Would more Political Parties would solve a lot of Problem in America?
Would several political parties all having the same say solve the rivalry problem in American Politics?
No
Side Score: 6
|
 |
Yes
Side Score: 7
|
|
|
|
|
1
point
I say to get rid of 'em all. I alternate between monarchism and libertarianism - I see the logic in having a monarchy. While not all are 'cut out' to be king, they have a different upbringing which makes them more suited to reign. I used to have a huge list, but I can't recall all of them anymore. Side: No
No it wouldn't. In fact it would make things worse. Granted there is a serious problem with extremes in a two party system, it is easy for a party to go straight to its "base" which tends to be a small group of crazy people when they lose power, but with multiple parties it is no longer a case of majority rule, it is a case of whoever happens to have the least opposition rule. That is, if 74% of people want either A, B, or C, all of which are similar, and 26% of people want D which would totally piss of 74% of the population, then you have a situation where it is quite possible that the minority rules, and consistently. This is no way to run a country. The two party system works fine, people just need to realize no two people agree on everything all of the time and learn to compromise without all the "Nazi" "Fascist" "Socialist" bs that goes on when one or the other party is not in power. Side: No
1
point
|
1
point
This country has a lot more political parties then people realize. While only five parties(Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitution, and Green) have over 100,000 registered voters there are 20+ other parties. So the problem is that that there is a shortage of parties but rather that only two parties currently have power. The only way to fix that would be to focus more on campaign finance reform so that the playing field is even or switch over to a Parliamentarian Congress where people vote for a party rather then a person and that way third parties would be able to make their way into Congress. Side: No
1
point
Libertarians are basically liberal republicans. They wouldn't be so bad (as in idealistic) if they didn't tend to support failed ideas like a free market (to use a cliche, a free market is like communism, good in theory but fails in practice, and we have tried both historically). Side: yes
Errr, just about every social issue? Libertarians are in favor of abortions, legalization of drugs, less money spent on the industrial military complex, removal of troops in the Middle East, gay marriage, getting rid of the Patriot Act, less strict immigration laws. Basically look at Ron Paul's voting record and apart from his stance on abortion you will find the general way a Libertarian would vote. Side: yes
More political parties could bring new ideas and different philosophies instead of conservative and liberal. What about libertarians? I agree except for the bit about libertarians, they're insane. I think two parties in American politics has made the system slow to change because it's always jumping back and forth, and that's probably because no party represents the majority's interests except in getting the other out of office. Side: yes
1
point
|
