to vote for them.

As for finding political solutions in divided congress, welcome to politics elsewhere in the world. They'd have to cooperate and compromise to get something that would stick, but which would also reflect the majority opinion(s) better. That might end the partisan my-way-or-the-highway-coz-I-have-52%-of-the-vote switching you go through now.

Peace
Dan

dontloseyourheat

People should vote third part to send a message.

The majority of states are already decided so it's not like you would be "wasting" a vote or helping out another candidate.

mammasan

The first step is having an educated and informed electorate, without this it doesn't matter how many political parties there are. I have been called snobbish and elitists for the comment I'm about to make, but I stand by it. The majority of Americans are either to lazy, apathetic or stupid to make an informed decision when it comes to voting. They either vote straight down party lines without knowing a single thing about the candidate or they get there information from 30 second commercials about the candidates .