DrDawkinstein Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Not sure how well this will do around here since it shouldnt be an "Us vs Them" "Repub vs Dem" thread, but here goes nothing... I think (hope) that most of us can agree the current 2-Party system sucks. And in light of an article I posted in another thread, we are teetering on the edge of possibly becoming a 1-Party country. As unlikely as that may actually be, that outcome would lead to the death of America, Freedom, and Liberty regardless of what party it was. There was a lot of talk this election (much like many elections in the past) of getting a 3rd Party 5% of the vote so it could get funding and participate in the next election. Again, regardless of the specific party, I believe that is a very good idea. While the Libertarian Party did pretty well this election, they missed the 5% mark in the Presidential election, and we're stuck with the 2-Party system for now. So my question to you, the political experts of TBD, is: How many Parties is "just right"? 1 is a nightmare, 2 sucks, 3 is better... But where is the cutoff to prevent the election from being too watered-down? How would we handle a 7 party election? How many parties would you like to see? And what would those parties represent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 You could look up north to get a good example. There are multiple parties in Canada but the Liberals and the Conservatives generally dominate. Of course a third party does put the rest on their heels but it's generally filled with amateurs (NDP). No matter which country you go with, people will generally be disenchanted with the political system because they feel that it doesn't fully represent them. Generally speaking, I want a socially liberal fiscally conservative party to be in control but it seems every party has their fringe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) You could look up north to get a good example. There are multiple parties in Canada but the Liberals and the Conservatives generally dominate. Of course a third party does put the rest on their heels but it's generally filled with amateurs (NDP). No matter which country you go with, people will generally be disenchanted with the political system because they feel that it doesn't fully represent them. Generally speaking, I want a socially liberal fiscally conservative party to be in control but it seems every party has their fringe. I was hoping you'd chime in. I remember watching Canadian election results as a kid and being bewildered by the number of parties they had! I'm not expecting a new party to come in and dominate, or even win, but it would be nice to have something to keep the big guys in check. Has there ever been an instance where having too many parties is a bad thing? Like someone winning an election with only 30% of the vote because the votes were too spread out? Im sure there are rules that protect against that, but then what? Edited November 14, 2012 by DrDareustein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) I was hoping you'd chime in. I remember watching Canadian election results as a kid and being bewildered by the number of parties they had! I'm not expecting a new party to come in and dominate, or even win, but it would be nice to have something to keep the big guys in check. Has there ever been an instance where having too many parties is a bad thing? Like someone winning an election with only 30% of the vote because the votes were too spread out? Well we don't necessarily always have an ultimate winner, just minority or majority. Harper held the minority for a while and eventually got the majority which flipped out the lefties since they figured Canada would go into neo-con imperialist mode with our 6 jets and 2 submarines? Effectively what happened in 2010 was that Harper won the majority but since Quebec is strong left, they kicked out the Liberals and voted in the NDP as the representative minority which as I said earlier, was a bunch of amateurs with one true charismatic leader (layton RIP). The pros = You have the Liberals having to re-tool to find out why they got their asses handed to them and they are effectively kept in check. The cons = You now have a bunch of amateurs who will soon be eligible for lifetime pensions etc since extra government automatically brings extra cost. Edited November 14, 2012 by meazza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 I saw a South African ballot years ago that had 28 candidates for president. I think that was too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 3.5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 So my question to you, the political experts of TBD, is: How many Parties is "just right"? Zero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Competition is a good thing, especially in the electoral process.. I would like see the Libertarian party begin to steal blue dogs and moderate republicans, strengthening that movement. I don't think their platform is a political panacea, but I believe the L's are right now the party most inline with what the founders had in mind with regards to small government and personal freedoms... