American election: two party system

[PAB]

Its no secret that their is a vacuum in american politics of a left wing party or a party that represent ordinary working americans.

The UK had a similar set up prior to the organisation of the Labour representative committee (lrc), in the beginning of the 20th century, which later formed the Labour Party. Before the labour party there existed the liberals and conservatives , two parties that represented the rich.

So -

is it possible, desirable or likely that america could form a mass labour party ?

The video below puts the issue very well

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

I love the video. It articulates what I have been saying about the two party system in a far better way than I ever could.

I just want to point out that there are more than two parties in the U.S. However, you would not know it from watching the media. Most citizens of the U.S. also think voting third party is a waste of a vote, when they should think that voting for the lesser of the two evils is the actual waste of a vote.

The other parties in the U.S. also do not do themselves a favor by, usually, only running for the presidency. They need to start smaller and run for mayor, governor, and state senate. After they establish themselves in those areas, they could start running for congress and the presidency.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

One of the things I never understood is why Ralph Nader wasted his time running for president - he should have (and still should) run for governor in whichever state he resides.

That way he'd have a real platform of how his championing of citizens' causes/rights worked in real politics to act as a springboard for the presidency.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

For those that are interested

 

[nemesiss]

apparently the american election is actually a 3 party system, where the 3rd party is so vastly overshadow that no one hears of it.

to me this system looks like picking between the lesser of 2 evils.
not sure how much worse it is compaired to the system here in holland, where we have to pick between 20 parties.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

Video Clip (10 seconds - 17 seconds)............. Priceless.

And I'm not talking about the text portion (focus on the (intended?) symbolism of the party symbols) . Although they could go together. Interesting advertising.... If it was actually planned that way. :lol:

 

[Prolescum]

I agree with HWIN and Dragan, that's always confused me a bit too. Part of the "I want it, and I want it now!" culture?




Damn you Gordon Gecko, damn you all to hell!!

 

[Reignman]

Not to mention, what ever party isn't in power, goes out of it's way to undermine the other party knowing the party in power is going to get all the blame. The sheople are dumb like that. In other words, you don't actually have to accomplish anything to get elected anymore, just make sure the other side doesn't get anything done and the frustrated people will just put you back in power.

 

[IBSpify]

If every "lesser of two evils" vote went to a third party candidate instead, then we would not be in a two party system.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

If every "lesser of two evils" vote went to a third party candidate instead, then we would not be in a two party system.

I watched the third party candidate debates last night and a couple of things struck me (It has to be a cultural thing?)

1. It seems in the States (can't really speak for the other nations) that the selection process fro President is largely a popularity contest with a very large charismatic factor imbedded into the "Who We Vote For" selection process. I think a social psychologist would have a field day analyzing the candidates on something related to "Perceived Confidence" and charisma. It's almost like our culture puts a larger weight on these characteristics when deciding on who to vote for.

2. Is this the litmus test that we as a nation really want to use to pick who we want to lead this country. I often wonder if all of the 'cultural' biases that we place on mate selection also carry some significance when we select our leaders. Do certain professions attract these types of personalities?

These are rhetorical questions and I'm only listing them as a possible 'think' discussion.

It appears, at least on the surface, that the (American Idol syndrome) has literally infested today's youth. It almost as if we have been conditioned to select Charisma over thinking and rationality. When will the public finally see the difference? Maybe this is a point that the third parties should focus on?

Perhaps our society is too blinded by the sex, greed, say anything to get another into the sack type of mentality that appears to go hand in hand with Authoritarian types of movements (Republican and Democratic selections). It appears that substance has long left the American culture, is this a point worth discussing in American politics?

Just for the record it appears the State in which I reside is leaning toward one candidate in this years election. With the electoral college type of system that is employed in the States it appears it will make my selection of a third party candidate more easy to stomach.

Cheers........

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

I don't think I have ever witnessed a Presidential Election where the 'burden of proof' has been so spun and manipulated. Thanks 24 Hour News Cycle.....

No wonder the American Science Educational program is so fucked up.

It appears that one form of 'burden of proof' is more effective in life, 'politics and business' (where it is effectively reversed?)........ And a second more accurate 'burden of proof' is used for Science related endeavors?

Cheers