The U.S. Party System- DEAD, and I'm sick of it- But I Do Have A Solution

Okay, I've had enough. I've posted this thought on a few threads and I really believe it-

Republicans and Democrats are the SAME, they are a CONSPIRACY to make us feel like we have a choice.

Don't talk to me about Independent Parties, they'll never get enough support to make a difference.

Our founding fathers warned us about the Party System-

In his Observations on History, Benjamin Franklin wrote that parties engender confusion. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay warned against the evils to the general public that a "spirit of faction" would cause. And George Washington refused allegiance to any political party during his eight-year service as first president of the United States.

Opednews.com Source


It's time we do something about it- ABOLISH THE PARTY SYSTEM.

No more parties. Hold primary elections based on ISSUES not affiliations. Anybody can run for office. Limit their campaigns to 5 Major Issue Points (ie. their platform). Do away with the recent action to take the limit off of political spending. Reinstate a specified $$ limit on candidates, in relation to how big or small the race. Once a candidate is approved in the primaries, (which also narrows the race down), all campaigns are funded with taxpayer dollars.

Take big corporations completely out of the mix. Screw them.

Before a candidate can take an oath of office, they must take a lie detector test. The test questions would focus on their key issues and possible affiliations with lobbies and special interest groups. If they fail it, race goes to runner-up and so-on down the line.

And no one who makes over $250,000 / year can run for any office. Sorry, but you are so far removed from the average American that you cannot possibly understand their issues or represent them.

The Republicans and Democrats monopolize political power in the United States, and the two-party system no longer serves the interests of the nation. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are in a position to satisfy the will of a majority of the American people. According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll (December 2007), 47% of those surveyed felt that the two-party system “has real problems,” while another 29% felt that the system was “seriously broken.” For many disillusioned voters, the 2008 elections will be a choice between the lesser of two evils, rather than an affirmation of support for the platform of either candidate. The Liberal vs. Conservative Debate Has Lost its Meaning The terms “liberal” and “conservative,” which have traditionally defined the two major parties in the United States, have lost much of their meaning. Instead, the parties are now largely defined by the industries who compete for their favor through lobbyists. As a result, most of the differences between the parties have become superficial.

Source II


I have ran this idea by a few family members and friends. Guess what? They think I'm NUTS. That's exactly what I expected.

Prove to me why this won't work.

They have just become large corporations. They are there to have power and make money, Politics is just big business. Politics had little or nothing to do with Democracy.



[edit on 31-1-2010 by zazzafrazz]

Originally posted by Signals
Take big corporations completely out of the mix. Screw them.

My name is SLAYER69 and I approve of this message.




This Message is Authorized and Financed by The Better Business Partnership of the East-West holdings Co for prosperity league





[edit on 31-1-2010 by SLAYER69]

Originally posted by Signals
Okay, I've had enough. I've posted this thought on a few threads and I really believe it-

Republicans and Democrats are the SAME, they are a CONSPIRACY to make us feel like we have a choice.

Agreed

Don't talk to me about Independent Parties, they'll never get enough support to make a difference.

Our founding fathers warned us about the Party System-

In his Observations on History, Benjamin Franklin wrote that parties engender confusion. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay warned against the evils to the general public that a "spirit of faction" would cause. And George Washington refused allegiance to any political party during his eight-year service as first president of the United States.

Opednews.com Source


It's time we do something about it- ABOLISH THE PARTY SYSTEM.

No more parties. Hold primary elections based on ISSUES not affiliations. Anybody can run for office. Limit their campaigns to 5 Major Issue Points (ie. their platform). Do away with the recent action to take the limit off of political spending. Reinstate a specified $$ limit on candidates, in relation to how big or small the race. Once a candidate is approved in the primaries, (which also narrows the race down), all campaigns are funded with taxpayer dollars.

Agreed

Take big corporations completely out of the mix. Screw them.

Agreed

Before a candidate can take an oath of office, they must take a lie detector test. The test questions would focus on their key issues and possible affiliations with lobbies and special interest groups. If they fail it, race goes to runner-up and so-on down the line.

AGREED!

