Will America ever get out of the two party system?

[Crowser]

Throughout American history there has always been two major parties that go at it for the presidency. Be it the Whig or Democratic-Rupublican party (yes they were the same at one point although the same issues cannot be applied) this has been a constant theme. Do you think America will ever have three or more parties that actually have a shot at the presidency instead of just two? I know there are hundreds of other parties like the Green and Libertarian but honestly they just don't have the support they need as of now. Perot in the 80's was the closest America has recently gotten to a three way election but he only got about 18% of the vote. Personally I would like to see more diversity between the candidates and one easy way to do this is just increase the number of candidates.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

I think the American system is fine, and this is coming from an Italian. We have way too many parties.

 

[SimpleChimp]

Not unless we are able to silence big business and stop the electoral college.

 

[Pandalisk]

Hmmmm, maybe there should be more choice than just two, there should always be a bigger choice when electing the leader of a country that powerful.

 

[Scrythe]

The less parties involved means that the winner was voted by an overall majority, as opposed to just having a few points more than, lets say, four or five other party candidates.

Sure, it's stupid that everyone either swings donkey or elephant, but the great thing about America is that you reserve the right to say "fuck you both."

 

[walls of cetepedes]

Britain has dozens of parties. Including the 'Monster loony raving party' who plan to plant Spaghetti trees.

Take a look at their tips for winning an election.

http://www.omrlp.com/index.php?page=how-to-win-an-election

 

[Fireshot25]

Im hoping that the increasing independents trend will continue to the point where the major parties are as small as the minor parties.

 

[Pandalisk]

Britain has dozens of parties. Including the 'Monster loony raving party' who plan to plant Spaghetti trees.

will the Prime minister be the flying spaghetti monster?

you know what? i would vote Churchill what GB needs is a decisive leader

"Churchill! do we accept the offer?"
"ooooooooohhh No"

"Do we fire the Nukes?"
"ooooooooohhh yes"

picking governments is like picking ceral, you want a wide selection so you can pick the one you think is the best one, and wont give you stomach cancer

 

[Warped Pixel]

Well not too many monthes ago I had heard of a independent governer in one of the states. I apologize for not knowing his name or state but It was monthes ago and i couldn't find him on a short google search. But as I saying it does show we atleast are getting some sort of progress. I think the state started with M if anyone knows more please do tell.

 

[Scarecrow38]

It's interesting because in Australia we also have two parties, but they're both so similar in policy that it's hard to tell whose in what party. I actually like that America has two political parties that are distinct and different. You know whose a democrat and whose a republican and you have a general idea about what their views are. In Australia both parties are so close to the centre that there's no real difference at all.

 

[walls of cetepedes]

Britain has dozens of parties. Including the 'Monster loony raving party' who plan to plant Spaghetti trees.

will the Prime minister be the flying spaghetti monster?

you know what? i would vote Churchill what GB needs is a decisive leader

"Churchill! do we accept the offer?"
"ooooooooohhh No"

"Do we fire the Nukes?"
"ooooooooohhh yes"

picking governments is like picking ceral, you want a wide selection so you can pick the one you think is the best one, and wont give you stomach cancer

Churchill. Nice.

 

[Halceon]

The less parties involved means that the winner was voted by an overall majority, as opposed to just having a few points more than, lets say, four or five other party candidates.

Sure, it's stupid that everyone either swings donkey or elephant, but the great thing about America is that you reserve the right to say "fuck you both."

How can you be this dense and still live? EVERY voting system includes the option to not vote. And it still doesn't change the fact that you're left with a choice of one out of two. Not voting just gives power to those, who don't think both candidates are worthless cavemen.

 

[lostclause]

I think the American system is fine, and this is coming from an Italian. We have way too many parties.

It seems we share something apart from kiwifruit. NZ has way too many parties too, all the small ones hold all the power, it takes a long time to get anything done. This is especially bad if the government is far off the majority.

 

[FallenRainbows]

No. Way to stubborn and a bastardised sence of patriotism where everything is un-American.
I know this isn't EVERY American and due to the intelligence of this here forums I doubt there are that many on here, but from what I see and hear.

