Simple question. Will a third or even fourth political party ever break the two party dominance that is destroying the country?

[Twilight Hue]

I want to see it happen before I die.

Anyone hopeful or confident we will see the two party system dominance destroyed once and for all anytime soon , or will we be in a perpetual two party hell until the country implodes under the weight of division fulfilling the saying, "Divided we fall"?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There are many countries with "a third or even fourth political party" that are arguably in worse shape. Casting leading questions as "simple" is either dishonest, ignorant, or both.

 

[Twilight Hue]

There are many countries with "a third or even fourth political party" that are arguably in worse shape. Casting leading questions as "simple" is either dishonest, ignorant, or both.

Regardless of perceived outcomes, I think an odd number of parties would be more preferential than one single centralized one.

 

[Eddi]

Seems to me the more parties the better:

Two parties better than one

Three parties better than two

Etc

Although yes, I think a system could get confusing if it had a stupid number of only tiny parties

What would such a number be?

I don't know

And of course there is a difference between having lots of parties and having lots of parties that ever win any measure of representation

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Seems to me the more parties the better:

North Korea Bad

United States Better​

Mexico Much Better​

Israel Much Much Better​

Just brilliant ...

 

[Eddi]

North Korea Bad

United States Better​

Mexico Much Better​

Israel Much Much Better​

Just brilliant ...

I think that USA has a more healthy political system than North Korea

And that Mexico and Israel both benefit from not being stuck in a two party system the way the USA (and UK) are...........

 

[The Hammer]

Simple question. Will a third or even fourth political party ever break the two party dominance that is destroying the country?



Nope

 

[Eddi]

Nope

Why not?

And would you like that to happen??????

 

[F1fan]

I want to see it happen before I die.

Anyone hopeful or confident we will see the two party system dominance destroyed once and for all anytime soon , or will we be in a perpetual two party hell until the country implodes under the weight of division fulfilling the saying, "Divided we fall"?

If two parties are destroying the country then more will destroy it faster.

Instead of creating new parties why not improve the existing ones?

 

[Twilight Hue]

If two parties are destroying the country then more will destroy it faster.

Instead of creating new parties why not improve the existing ones?

Maybe it's more of a systemic issue than a party issue special interest and pay for vote schemes involving unions come to mind.

Remove those perhaps in lieu of party reform would be a better choice?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Simply vote for the more decent person.

 

[Quintessence]

If two parties are destroying the country then more will destroy it faster.

Instead of creating new parties why not improve the existing ones?

Yeah, I'd prefer this. I used to be able to vote for candidates from either party (and did... back when I first came of voting age). National voting reform to force ranked choice voting nationwide and eliminate the dumb electoral college is the dream (bonus points for term limits at all levels of government), but simply won't happen unless there's a significant revolt or revolution here.

 

[Balthazzar]

I want to see it happen before I die.

Anyone hopeful or confident we will see the two party system dominance destroyed once and for all anytime soon , or will we be in a perpetual two party hell until the country implodes under the weight of division fulfilling the saying, "Divided we fall"?

That depends on ability. I don't mind the two party system as this helps balance the weights, but sometimes we end up in grid lock and others too much off kilter. It's a rare treat to find cooperation and understanding between them.

 

[Revoltingest]

The question is likely...
When?
Forever is a long time.

 

[Balthazzar]

If two parties are destroying the country then more will destroy it faster.

Instead of creating new parties why not improve the existing ones?

Or better yet why not do all three? Improvements are warranted anyway, and adding a party set up to improve government functions may in fact improve the pool from whence we choose our representatives.

 

[F1fan]

Or better yet why not do all three? Improvements are warranted anyway, and adding a party set up to improve government functions may in fact improve the pool from whence we choose our representatives.

Well, this would all begin with massive election campaign reform. Get money out of politics. Get rids of pacs. Make fund raising a system that shares the money raised. Issue local, state, and federal packets or programs that fewature all relevant candidates and their platforms. Limit campaigning time frames. The 2 year presidential cycle is absurd. Simplify the system, and do ranked choice voting. Make it cheaper, make it faster, make it more interesting, let the rich and special interests sit on the sidelines and be just like any ordinary citizen, meaning no more Citizens United.

Get the voters to support all that, and it's a start.

 

[Balthazzar]

Well, this would all begin with massive election campaign reform. Get money out of politics. Get rids of pacs. Make fund raising a system that shares the money raised. Issue local, state, and federal packets or programs that fewature all relevant candidates and their platforms. Limit campaigning time frames. The 2 year presidential cycle is absurd. Simplify the system, and do ranked choice voting. Make it cheaper, make it faster, make it more interesting, let the rich and special interests sit on the sidelines and be just like any ordinary citizen, meaning no more Citizens United.

Get the voters to support all that, and it's a start.

Massive campaigns while getting money out of politics and utilizing a fundraising system to share what money? Are we speaking about individual donations? If so, why should anyone contribute? What? Based on an ideal of a new un-tested system of government? How are we to understand our representatives without due process? Also, it takes time to establish an ability that isn't riddled with skeletons and wet mud. In case you haven't noticed, a favored past time in America is digging up dirt and bones. It takes money to campaign and if you don't have a name able to be trusted or considered, then why would anyone donate to a cause they know nothing about, not to mention the presence of bones and mud subject to inquiring and concerned minds? My suggestion is to first create an honorable name, and a reputable family. If we truly wish to successfully contend in the larger arena of politics, these are a standard prerequisite.

 

[crossfire]

I want to see it happen before I die.

Anyone hopeful or confident we will see the two party system dominance destroyed once and for all anytime soon , or will we be in a perpetual two party hell until the country implodes under the weight of division fulfilling the saying, "Divided we fall"?

It can happen if the voters quit believing the swill parroted by the neoliberal uniparty: "If you vote for a third party, you are throwing away your vote." If voters actually voted for their own personally held political values instead of what the DNC and RNC "selects" for us, then one might expect more coalition building instead of polarizing partisanship. The RNC and DNC depend on polarizing partisanship in order to keep voters from wandering off the reservation and joining third parties.

 

[tytlyf]

OP supports the Republican party which is responsible for keeping money IN politics and doing everything they can to prevent change.
If you want change to happen, you're gonna have to stop supporting Republicans.
It's a corporate party that relies on corporate dark money that they put into place.
OP even mentioned he disliked unions, which is a corporate republican talking point.
Why do you support corporations instead of workers OP?
You're the problem.

 

[Watchmen]

Regardless of perceived outcomes, I think an odd number of parties would be more preferential than one single centralized one.

Why?