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Throwing out very marginal factions, the left is split between green/liberals and moderates; the right has moderates; wacko religious fanatics; and libertarians. That could be 5, but the moderate dems/reps aren't far apart, making 4 possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) Throwing out very marginal factions, the left is split between green/liberals and moderates; the right has moderates; wacko religious fanatics; and libertarians. That could be 5, but the moderate dems/reps aren't far apart, making 4 possible. That's about how I see it too. Could possibly end up with 4 or 5 parties. Tea Party (extremist cons) Moderate Repubs Moderate Dems Libertarian Green (extremist libs) Would certainly make for an interesting (but loong) debate! Edited November 14, 2012 by DrDareustein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 The very best possible amount of political parties is zero. Failing that, the second best number is infinite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 That's about how I see it too. Could possibly end up with 4 or 5 parties. Tea Party (extremist cons) Moderate Repubs Moderate Dems Libertarian Green (extremist libs) Would certainly make for an interesting (but loong) debate! What is extremist about the Tea Party? http://www.thehartfordteapartypatriots.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=27&MMN_position=26:26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 What is extremist about the Tea Party? http://www.thehartfo..._position=26:26 They are definitely the most fiscally conservative group, and while there is nothing wrong with that, they unfortunately tend to attract a lot of "social conservatives" or as they are called in the real world, bigots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 They are definitely the most fiscally conservative group, and while there is nothing wrong with that, they unfortunately tend to attract a lot of "social conservatives" or as they are called in the real world, bigots. They attract the bigoted criticism. See the link below and figure out if you're one of the bigots too: http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2010/05/ten-tea-party-falsehoods.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 They attract the bigoted criticism. See the link below and figure out if you're one of the bigots too: http://blog.beliefne...falsehoods.html No, because as I said in the first sentence of the thread, I dont care about the actual parties or which side anyone is on, or the name of what. This is about the Government and Election process in general, and how more or less parties can affect it. Your posts are for a different conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 No, because as I said in the first sentence of the thread, I dont care about the actual parties or which side anyone is on, or the name of what. This is about the Government and Election process in general, and how more or less parties can affect it. Your posts are for a different conversation. Calling one political movement a group of bigots seems like a funny way of demonstrating how little you care. Try to stay within the confines of your own topic and then you can expect others to do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 Calling one political movement a group of bigots seems like a funny way of demonstrating how little you care. Try to stay within the confines of your own topic and then you can expect others to do the same. Never called the entire group or movement bigots. Try reading again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 The problem with another party showing up is that it would never be split evenly, ultimately leading to one party rule. Our system could not support 3 parties. It just isn't built like that. Third parties are not necessarily there for their own fulfillment. They exist to shift the platforms of the major parties. I see the Republican party adopting much of the current Libertarian platform in the not too distant future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Never called the entire group or movement bigots. Try reading again. You made a pretty clear value judgement on a particular political movement then followed that by claiming you don't want to discuss the merits of any political party. My comprehension is fine. Every few months or weeks you venture in to PPP, blast away unprovoked and then claim that you were attacked by racist, conservative, [insert a litany of other insults], drones. You can't seem to refrain from getting your shots in and starting the **** storm, but then you act as if you're above it all. Yet you wonder why you have zero credibility here and you aren't received very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) You made a pretty clear value judgement on a particular political movement then followed that by claiming you don't want to discuss the merits of any political party. My comprehension is fine. Every few months or weeks you venture in to PPP, blast away unprovoked and then claim that you were attacked by racist, conservative, [insert a litany of other insults], drones. You can't seem to refrain from getting your shots in and starting the **** storm, but then you act as if you're above it all. Yet you wonder why you have zero credibility here and you aren't received very well. Calm the !@#$ down. I never once said the entire Tea Party are bigots. He asked why I would label the Tea Party as extremists. There are 2 sections that most political issues or ideals fall into, fiscal and social. While the movement started, and is mostly still, about fiscal conservatism, it has unfortunately attracted some social conservatives. Those social conservatives tend to be extremists and therefore bigots. Not ALL Tea Party members, I wont even say most. But that is why I used them to specify an extremely conservative party. RELAX Edited November 14, 2012 by DrDareustein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts