Posted on 09/30/2017 10:51:50 AM PDT by TBP
Tell me how that is better
I don't know if it makes the world or things in those countries any better, but all the constant bellyaching about how neither party represents people takes its toll after a while.
By this point, I'm tempted to say, form your own party that represents exactly what you believe, and let everybody else do the same, and then we'll see where we are.
Where we end up probably won't be that different from where we are now, but people might accept that what we get represents what the country thinks, rather than something that's been forced upon us.
Of course it's not going to happen because winner-take-all single representative per district voting favors the two party system.
Increase the number of house members 5 fold and it will happen. Having 435 makes it too easy for them to collude and gives the ones we have too much power.
Add term limits and swamp will be permanently drained.
Runoff elections at every level will solve most of our political problems. Unfortunately each state has the right to election law.
Term limits for elective office
and loser-pays for litigation.
Things that need doingl
And they rig the laws in favor of the Demopublican duopoly.
They claim that there isn’t room in the Chamber for more representatives.
Dumbest reason I’ve ever heard.
If and when we get our Article V convention, we should send out an amendment limiting the number of constituents a House member can represent. Right now, it’s getting close to a million average. That’s not the local representation that the Founders intended.
Runoff elections would fix that.
No, we don’t.
All splinter groups can be accommodated within the two parties.
The Republican Party has shown no inclination to accommodate the Trump/Freedom Caucus/constitutionalist wing, let alone the libertarian wing. And the Democrats no long tolerate their most sensible, middle-of-the-raod members.
What ails our republic isn’t a dearth of political parties.
The abandonment of state appointed senators pulled the keystone from the Framers’ balanced structure of government.
We can continue our 104 year-old dance around party idols, but free government cannot possibly return without repeal of the 17th Amendment.
Last line....precisely
See 1912 for an an example of what happens when your vote splits and your opponents doesn’t. Wilson the rat got 42% of the vote (less votes than the losing rat from 1908) and over 400 electoral votes.
HARD PASS. As long as we have the first past the post electoral systems this is insane suicide. There can be one major party on the right, or we lose. Observe Canada from 1993 to 2004. Observe Alberta Canada in their last election where the hard left won (the conservatives parties wised up and merged so they will be a one term wonder).
The parties “imploding” would be meaningless, parties are made up of people, who would all still be alive. Almost all Northern Whigs became Republicans, and they made up the large majority of Republicans.
“Moderates” from both parties (there are few enough moderate rats) joining together in a “centrist” party is a fantasy of media idiots who think the country is full of passionate moderates, lol, such a party would be a joke. They’d get a lot of endorsements from papers no one reads and a lot of third place finishes, they’d have no grassroots activists.
The way to win is simple, nominate conservatives in the GOP primary. It’s too hard? Well it’s a helluva lot easier than any wild scheme.
NY & CT allow cross endorsement. Gives NY Conservative Party influence . . .CT Independent Party, same
The Democrats would split too. See 1860.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.