I Want To Eliminate The Two Party System

From the beginning, I never supported or really liked Trump. I was actually a huge Bernie supporter and voted for him in the primaries.

Since Trump trolled his way into office, I've said both good and bad things about him based on what I believe is best.

One of my libertarian posts said it best:

"But, if you are disappointed that YOUR President has been found to NOT be in collusion with a hostile foreign government to sabotage an election, or that there's no evidence of obstruction of justice till this moment, you need a thorough self-examination of your own motives and priorities as an American citizen.

It's one thing to oppose any President's policies. It's quite another to hope your President is a traitor, saboteur, or criminal for your own side's political advantage."

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Qwerty14

Would you prefer a one party system then? Haha

SW-User

@Qwerty14 I prefer multiple parties get a chance. Not just two. Either that or no parties.

Qwerty14

@SW-User And what type of voting system would you recommend?

SW-User

@Qwerty14 What's wrong with what we have now? The problem is that in order to debate on big networks, you need a certain percentage of the vote which automatically goes to two parties.

Also, people are not informed enough and play team politics rather than actually look at what a person stands for or their record.

Qwerty14

@SW-User Well first past the post (FPP) is a system where the majority of voters can be overlooked in favour of number of electorates. That's how you get a minority win like Trump had. Also FPP almost always results in two parties as the choices at the end of the day. There are several better systems out there that look at multiple parties. Ones like MMP or STV. Usually social countries and more civil bases countries use these methods as they're fairer and better represent the nation as a whole.

A no party system is the worst possible idea. Party's are what you wanna vote for, not individuals. You wanna know that a party has your best interest and will vote with one another. Otherwise you'll actually have to study all 535 representatives and know how they'd all vote on every given bill. Talk about a headache

SW-User

@Qwerty14 I think eliminating all parties is best. If it's a headache for someone to vote for a person based off their record, then they are probably uniformed enough to vote most of the time.

Not all Democrats support the same policies. Some are DINOs. If you only vote for someone just because their a democrat, then you are really not voting for the best of the country.

Qwerty14

@SW-User You really know all 535 members of Congress? That's insane. You shouldn't have to do that just to be able to vote.

SW-User

@Qwerty14 Here is the thing, not all of them are running for president.

And, yes. I can recognize them if I saw them at an airport but I don't know their policies in depth because it doesn't affect me unless they are in Illinois.

Qwerty14

@SW-User I think it's an insane thing to try getting the IS to know all 535 members of Congress and the presidential administrations and everyone else else on the ballet that doesn't get in. Its an impossible feat. That's why all nations form parties. This also far more affordable

SW-User

@Qwerty14 But many nations allow more than two parties to run or have more than two parties in Congress.

Qwerty14

@SW-User America has more than two parties. In fact the 3rd party has won states in the past. It's just that atm the minor parties are rubbish. No one wants the Libertarians or Greens to run things lol

SW-User

@Qwerty14 They have in the past. Even the presidency.

You're final statement is why we should do away with parties. Why generalize people off parties. There are different factions of libertarians. Completely opposite of Ron Paul

Qwerty14

@SW-User Because most people fall into specific ideologies. I think you'll never eliminate parties but you could do away with FPP