And no one who makes over $250,000 / year can run for any office. Sorry, but you are so far removed from the average American that you cannot possibly understand their issues or represent them.

Agreed somewhat, I would increase the limit to $500,000 or even $1,000,000 just because you make a lot of money doesn't mean you're necessarily detached. There are a lot of people who come from the gutter and end up living the high life without forgetting where they came from.

"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

.....keep reading

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

Perhaps most of you here dont see what I do here. But the whole document has one central point.

I am not advocating revolution , it will come to a point where each of you will be called upon to make a choice on where you stand. I think this website and several others will become the grounds upon with which freedom will be planted with seeds of Ideas.

Which way will you go, which way. Will you have the courage to sign on the line? Put your name up for all of history to review, or cower down?

My answer for them

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Signals
Before a candidate can take an oath of office, they must take a lie detector test.

Damn, up until here you were making sense. "Lie Detectors" just do not work, they are easily fooled and not scientific. You may as well have a voodoo priestess do a fortune reading over chicken entrails, it will be as accurate as a lie detector!

reply to post by Raverous


Thanks, but I respectfully disagree. In fact, $250,000 / year is rather high-

In 2007, the median annual household income rose 1.3% to $50,233.00 according to the Census Bureau.

Source

Of course those numbers are 3 years old, but I'd be willing to bet the number is lower now.

Anybody in that $500,000-1,000,000 range I would have to put on the same level as corporations...too many special interests to represent us.

reply to post by dereks


So what would you propose, throw out the lie detector?

I'd say it's better than nothing.

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Signals]

Originally posted by ripcontrol
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

.....keep reading

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

Perhaps most of you here dont see what I do here. But the whole document has one central point.

I am not advocating revolution

, it will come to a point where each of you will be called upon to make a choice on where you stand. I think this website and several others will become the grounds upon with which freedom will be planted with seeds of Ideas.

Which way will you go, which way. Will you have the courage to sign on the line? Put your name up for all of history to review, or cower down?

My answer for them

www.youtube.com...

Thanks for the input!

If I could give that 2 stars I would!

reply to post by Signals


The idea sounds superb. I can't say that I haven't thought along similar lines myself, and I am sure that we aren't the first in history to think along those lines.

Which brings me to my point. Considering it would not be the first time some avid representative of change tried to revolutionize this government, what makes this different than any other time? How will this change anything?

Simple answer: it won't.

Call me pessimistic but the people of the United States are too damn STUPID to try to make any change. They are too damn LAZY to stand up for themselves. Last but not least they are too damn BRAINWASHED to even think for themselves.




Allow me to paint this pictures as clear as it can be since people still don't seem to understand.

PEACEFUL. CHANGE. WILL. NOT. SUCCEED.

Not this plan, not any plan. You said it yourself, independents will never hold majority in government. Thus it is this simple fact to look upon to realize that the system that so many people hold faith upon to change peacefully - does not care about you and will not change no matter what you do.


Even the people who are awake will stop at nothing to hit the snooze button and go back to sleep. It is a sick vicious cycle that will never change unless people realize that sometimes SACRIFICES need to be made. That means pleasantries, financial well-being, and even life.

Let's be honest, the only reason the people, and the majority of ATS doesn't fight already - is because they are too selfish to give up these things, even if it means providing better for perhaps their families and futures generations.




But I digress, your idea, grand... if it were plausible and had ANY way whatsoever of being implemented. Sadly, it does not. It will only go down as another one of the philosophical pipe dreams of the masses who woke up, stayed awake, and yet still failed to accomplish anything throughout their troubles.

[edit on 1-2-2010 by gwydionblack]

THIS is a really good idea, an excellent idea.
Now for the logistics of implementation and introduction of it into a system so protected and guarded by the parasites that feed from it, is another challenge.
Star and Flag!

I think instead of a lie detector test, our leaders should be required to take an IQ test. I think the intellectual community would have our (the peoples') best interests as their top priority and the best solutions for our issues and concerns.

I guess I'm just tired of my leaders and decision makers being complete morons. For example, they don't understand what the internet is, but they can propose laws about it. (it's a series of tubes.... right?)

