The American political system has been debated for many years now, while even its very structure shows obvious flaws. The idea of dividing a nation
into individual groups, each its own principles and methods, and declaring only one contestant permissible to seek it's objectives, is foolish in its
very concept. To not devise a system that assures all possibly beneficial ideas are applied, regardless of party, is crippling to our advancement. We
don't have Republican issues and Democratic ones, we have American issues only. There's no Liberal priorities and Conservative needs, only American
ones. We are one nation with only a single list of concerns. Debates should be held to prioritize that list? We are selling ourselves short to divide
that list and hold contest on which of our needs to leave out.
Further, we are now adding new divisions to our priorities. First was the Third Party, and now the Green and Libertarian Party? Does this serve one
nations needs? The answer to that is obvious and the only ones who fail to understand this are the very people being represented on the list itself.
Those that enter the contests know this very well. That is why time and again they work from a different list all together! Theirs is an agenda very
different than the one we eagerly split and argued over during the contests. Their list has none of the priorities from any of our divided list? They
already have us agreeing to leave out things from our one list by dividing it five ways and only choose one? Is one fifth of our list still too much
to ask?
Apparently it is because every election may be different, but every term won results in the same old discussion later. The campaign is all about what
portion of our needs they will focus on pursuing if elected, but once elected, our list is ignored? Something always comes out of nowhere to create a
crisis that trumps our original agenda. Conveniently, turns our partial list of priorities on its head giving our hopes a back seat position yet
again. Over and over and over and over......
We fall for this every single time and, while we sit there being ignored, in stead of our newly elected hopefuls working things off our list, they
create pages of new issues to add to it. When will we learn that there is only one list in all their sights? There isn't five parties, but only one?
Our list is only there in theory. A tool for us to fight about and debate while they meticulously exercise their agenda. The agenda that was drawn up
long before they came forward to discuss ours. The next chapter in our nation that has nothing to do with our progression, but usually only the
opposite. We are being suckered out of a life we should be living, but will never even know. When will we understand this? How much abuse will it take
to make the majority see the blinding truth?
If we are so naive that we can't even see the injustice created by our divided party political system, we will forever be abused by someone. This has
gone on for many generations and may soon be worse than ever before? Maybe that's exactly what needs to happen to wake this country up? Hitting the
absolute bottom may end up the worst and best thing for this country? All I know is it can't go on like this.
Please, everyone that reads this, think long and hard about the Democrat and Republican system. Ask others to think of it also? Has it ever been
different? How many times have you griped about the person you voted for being useless? How many times have you heard others say the same? Over and
over and over....never changes and never been different! Please share any thoughts you have on how to stop this. Thanks for listening!
Peace.
|
reply to post by Zerbst
It is interesting to note that most of the other world nations have multiparty systems and they have to form coalitions to get things done. Multiple
parties allow the more fringe sides to get a say, and offer much more choice than our two party system.
I am not a social conservative, so the Republican Party is not always the choice for me. I am also not a classic liberal, so the Democratic Party is
also not the choice. I have moderate views on many issues, yet there is no party to speak to me. The primaries are made for the core party
constituents, and that leaves most of the other people out.
Unfortunately, the third party candidates could not even muster a combined one percent of the vote this election. If the people who choose to not vote
would go out and vote for a third party candidate, then they would get some respect.
Excellent analogy, and starred and flagged.
|
reply to post by kidflash2008
Thanks for the input! You and I are similar in our perspectives. In fact we are most likely part of the majority represented most by Third Party
candidates that are unable to achieve any ground in a mostly two party system? That very fact explains my point well! The most substantial part of our
listed needs are falling into this third party and failing to obtain any traction whatsoever.
I'm not trying to condone the elimination of party systems all together, but more a reformed system that ensures our needs are met more seriously.
Hopefully others will provide more evidence that the significant points of view held by ourselves are more popular than what's represented in the not
so popular Third Party?
Peace.
|
reply to post by Zerbst
The sad fact is about half the voting population isn't registered to vote, and the ones that are, do not observe that right. I think it is partly
peoples fault for not doing their research. Everyone wants a short soundbite for the answer to a complex problem. When a candidate actually starts
talking about the problem and a real solution, the channel gets turned.
When was the last time you heard a candidate state they would raise taxes? Walter Mondale stated that because of the huge deficits the country was
facing back in the 1980s. He lost big time, and most candidates do not mention taxes during their campaigns, just on how they will cut them.
Ross Perot was a straight talker, but he was quite a social liberal (His candidate for vice president stated in a debate that a woman had the right to
choose, end of discussion. I liked that honesty, and he did not answer any more questions on that subject). I don't think many people looked at his
policies, as they liked it that he stated the country was in a mess. Unfortunately, he did not have any solutions to the problems. He was asked many
times, and he would immediately state the media was biased against him. I then realized he was just like the Democrats and Republicans, and he would
say anything to get a vote.
If there is a third party candidate we like, we have to get people who do not normally vote to register and vote for the candidate. It takes work, but
eventually it can happen.
|
reply to post by kidflash2008
The question then is why are more people not voting? Maybe they don't vote due to my point in the original post? They know their vote is irrelevant,
so why bother. That being true, how do you substantially change that opinion?
I agree with you about certain political positions are campaign suicide. It's a shame that positions on issues like abortion, or gay marriage can
outweigh ones so much more vital. I believe things of this nature should be left to the individual states to decide. Intertwining them with federal
policy obviously causes an overshadowing effect that is crippling Third Party candidates. Being an honest politician is dangerous ground in a non
thinking society! Combine that with the fact that these races are even more influenced by the amount of money collected and you start to see why there
are so many problems? I am all for a cap on campaign contributions. There should also be limits on where they can come from? A candidate that
emphasizes priorities that directly benefit the top ten on the Forbes list should not gain such advantage from it? That's a crime in itself!
|
reply to post by Zerbst
Most people do not care, or have tremendous apathy toward all politicians. I think they were surprised when the young actually voted in higher numbers
last November. One of the highest voting populations are conservative older white people. They vote in droves, so many politician tune their message
for them.
How do we get people to vote? How do we get the interest up? Almost everyone has a pet interest, and the way to get them interested is through those
interests.
Although I am not a one issue voter, many people are. That is one way to start the interest, and hopefully they will broaden their horizons to other
positions. Abortion is very important to the Fundamentalist Christian, and they will not vote for a pro-choice candidate. The Republican Party does
not want to scare away that core constituent, so they will never take the pro-life plank out of the platform. (This is why Mitt Romney will have
trouble if he runs, he was quite pro-choice as governor of Massachusetts, and the pro-life people do not believe he has had a change of heart.)
|
