It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
USA Today, 5/11/2011
A slim majority of Americans say it's time for a third party because the Democratic and Republican Parties are doing such a poor job, a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows.
USA Today, 12/22/2011
More than 2.5 million voters have left the Democratic and Republican parties since the 2008 elections, while the number of independent voters continues to grow.
....with whom those who strongly supported the policies of President Jackson closely identified historically- back in 1796 and 1800. This Major Party has, of course, stayed with the name Democrats ever since.
....producing a new "Democrats versus Republicans" Major Party alignment: one that, at least insofar as the Parties' names are concerned, continues to this very day.
The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens.
The Anti-Masonic Party was the original third party to be active on the national scene.
We pledge our party to legislation that will compel strict limitation on all campaign contributions and expenditures, and detailed publicity of both before as well as after primaries and elections.
A majority of voters strongly favor both requiring corporations to get shareholder approval for political spending (56 percent strongly favor, 80 percent total favor) and a ban on political spending by foreign corporations (51 percent strongly favor, 60 percent total favor)."
Poll after poll reveal a public convinced that lobbyists are a destructive influence
In a chat with the website Reddit, President Obama called for serious look at a constitutional amendment to reverse the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.
Romney came close to matching the $181 million that President Obama raised last month — and he did so during a rocky period for his candidacy and before his solid performance in the Oct. 3 debate, an event that greatly energized the Republican base.
The Electoral College is a controversial mechanism of presidential elections that was created by the framers of the U.S. Constitution as a compromise for the presidential election process. At the time, some politicians believed a purely popular election was too reckless, while others objected to giving Congress the power to select the president. The compromise was to set up an Electoral College system that allowed voters to vote for electors, who would then cast their votes for candidates, a system described in Article II, section 1 of the Constitution.
Nearly 90 percent of people in the United States say there is too much corporate money in politics, according to a new poll from a collection of watchdog and public interest groups.
On Thursday, Axelrod said the president would push for campaign finance reform if he won a second term.
link from September
Today at the Education Nation forum, Mitt Romney finally admitted that money distorts our democracy by improperly influencing politicians, and causing them to ignore their constituents in favor of powerful donors. He even called for action to end this problem, saying it’s “the wrong way for us to go.”
Both sides agree that campaign finance reform should be addressed, and this will inevitably cede some power to independent and third party candidates.
Recent challenges to problem solving will persist. The election will do little to address the underlying flaws in our politics.
Since switching to a third party myself, I tried to pay really close attention to the merits of this debate. The validity of a third party is in question. PatrickGarrow17 took the aspect of campaign finance and the validity of third parties by givingclear examples. Druid 42 did well to bring up the Electoral College, but the ultimate flaw is that the Electoral College does look at third party candidates as seen by Ralph Naders attempt at 2000. So the win, would have to go to PatrickGarrow17
“First round PatrickGarrow17 opened well, but Druid42 took the lead with the factual history of the two-party system, and by not entertaining the need for a new system that has stood for centuries. While Patrick’s opener proved interesting as to how the American people are yearning for change, Druid took the reality road of the corruption within the current government system and the inherent costs of running as an independent.
First round to Druid42.
The second round was very hard to pick a clear winner as both opponents had very strong statements. PatrickGarrow17 came back strongly with proof of how a third party system can and has worked in the past. He also considered how the system can work against those who have the funds to run, and answered the socratic questions well, particularly this one;
3. There is a dormant super-politician, it is the American people.
Druid responded by elaborating on his first round post, clearly showing just how much money the major candidates have in their fold, and of course who finances them. Unfortunately, in my opinion he only really carried over what was already said in the first post, without adding much new information.
Second round to PatrickGarrow17.
Both opponents had very good closing statements. PatrcikGarrow17 brought a lot of facts to the table about how change can be effected and what the people can do to effect change away from the two party system.
Despite this, Druid42’s closing statement was very strong, and not only addressed the problems, but put them into a very clear perspective about the ways and means to go about repairing the current system.
This statement, in my opinion is the prize winning piece;
Besides, now is not a good time to try and reform the government. It's a time to work on re-building the economy, creating viable jobs, and moving out of the recessive state that we are economically experiencing. It's time to come together as an electorate, and stand behind our president and his policies, and work toward having a positive impact on future elections.
Third round and the debate to Druid42.”
Both openings are putting forward reasonable arguments for either position. They are fair and grounded, yet cancel each other out. PatrickGarrow17 claims changes are already happening, while Druid42 maintains changes are impossible. Neither more convincing than the other, this is a tie so far.
In the second round, PatrickGarrow17 parries by showing changes are not unprecedented and that the general public opposes the influence of money in politics, also claiming the public is the super-politician that can change all. Druid42 counter argument exists almost entirely of showing how big of a factor money is, and even when overcome there is still the hurdle of the Electoral College.
I give this round to Druid42, because his arguments clearly layout the difficulties of taking the obstacles for change, while the opposing arguments are a bit weak in showing how the dominance is ending.
In the closing, PatrickGarrow17 comes back strong in showing how the dominance is not really a dominance, and it is diminishing and can be influenced. It had me convinced. However, Druid42 delivers the fatal blow in his closing plea: such a change would call for change in legislation and possibly the constitution (Electoral College), which would have to be initiated by the current two party legislators.
It´s an unfortunate vicious circle, and given the title "The Two Party Dominance is Ending", I don´t see the end of it anytime soon. It´s convincing enough for me to give the debate to Druid42.