Should they? I don't see why not, the tow old parties will be there so no real effect on voting apart from more options which can only be better.

 

[pirateninj4]

It's interesting because in Australia we also have two parties, but they're both so similar in policy that it's hard to tell whose in what party. I actually like that America has two political parties that are distinct and different. You know whose a democrat and whose a republican and you have a general idea about what their views are. In Australia both parties are so close to the centre that there's no real difference at all.

Actually they're pretty homogenized, the real difference is in the people who support them. The parties themselves continue to do the same crap, just with different labelling.

 

[Scrythe]

The less parties involved means that the winner was voted by an overall majority, as opposed to just having a few points more than, lets say, four or five other party candidates.

Sure, it's stupid that everyone either swings donkey or elephant, but the great thing about America is that you reserve the right to say "fuck you both."

How can you be this dense and still live? EVERY voting system includes the option to not vote. And it still doesn't change the fact that you're left with a choice of one out of two. Not voting just gives power to those, who don't think both candidates are worthless cavemen.

Wow, was your heart racing when you typed that much hate? Chill out, sister, I believe you took me out of context.

I didn't mean that as "you either vote red or blue or none", I meant it as even though we have two gigantic parties, you have several options otherwise.

What I should have said was "fuck you both, I'm voting for the underdog"

Oh, but since you're curious as to how I can be "this dense and still live", I'd like to point out that I didn't pull a statement out of my ass like "EVERY voting system includes the option to not vote." Since I'm feeling generous, allow me to introduce to you a list of countries that have, and enforce, something called "compulsory voting":

• 
  Argentina
  Australia
  Brazil
  Chile
  The Democratic Republic of the Congo
  Ecuador
  Fiji
  Liechtenstein
  Nauru
  Peru
  Singapore
  Switzerland
  Turkey
  Uruguay

These countries I listed have penalties for not voting, which range from fines to prison.

I can't be that dense, considering I'm still quite buoyant.

 

[LongAndShort]

Having lots of parties didn't do any good in Germany in the thirties. The inability for any single party to gain majority in the parliament (or in the Presidential elections for that matter) was one of the factors that allowed the Nazis to take control. Stick with the two party system. It works.

 

[chaosfenrir]

The less parties involved means that the winner was voted by an overall majority, as opposed to just having a few points more than, lets say, four or five other party candidates.

Sure, it's stupid that everyone either swings donkey or elephant, but the great thing about America is that you reserve the right to say "fuck you both."

How can you be this dense and still live? EVERY voting system includes the option to not vote. And it still doesn't change the fact that you're left with a choice of one out of two. Not voting just gives power to those, who don't think both candidates are worthless cavemen.

Err not actually. In my country, it's COMPULSORY to vote. Also, I dun see anythin wrong with 2 parties, too many and u cant get a majority. Sides, it's better than my country, where we practically only have 1

 

[scotth266]

America is NOT a two-party system. There just happens to be two really powerful parties that most people flock towards.

There are actually tons of political parties in America, and they do win seats on occasion.

 

[notsosavagemessiah]

The problem with the 2 party system (which we don't actually have, there's lots of politcal parties, but nobody takes them seriously) is that not everybody is represented. This is especially true of moderates, whom only recently have seemingly become a prominent political force. It forces people to either side with one or the other, when you never fully agree with either. I think the more parties the better, the majority of course will be more prominently represented, which is what our system is supposed to be, but as time has gone on more people have become disillusioned, resulting in low voter turnout, because they don't feel represented, they don't feel like their opinions count. It turns out that this is mostly true, because the other parties out there don't have the budget to fight back when the two dominant parties label them (and their other major contender) as being a bunch of crazies with no real national interests. I guess the point of my rambling is this, we don't have officially have a two party system, just a de facto one. This can only change if more people organize under a different banner, not democrat, not republican. unfortunately, i don't believe most people are aware that they even have a choice, simply because it's been so ingrained in our heads now that you're either a donkey or an elephant that nobody seems to believe any different.