General Question

Chriznak's avatar

What change would you prefer in american politics?

Asked by Chriznak (50points) February 24th, 2009

would you prefer moving to a 3 party system or a no party system?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

8 Answers

peyton_farquhar's avatar

you are = you’re

Allie's avatar

If you understand the question, then just answer it. If your comprehension is that bad, you have bigger problems.

As for the question, I would prefer a no party system. I think it would be better if parties were removed from the equation and the most capable person (or person that the people believe is the most capable) should lead.

Bluefreedom's avatar

I would prefer to see honesty and genuine ethical and moralistic behavior in American politics, for a change. Could we get that to happen or is that far too much to ask for?

I’m with @Allie on the no party system. Let’s give that a whirl and see what transpires.

Jayne's avatar

The problem with a no party election is that it allows several candidates to have a legitimate chance at winning; which sounds good, except that an election with more than two candidates is mathematically unfair. The more candidates there are, the greater the chance that the person elected would have been less popular than the runner-up if they were campaigning only against one another, because candidates that do not win can still have an effect on the outcome of the election- particularly under the rules of the electoral college, wherein a third-place candidate might win one state by a small margin where the candidate who won the national popular vote won second, thereby costing him all of the electoral votes that would otherwise have been his. But even under a pure popular vote, a third candidate can take votes away from another a la Ralph Nader. Of course, this is something of a problem as it is, but with parties to give the dominant two candidates a boost, the effect is less significant. Primaries, naturally, are not fair under this model, but the differences between candidates are usually less marked and therefore the problem is less critical, even where there is more potential for unfairness.

mrswho's avatar

I think that a no party system would be ideal, but it takes the political machine to get people elected and to organize this thing we call government. A three party system wouldn’t be much better than what we have now. It would allow people to fine tune their alligences, but that’s about it. Though the partisan politics is bad because it simplifies things too much, I do like the inefficiency. We need it.

wundayatta's avatar

I don’t understand. Why is a no party system ideal. I mean theoretically, not practically. Let’s say, as a thought experiment. What do you hope to have happen that you believe might happen if there were no parties?

augustlan's avatar

The changes I would prefer have nothing to do with the number of parties that exist. I’d like to see the electoral college abolished. I’d like the ballots to have no party identification on them at all. Maybe not even the candidate’s name! Just a list of their platform positions and programs. You’d vote for each position/program you agree with, and whichever candidate most closely aligns with your preferences gets your vote. That way people would vote for the things they actually believe in, rather than letting their vote be decided by party politics or personality.

Jayne's avatar

Here here! Your platform gets my vote…what was your name again?

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther