Why I believe STRONGLY in a TWO-PARTY system. By: David C. Osborne

David C. Osborne (My Orginial Work) ^ | 28 August 2007 | David C. Osborne

[davidosborne]

And where is this idea presented in the U.S. Constitution?

IT IS NOT... I simply was describing the system as it exists... and why it exists.... unless we change the way the PRIMARY and GENERAL elections are conducted.. a strict TWO-PARTY system is the ONLY way I see to make it work.. I would cerainly support a constitutional ammendment that provides a Runoff/1st choice/2nd choice way of voting... this would effectively allow a 3rd party to function without resulting in your vote actually HELPING someone you OPPOSE...

[ClaireSolt]

I belong to the RNC, but that is not what you said. Republicans expect the candidates to fund their own campaigns with very mionimal help.

[Paperdoll]

Thanks for the ping, david. Good thread. Allow me to insert MHO here for a minute:

l. No Federal funding for private or religious schools. Federal funding ALWAYS comes with strings.

2 Perpetuate the two party system! FDT’s McCain-Feingold bill opened the doors for George Soros’ Moveon to dominate the Democrat Party with soft money, while, to my knowledge, the Republican Party gets none.

3. People MUST be more discriminating about the record of encumbants before voting them back into office by name recognition only. BUT because they do not, term limits for Congress should be imposed.

In my seven decades, I have not seen so much at stake as is at stake with the 08 elections, both for the Commander in Chief, and for Congress. Wake up, America, or there will no longer be an America as we knew her to be.

[Ravenstar]

But the Party is not limited in their contribution to their own candidates. They can run “issue” ads that say essentially vote for this guy! In the last Presidential race this resulted in George Bush spending $660 million and John Kerry $534 million for a whopping total of $1.19 Billion dollars spent in the Presidential race. The Republican Leadship Council spends the corporate dollars where they choose and in the Presidential race if they see the RINO’s lagging that is where they will throw the money.
The Conservatives often believe the liberal lamestream media that a True Conservative is unelectable. Why then is someone from the looney left electable, Cynthia McKinney, Charles Schumer, et al? RINO’s only will be permitted to garner the Republican nomination. The RLC will do everything they can to defeat someone like say...Duncan Hunter and have instead a globalist RINO.

Ravenstar

[Paperdoll]

>I am not sure that George Washington could have envisioned the world economy that exists today.<

Perhaps if we’d had more presidents like George Washington, we would not be dependent on the world economy. We would still be providing goods for money, not the worlds largest debtor that we are today.

[Paperdoll]

>they pay way too much attention to what a candidate says and whether it coincides with what they themselves believe.
That matters most with hiring professors. Elections are about choosing people and manage constrained with checks and balances. So we should look at what people can do.<

You are so right! it is not only what a politician says that should count with the electorate, but what a politician has accomplished. Anyone can say anything, but past actions leading to failures and successes are a good barometer to determine future actions. Caveat emptor.

[Marine_Uncle]

Well put. And to often some at FR get down on some demowit loney tune, and do not realize some in their party are not better. We need solid patriotic well educated leaders who are not afraid to go against the grain when required.
Few in todays world appear to have the resolve. And those that do, often are shunted. Of course that has always been the case. No different then the politics played in the world of capitalism and business sector in general. To often the wrong people end up running the show.

[ClaireSolt]

Finally, some progress. Don’t vote for lawywers.
They are just talkers.

[Marine_Uncle]

Interesting how GHB had the nerve to make a statement how the lawyers would bilk the country some time back. Then the fools elected Clinton. No response required. Just adding to your accute observance.

[xzins]

Actually, I’d prefer a real Conservative Party.

Since a majority is not required to win the presidency, it simply needs to appeal to about 33-40% of the people.

[MarkBsnr]

I’d agree with you on many of your points.

It is nobody’s business which party you belong to - let the party manage that, not the gubmint.

If you belong to more than one party at the same time, it’s the party’s business, not the gubmint.

Let the Prez be simply the majority leader in House - which is what GW and many of the founding fathers wished - which is what the Speaker could be, or else another position.

The parliamentary system is really a spectacle to see - the members actually engage each other as opposed to the snorefest that you see on CSPAN.

[The Duke]

Here is the problem with “registering” with an “entity” other than Republican -— in many states (including my own) you can only vote in the PRIMARY for candidates in the party with which you are REGISTERED...

Yep, I must agree that this *is* a problem. However, I think the Republicans are in need of some stern medicine, so maybe it's necessary for a while(?)

[davidosborne]

The “stern medicine” IMHO is what we do in the PRIMARY — not in the GENERAL election..