This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
Mildly AdultCreative
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Would the USA be Better off with 7 Major Political Parties?

Poll - Total Votes: 13
One Political Party
Two Political Parties
Three Political Parties
Four Political Parties
Five Political Parties
6+ Political Parties
Show Results
You can only vote on one answer.
Someone brought up "RINO's" (republicans in name only). This of course leads directly into DINO's, if you bring in the centrist factions of each, (the RIF's & DIF's..?) you could make four parties. This would absolutely open the door for the existing 3rd parties, Green and Gold. Add one spoiler and you could have a much more complex and dysfunctional federal government.

I believe this would be a benefit for all mankind!

Are two parties enough?

Are eight too many??

You decide!

DUN-DUN-DUnnnnnnnnn...
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
Actually our "two-party" system has been 4-5 parties most of my lifetime. I say 5, because FDR and the New Deal sort of broadened the Democratic tent big enough for the full spectrum, or to more precise, his efforts to respond to the Great Depression and WWII when the Republicans essentially wanted to do nothing (prior to Pearl Harbor). Truman's efforts to steer a mid-course in the post-war period (integrating the military, supporting the UN that alienated the conservatives; temporarily nationalizing strategic industries to fight the unions, price controls alienating the conservatives) actually split the Democratic Party into 3 parties: Wallace leading the liberal/progressives in one direction, Thurmand the conservative/States' Righter Dixiecrats in the other, and assuring Republican Dewey's victory, the pundits all assured us. Except Truman rode the moderate Democratic ticket to victory.

The Republicans then recruited Eisenhower to be the moderate middleroader of all time, and road him to victory in two terms. And during the 50's the two parties tried to outdo each other in being middle of the roaders, working across the aisle; Adlai Stevenson was just a little too liberal to fit the mold on a national scale. The liberals and conservatives drifted back into one or the other of the two parties, but were always fringes within the parties driven by the moderates.

It was JFK/LBJ's embrace of the Civil Rights Movement that drove a more permanent wedge between the two parties, and Nixon's Southern Strategy that converted the long time Democratic South into rock solid conservative Republicans. And it seems that is when the two parties became taken over by the extreme views in both parties, leaving the moderates no place to go.

All of which is a long-winded explanation as to why there should be no limit, but at least 3 is needed.
Really · 80-89, M
@dancingtongue
I believe I not only understand what you are saying, but agree wholeheartedly
'Never in the history ....' How does it feel to be one of the few? 😁
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@Really You and I are not alone, we may be. 😜
@dancingtongue all capitalists think we're fine with only business parties.
Penny · 46-50, F
why not abolish the party system altogether. apparently all it does is cause dissension
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@Really yeahhh... I've been familiar with this concept for longer than google has been around. I'm an old guy, we used to have to use these things called 'books'. awful smelly heavy things! But I will willing acknowledge that you are the smartest man on the internet if it helps...
Really · 80-89, M
@GerOttman Thanks for your offer but I'm more selective about 'helpers'.

I read a lot, mostly non fiction. I was already reading at least 20 years before you were born (assuming you've posted your true age bracket)

'Bye now. I need someone sensible to talk to.
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@Really Sooo smart I mean really really smart!
Driver2 · M
No just ship the leftist and the liberals out .
Driver2 · M
@GerOttman nazi , socialist, communist. They have no place in the United States
Driver2 · M
@monte3 you just don’t get it. All the left does is bash our country. So they can just leave
That’s my point .
And you know that but your just an ass.
monte3 · 70-79, M
@Driver2 No your
Ointment was literally and I quote “ ship the leftists and liberals out”. 🤷‍♂️
Than when you were confronted by the general racism of that point you pointed- oddly I might add- at Biden. Who simply pointed out that a party that tries to overturn an election, with no evidence, is perhaps a bit fascist 😊
Really · 80-89, M
I'm an outsider and only 'know' what I see/hear on the media, or read, but the concept of a "much more ... dysfunctional federal government" is hard to imagine.
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@Really I know it's a lot to hope for but only big goals bring great achievement!
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
Unless you get rid of first past the post voting there is no point in trying to create more parties. You need some kind of proportionality so that the parties that represent significant minorities or voters actually get some representation in government.

With first past the post you essentially force the system into two or three major parties and also allow for parties that get less than half the vote to have more than half the seats in parliament as often happens in the UK.
kutee · T
usa needs a royal family head of state
2cool4school · 46-50, F
@GerOttman @kutee Sadly I think a lot of people assume that the Kardashians are the US’ equivalent to a Royal fam…
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@2cool4school yeahhhh I never got that whole Kardashian thing, weird stuff man
2cool4school · 46-50, F
@GerOttman me neither. I think it’s a generational fad and I’m too old. I can’t stand them. I see plenty of Kardashianitis in society today. Hope it clears up…
2cool4school · 46-50, F
The duopoly is definitely not working so why not try something else??
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@2cool4school well mostly because it's hard, I think. People don't like hard things, easy answers are too appealing!
Yes, anything that adds more democracy might save us from the oil corporations, the war corporations and the inequality.
That's why we hate democracy.
@GerOttman and this ruling elite is free from democracy entirely.
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@Roundandroundwego I'm not sure it's been tried recently. The populace is lazy and content to be fed like cattle.
@GerOttman surel, the internet nowadays tells us how and what we're thinking- the version elites paid for.
5 at least.

Parliamentary systems tend to produce politicians who know they must compromise.

As long as you avoid Italy's too-many parties, but have 4-5, I think it would be saner.
royalblue1193 · 31-35, M
Eight would be a death trap
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@royalblue1193 with any luck it would result in a complete stand still..
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
I find it difficult to believe someone voted for only two. That's what got us into the mess we're in right now.
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@ninalanyon See also https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2019/09/17/political-elections-game-theory/
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@ninalanyon By finding out what their rivals offer, and seeing what credible, practicable and affordable alternatives they can offer themselves, with a good chance of delivering them if in Government. Then by as many of their constituency divisions as practicable, fielding suitable candidates.
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@ArishMell Still doesn't help if they are evenly spread over the country.
This message was deleted by its author.
This message was deleted by its author.
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@swirlie there it is, somebody used the 'T' word... (sigh)
This message was deleted by its author.

 
Post Comment