[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

If we had more parties, how would it be any different? Wouldn't the dependent masses continue to huddle in the most secure liberal parties? Wouldn't the Libertians, Reformers, Christian Right, right-wing conservatives, et al, still be outnumbered, and wouldn't this setup conditions for a complete socialist takeover?

What we have now is the GOPs nearly completely abandoning the Conservative ideology, losing all respect for our Constitution and competing with the Democrats to grow and empower the gov't as much as possible. And, while at it, faking some huge disagreements with their fellow Dems, claiming 'conservatism' for themselves and though their sheer well-funded weight, preventing any true freedom or Constitution-loving voice from being heard.

Several viable political groups would facilitate debate and would give the people the ability to more closely align themselves with the groups that best represent their view. The fact that 50% of our electorate doesn't vote could mean that many of those 50% can't find anyone to represent them or can't even imagine any alternative to the ever-growing daddy-knows-best state. I and many people that I know can't identify with either of these two political Mafias. I found a presidential candidate to vote for last time around but I knew he would not win long before the election started. Most of those who knew didn't waste their time.

Would it be 'different' if there were more political parties? Of course it would. The first visible difference: we would no longer have this ideological monopoly that suffocates most original political thought. How many original political thinkers are alive and producing today?

Would it be better? I personally don't know but enquiring minds would very much like to.

[Jim Robinson]

Well there is absolutely nothing stopping anyone from creating a viable third or fourth or fifth party. All you have to do is come up with the greatest idea since sliced bread and then convince millions of people to abandon their old "mafia" parties and join up. Nothing to it. You'll have majority control over the Senate in no time and then you can change all the rules.

[Timesink]

Would it be 'different' if there were more political parties? Of course it would. [...] Would it be better? I personally don't know but enquiring minds would very much like to.

I do know. It would not be better. See my response #865. The system set up by our Constitution pretty much demands a two-party power struggle to operate properly. The addition of truly powerful third, fourth or fifth parties would throw the entire government into disarray and gridlock. (Not that gridlock is always bad, but gridlock always IS bad.)

The first visible difference: we would no longer have this ideological monopoly that suffocates most original political thought. How many original political thinkers are alive and producing today?

A good point, but we have the First Amendment. There is no need for full national party structures to exist in order for people to come up with and distribute their political ideas. If they're any good, their ideas WILL be noticed. (For example, the Libertarians have a pretty decent national structure to get their ideas out, but 98% of the country still thinks their ideas are nuts when they are presented with them.)

[jpsb]

"The fact that 50% of our electorate doesn't vote"

50% of those eligible to register to vote register. Of those registered voters 50% vote. So the real is number is 25%. Which means that if you can get 13% of the adults in this country to vote for you, you get elected.