Perhaps being an adult is just like being a kid. Who would you rather have to represent you? A rich/popular kid, or the valedictorian? I would choose the valedictorian to make the right choices.

[edit on 2.1.2010 by Avarus]

Originally posted by Signals
And no one who makes over $250,000 / year can run for any office. Sorry, but you are so far removed from the average American that you cannot possibly understand their issues or represent them.

I agree with much of what you say, but this one will not work. The Constitution guarantees equal rights to everyone. The better solution would be to increase the competitiveness of those with lesser incomes and to that end, I think you already have the solution: full federal funding of presidential and congressional races. You would probably have to institute a similar system at the state and local level as well. On the other hand, there's also the issue of outside groups funding ads in favor or against certain candidates or issues, which is impossible to eliminate without trampling on their free speech rights.

The lie detector won't work, either, as it has the potential to override the will of the people. You could easily rig the system in order to ensure that a certain candidate wins. A better solution would be to institute a recall system whereby citizens who could obtain enough signatures could call a special election at any time during a term to possibly throw out an unpopular incumbent if necessary. There would have to be some limits placed on the number of times it could be done (once per term or twice per decade, something like that) to prevent it from being abused.

reply to post by Avarus


The problem with that idea is that everyone has equal rights, including stupid people. This includes having the right to run for elected office if they so desire. Additionally, an IQ test could potentially be abused and manipulated, allowing the administrators of the test to have a great deal of undue influence on the process.

reply to post by gwydionblack


Sadly, you may be right. Peaceful change may just be a dream.

However that change comes about, and eventually it will, I hope our next system is closer to this than the corporate party system we have.

Democracy is the worst system of government to ever have been created. It places faith in the majority to decide what is best for them and elects those that provide 'bread and circuses' rather than viable solutions.

Democracy and the 'freedom' it provides allow anyone to do generally anything except violate current public taboos. People are allowed to do what they like, and with no true leader to guide them, they very often decide on what is immediately ahead of them and brings temporary comfort. In order to be elected, politicians must cater to people's desires, however misguided. They must promise to make everyone happy, offend no one and offer quick fixes to whatever is hurting people (green cars for global warming, increased prison sentences for crime, gun control for school shootings). None of this actually works to alleviate the larger problem.
Society and life have been organized on the basis of what an individual wants, not on what is good for him or her...Just as only one out of 100,000 has the talent to be an engineer or an acrobat, similarly only very few are able to solve the matters of the nation and humankind. Only rare people can perceive the connections between matters in the big picture, and to unravel the key questions: what caused each fact and to what will it lead. In this time and this part of the World we are heedlessly hanging on democracy and parliamentary system, even though these are the most mindless and desperate experiments in the history of mankind...

reply to post by vor78


I agree, but the same could be said for lie detector tests. I think NoFX said it best with:

there's no point for democracy when ignorance is celebrated
political scientists get the same one vote as some Arkansas inbred
majority rule, don't work in mental institutions
sometimes the smallest softest voice carries the grand biggest solutions

- "Idiots Are Taking Over"

reply to post by concernedcitizan


I'll agree with most of that....what we need to do better next time is hold them to their promises...their platform.

And keep in mind we are technically a Republic, not a Democracy.

reply to post by Signals


Where most civilizations fail is poor leadership, whether by selecting a bad leader or by picking a system of politics in which leadership is not rewarded. The utilitarian nature of democracy, in which what most people think they want is considered good, assumes they are each as wise as a good leader and that they will have the time and resources to see beyond the immediate. As most people lack the inclination and devotion to such study, they inevitably pick short-term benefits with long-term negative socialized consequences.

The future civilization will recognize that a leader exists to do what is right and this is often unpopular but avoids greater problems. This means that at any given moment, most of the population may disagree with its leader, but that over time, they will come to agree with most of what this leader does. No leader is perfect, so we aim to satisfy the most important structural needs and to provide for individuals to have a reasonable place to live. Perfection does not and cannot exist, but if in chasing details we lose sight of overall direction, we fail, where if we get the basics right and screw up the details it is at most an inconvenience.

reply to post by concernedcitizan


Certainly bad leaders are picked, for one reason or another.

I still think my OP would help weed most of that out....