Thoughts on the two party system vs. European parlementarism

[KurtNilsen]

Thoughts?

In my opinion the two part system will always trend towards the centre and other important blocks of the electorate will get totally cut out.

And follow up question: Will a third party alternative ever appear?

Second follow up: How can it be ensured that the will of the people better shape the actual political platform any president has to follow?

[Kamika]

1. well it depends

I honestly think the european is best. because with our system nomatter what you do 50% of the voters are pissed off..

representing democracy is best imo

[KurtNilsen]

2. I guess it is a trade off.

Having a powerful president at least helps the executive branch follow a congruent line of policies. In Norway, for instance, a minority government alternates between getting support from the right and the left and everyone is left totally confused.

[KurtNilsen]

3. No one else?

[Spider Jerusalem]

4. Personally I'd like to see the US move to parliamentary government.

It would allow for a greater range of expression of political opinion, and, with proportional representation, would ensure that ALL points of view are represented in the national legislature. And it would require coalition politics as almost a matter of course, rather than the dominant two-party system that marginalises all other viewpoints.

Also, the option of dissolving the government with a no-confidence vote is something I envy the parliamentary form of government.

The form of government which exists in America was fine, two hundred years ago. But now I think the interests of democracy would be better served by a government based upon the British/European parliamentary model rather than the republican model.

[KurtNilsen]

5. Imagine.....

The Kuchinic party winning 10 percent of the vote joining up with Sharpton with 5 percent and the major Edwards/Kerry party with 36 precent of the vote. Lots of groundwork to be done on hammering out a joint political platform. A REAL JOINT political platfrom that fairly represented every party. I think I would like it ;-)

[Spider Jerusalem]

6. I think I would, too...

but alas, for now we must play the hand we're dealt...I DO think it's about time to replace some of the US Constitution, though many or most in this country would call me mad for making such a suggestion....

[KurtNilsen]

8. No one else?

[Citizen Kang]

7. I'd prefer a European type government

Then I wouldn't constantly be voting for the lesser of two evils. Having a multi-party system would reduce the possibility of extremists taking over a major party and dominating the discourse of the country's politics ala the Republican Party today. Coalitions would have to be built and everyone's viewpoint would have to be considered, unlike today.

And here's the kicker, many, many people here on DU would not belong to the Democratic Party if there were a viable alternative (like a Green or Progressive party). It may not be a popular thing to say, but its' true.

[K-W]

9. Out system is not designed to accomidate parties well.

The basis of our system is electing people. Each election is supposed to be a race between people to get the person who most represents his constituancy.

Parties take the individual out of government. The big issues are decided on the party level and members are whipped into shape. We are voting on parties in a system designed for independent lawmakers.

We should absolutely have a representitive government and aknowledge that parties are the level of governement that matter.

[sweetheart]

10. Fixing a broken constitution

The constitution is not in power. The bill of rights has become a
joke. The separation of church and state a joke, and the people's
will, also a joke. We need a new constitution altogether.

The new one would be unicameral (1 chamber for "DEMOCRACY") It would
prohibit gerrymandering, and allow many many parties, that a coalition majority form a government.

The new constitution would revise the bill of rights in light of the
universal declaration of human rights, which are much more consistent
and modern than the nonexistant paltry rights of the christian dictatorship constitution.

The new constitution would fully outline the basis of currency, trade,
regulation of public markets, the federal reserve system and that
money and corporations are not speech, or citizens... and have no rights. Campaign finance would accordingly be included and that entire loophole closed for finance to corrupt a democratic system.

The new constitution also would clearly define the rights of the
public common regarding electronic media, and outline the statutes
that mass media cannot corrupt democracy.

The new constitution would enshrine at the outset, equal rights to
ALLL people, american and non american, gay, women, ethnic, felons,
drugs users, religious zealots, and the whole lot.

The old constitution is written by slave owners to institutionalize
slavery and repression. Of course it is off course with democracy.

It is time it was upgraded past the millenium bug.