[deputy125]

i'm still a bit confused on his matter---and i know it goes back in history to the founding of this Country, but somebody please explain to me how a two-party system became so entrenched in our political process........
I know that it just about always has seemed that way but why?
All else bein' equal or un-equal, how can just two parties have such a hold on this Country and ever hope to represent the people?

Its not clear cut/nite and day politics on the issues. There is so much over-lap in the two parties on some issues that the area becomes gray and inessence--no one or anyone gets proper representation when these two parties have the middle round so muddied up. Only the extreme fringe elements seem to garner much attention as to a distinctive difference in the two parties.

Teddy Roosvelt made a good run on the progressive(bull moose) party and had an extreme impact on the scene for a few years but it died with TR-----but it showed it can happen and a difference can be made---voices can be heard. But it soon fell back into the two party system and the us against them mentality of politics again.

 

[sheepdog]

It started in the Garden of Eden, Deputy125, and I'm being serious....Our Creator made Adam and Eve and told them how to live, what to do and one thing not to do...when they disobeyed, man's government began...instead of letting Him rule us, we wanted to decide for ourselves what was right and wrong...and the rest is history...instead of having a perfect Father care for and provide and protect...man has come up with plan after plan...gov't after gov't...trying to find something that would work...and still let him do what he wants...kings, democracy, a republic....some work better than others but none works as good as just obeying our Creator...who cares for us better than we can EVER care for ourselves...and we have wars and crime and folks like you and me who have tried to clean up the mess...we're outa control and in a spin...any name you give a group who believe one way makes not much difference...majority rule would be fairer...but we vote and make clear that 85% of the people want it this way...then some judge steps in and dictates that it'll be the way the 15% want it...so that doesn't work...we can have a third, fourth, fifth party...we're still men and we still don't know what's best for ourselves....we can do some good and then hit a brick wall.....I'll vote this time, and next, and as long as I can...but what I really want is a good King who has all the knowledge and understanding, who really cares for us unselfishly, and who will see to it (having all the power there is) that everyone always gets a fair shake and then some.....He's coming back to give us the best government...absolute...from the top down, for our good...and there is my hope......

Till then, all we can do is take our beliefs and opinions and try to put them across and get our way....which is what we all do....and we all want different things....and we won't agree on everything...and we will squabble and won't fight fair....and here we are.......majority rule doesn't rule well, either...
When our forefathers spoke of our unalienable rights, they were speaking of what God says we have and can do....and someone's always trying to take those rights away...to have power and control over us...not for our good but for their own selfish purposes....I remember a party called the Whigs...in the dim fog of American History....there were others...out for their own good instead of the good of all....man doesn't do that well....it's hard to consider others every time...we're mostly selfish....

Bottom line...man is not qualified to govern himself...we need help...who better than the Creator to govern us? Rev 21 gives me hope....till then, I wait and do what I can, expecting little change for the good no matter what party is in office....

 

[gunman42782]

Outstanding post, Sheepdog! You said it much better than I could have, and I agree 100%!

 

[Terry_P]

I think our system encourages a two party system. The electorial college with it's winner take all on a state by state basis and a majority winner means a candidate needs to be viable in all (or at least a majority of) states. That requires considerable resources and if no one receives a majority then the election goes to the house to decide.

The real question is how did we get away from our core values as a nation? I think the answer lies in the old joke: What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean................................... A good start.

 

[deputy125]

i'd like to see a strong 3rd party-----not so much as a presidency, but as members of the house and senate. Let's see how fast the demos and republicans try to suck up and get their votes on some cruical nail bite'er leglislation............

 

[sheepdog]

I'd like to see signed contracts signed by Senator so and so with his constituants that spells out what he will support and what he will oppose....before the election...so that he'd be accountable and could be FIRED...what is there about today's politicians that they flip-flop so much?????

 

[Snuffy]

I also think that their retirement funds should go to the national debt and no one gets paid until its not a debt any more. Its not going to happen but I can dream, also while I am dreaming the voters should have a say as to if they should get a raise or not.

 

[b.roberts]

Third parties don't work in our political system. All they do is take votes away from the major party candidate that they are closest to. With very few exceptions voting for a third party helps defeat that which is most important to you politically. Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose party caused the defeat of the Republican, who happenned to be TR's vice-president. Bad move in an otherwise admirable man.