Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7133|67.222.138.85
...will be the death of the U.S.

It hasn't posed too much of a problem until the last say 30 years, when a developing nation still had many problems to unite behind. People could get over their differences to get something done, instead of bickering about every single issue. Now the party system I believe is past helpful discussion of issues to hammer out the right course and into destroying the capabilities of the nation to act on anything.

I don't believe we lost the Vietnam war based on military tact, but on public opinion at home. As also in the war in the middle east, it is not a question of military power. If the sole objective was to take out the threat, we could have carpet bombed the whole country. Obviously this is an extreme that should never have been done or should be done in the future, but the problem is in finding the goal and having the will in our government and ultimately populace to carry through what we started.

Disagreement is healthy to a republic, and I'm not asking for a totalitarian state, but the complete and utter political bullshit our country goes through needs to go. People base their decisions on what everyone else is doing, not what they think is right, like some high-school popularity contest. Politicians need to hammer out what they think is the right thing to do, individually not with their party, and once a course of action is decided all focus should be on making the most of that decision. There is no use looking into the past trying to make the other side look bad, only in trying to make the most of the situation at hand.

George Washington wrote:

It serves always to distract the Public Councils and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill founded Jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot & insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence & corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another.
P.S. - After writing this I saw that a Republican bias could be construed, but that was not the aim, only I think a product of the current times that we live in. Both parties are very much to blame in my opinion.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7027|132 and Bush

Hey it was a single party up until the last election..lol
Xbone Stormsurgezz
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|7111|United States of America
I've been saying the same thing for some time now. It's going to get to a point where if one party says eating babies is wrong, the other will naturally say that it is right.
paranoid101
Ambitious but Rubbish
+540|7166
To be honest all party's and Politicians are as bad as each other.

But this will never stop me from voting, hell over here in the UK people I know say if you vote for say the Green party you are wasting your vote, but no the only way you could ever waste your vote was by not using it.

Its the only damn thing Politicians listen to and hell I'm thankful I live somewhere that I have the choice of the vote.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6956|Global Command
In local elections I vote issues.
In national election, I plan on voting for anything but Rino or Dino.


Enough people do this and we can make a change. People don't do this then I agree, we are doomed.
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6794|Columbus, Ohio

ATG wrote:

In local elections I vote issues.
In national election, I plan on voting for anything but Rino or Dino.
In local I vote.
In national, I don't vote.
paranoid101
Ambitious but Rubbish
+540|7166

ATG wrote:

In local elections I vote issues.
In national election, I plan on voting for anything but Rino or Dino.


Enough people do this and we can make a change. People don't do this then I agree, we are doomed.
Same over here in the UK with Labour and Conservative (well we do have a third Liberal, but they are just happy to nick a few seats off the other two main ones), like the idea of people not voting for them, sadly it won't ever happen, nice idea though.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7133|67.222.138.85
I am 16, so cannot vote right now. I have taken no classes on US government or anything, so I'm sorry if anything I said was off-base. I plan on always voting on the candidate that I agree with/isn't mentally impaired, even if that's my neighbor Joe. (Actually, maybe I will put chuyskywalker up on the ballot if the 2008 candidates suck. At least he could get a good national forum going.)
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6832|North Carolina
I don't like our party system either, but I think most of what is bringing America down is actually its size.

A quick glance at the largest First World nations shows a rather peculiar thing.

1. U.S. = 300 Million
2. Japan = 127 Million
3. Germany = 82 Million
4. U.K. = 60 Million
5. France = 60 Million

By far, we have the largest population of any First World country.  I think that leads to certain cultural weaknesses.  Our diversity as a nation is a strength in how we can bring in the brightest people of every culture.  On the other hand, however, we see far less cultural unity in America than in homogeneous countries like Japan.

This lack of unity seems to be demonstrated by the conflicts between the big two parties.  Simultaneously, there is a more subtle conflict occurring between big business and the common man.  Basically, the culturally divisive issues in America (like gay marriage) are being used as a smokescreen for the real issues like war and the growing wealth disparity in America.

The big two parties seem to be in conflict with each other over mostly cultural issues, but in reality, they are generally aligned in their interest of making the rich get richer and watching the middle class shrink.

This economic conflict between the rich and the middle class is generally kept in check more in countries where cultural issues are generally agreed upon.  Countries like Canada seem to have less cultural issues, so they focus more on economic ones.  This keeps the public's attention on how the rich behave.  In America, the rich are free to abuse the system at the expense of the average taxpayer.

So, in a way, the two party system is to blame for colluding in their efforts to separate the average citizen from the government.  Both parties would rather cater to the whims of lobbyists than to the interests of the average person.
BVC
Member
+325|7122
The US doesn't have a proportional representation system, correct?  If a two party system is failing, perhaps proportional representation is the answer.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6832|North Carolina

Pubic wrote:

The US doesn't have a proportional representation system, correct?  If a two party system is failing, perhaps proportional representation is the answer.
We do...  the House of Representatives is proportionate to population.  You're thinking of the Senate.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard