Since we have a third party thread

[bobhikes]

I have been trying but have not been able to crack the 2 party system.

Does anyone have idea's on how to break through the monopoly. There definately seems to be a lot of disgust for the main line parties. How can we take advantage of it.

Lets throw around some Idea's and see if any are worthy

I did look at the constitution and the admentments and there is no help there.

 

[Tarheeler]

It will take a lot work to undo the status quo; our current electoral process (ie: first-past-the-post) favors a two-party system and works to keep them in place.

Any real change is going to have to start at the county and state level, and it's going to take a lot of work. The key to it all is education: People need to know that there are other ways to choose representatives and that there is more than just two ways to look things.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It will take a lot work to undo the status quo; our current electoral process (ie: first-past-the-post) favors a two-party system and works to keep them in place.

Any real change is going to have to start at the county and state level, and it's going to take a lot of work. The key to it all is education: People need to know that there are other ways to choose representatives and that there is more than just two ways to look things.

You're right on about it having to start at the county and state level. The first-past-the-post system means that a party with moderate support in only a handful of districts and none at all everywhere else will get more representation than a party that finishes a solid second or third in every district.

That's been the general trend here in Canada: third parties have started with a very strong regional focus: NDP (Saskatchewan), Bloc Quebecois (Quebec), Reform (Alberta). They all got a foothold in one province before becoming national (except for the BQ, which stayed in Quebec for obvious reasons).

In the US, some Texas Independence Party probaby has a better shot at winning seats than parties like the Greens or Libertarians whose support is spread out over the whole country.

 

[Tarheeler]

You're right on about it having to start at the county and state level. The first-past-the-post system means that a party with moderate support in only a handful of districts and none at all everywhere else will get more representation than a party that finishes a solid second or third in every district.

That's been the general trend here in Canada: third parties have started with a very strong regional focus: NDP (Saskatchewan), Bloc Quebecois (Quebec), Reform (Alberta). They all got a foothold in one province before becoming national (except for the BQ, which stayed in Quebec for obvious reasons).

In the US, some Texas Independence Party probaby has a better shot at winning seats than parties like the Greens or Libertarians whose support is spread out over the whole country.

It's more than just that for us though: Our parties don't win "seats"; they win the entire district. Even if a third party is able to win on the local level (and they sometimes do), it is extremely rare for them to be even a blip on the radar nationally.

Working on a local level means, to me at least, that we need to start shifting away from first-past-the-post elections and start implementing proportional representation and other methods like intstant runoff voting. If we can get people to get comfortable with the idea of it and they see the type of representation that is possible, we can can then move it to the state level, and then (eventually) to the national level.

 

[Iti oj]

You need to remove money and lobbying and special interest groups.

 

[bobhikes]

What about a News media that focus's on the independents. Drawing national attention like we have for the conservatives and the liberals. What would it take start one. I believe it could be sucessful.

 

[bobhikes]

For a begining maybe a Reality TV show.

 

[Revoltingest]

At large elections for representatives would allow 3rd parties more wins.
At-large - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Tarheeler]

What about a News media that focus's on the independents. Drawing national attention like we have for the conservatives and the liberals. What would it take start one. I believe it could be sucessful.

I think it would be a start, but impotent by itself. It's going to take more that just a little publicity to break up the monopoly of the two-party system.

The are a lot of people out there who already want viable third parties, and a lot more that just want real variety in their political choices. The problem is that the system itself is rigged, and the people running the show know that they really aren't answerable to the people.

 

[metis]

That's been the general trend here in Canada: third parties have started with a very strong regional focus: NDP (Saskatchewan), Bloc Quebecois (Quebec), Reform (Alberta). They all got a foothold in one province before becoming national (except for the BQ, which stayed in Quebec for obvious reasons).

Third parties in Canada and other countries that have parliamentary democracies have had more success due to the nature of that system, whereas the American presidential system makes it more difficult. With yours, even a party losing an election can still have some representation being possible in the cabinet or as part of a majority coalition, but not so in the presidential system that tends to favor winner-take-all at all levels.

 

[Tarheeler]

Third parties in Canada and other countries that have parliamentary democracies have had more success due to the nature of that system, whereas the American presidential system makes it more difficult. With yours, even a party losing an election can still have some representation being possible in the cabinet or as part of a majority coalition, but not so in the presidential system that tends to favor winner-take-all at all levels.

I think our electoral process is to blame more than our form of government; there are quite a few presidential systems that use proportional representation quite effectively, and having an elected executive can offer distinct advantages over the parliamentary system.

 

[metis]

I think our electoral process is to blame more than our form of government; there are quite a few presidential systems that use proportional representation quite effectively, and having an elected executive can offer distinct advantages over the parliamentary system.

But it even goes beyond that as much the same is found amongst the states and local communities. Neither system is perfect, and there's definitely pros and cons to each, but our presidential system hasn't been too friendly to third parties.

Myself, I prefer the parliamentary system over what we have simply because the philosophical basis and the general format makes more sense to me. This might be a good topic on a separate thread.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I think the reason why there's not enough support for third parties is that most people are content with the status quo. They don't like change, and they're quite alright just dealing with things as they are. The problem with this is that nothing is going to get done this way, it's not going to change anything. Education is the most important thing. Alot of people may not even be aware that there are third parties, and if they are, probably aren't aware what there stances are. People keep talking about change, but most aren't willing to do something to get real change. I was disappointed that Ron Paul didn't have as much support as it seemed.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

You need to remove money and lobbying and special interest groups.

This right here...I agree all the way.

Money...now....is a big issue in the electoral process.

SIDE NOTE: I don't mind the idea of a viable third party in the mix but I often wonder what would make that particular party stand out....especially stand out over time. Over time, at least from what I've seen, parties change. Could we find ourselves right back here one day asking..."How about a fourth party?".......

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

This right here...I agree all the way.

Money...now....is a big issue in the electoral process.

SIDE NOTE: I don't mind the idea of a viable third party in the mix but I often wonder what would make that particular party stand out....especially stand out over time. Over time, at least from what I've seen, parties change. Could we find ourselves right back here one day asking..."How about a fourth party?".......

I think politics needs to change, parties and systems shouldn't remain static. This is why we're here now trying to find viable ways to get more support for third parties. I'd hope that somewhere down the road we'd be discussing fourth parties.

 

[Revoltingest]

You need to remove money and lobbying and special interest groups.

This won't happen, & would be a bad idea anyway.
- Without lobbying by special interest groups, politicians would be insulated from expression of our wants.
- Money will always find a way.
So any solution shouldn't be about eliminating these influences, but rather doing a better job managing them.

People often think of "special interests" as someone else's improper desires & influence. But consider that
you're one too if you support any of: ACLU, NRA, NAACP, AMA, AARP, FFA, Cato, IJ, Greenpeace, etc, etc.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I think politics needs to change, parties and systems shouldn't remain static. This is why we're here now trying to find viable ways to get more support for third parties. I'd hope that somewhere down the road we'd be discussing fourth parties.

I completely agree. I often worry that a third and a fourth or more..in order to compete will become the status quo in order to have a voice. I'm reading up on what the Green Party is all about and I really like them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Third parties in Clegislatured other countries that have parliamentary democracies have had more success due to the nature of that system, whereas the American presidential system makes it more difficult. With yours, even a party losing an election can still have some representation being possible in the cabinet or as part of a majority coalition, but not so in the presidential system that tends to favor winner-take-all at all levels.

I was mainly thinking of elections for legislature, either Parliament or Congress. The process for both is very similar (except you have an elected Senate).

 

[bobhikes]

Parties did Change throughout the US history. It is only recently that two party system has be locked.

Federalists where the original party
Whigs existed a few elections.
Teddy Roosevelt formed the Bull Moose party.

I also think that people are ready for change but have no faith in the third parties. Media concentration can so the parties as valid alternatives. I have heard many times that voting for a third party is just throwing away your vote.

 

[Akivah]

I have been trying but have not been able to crack the 2 party system.

Does anyone have idea's on how to break through the monopoly. There definately seems to be a lot of disgust for the main line parties. How can we take advantage of it.

Lets throw around some Idea's and see if any are worthy.

I think the best chance for more parties is to split both existing parties. There is a lot of existing disagreement within both parties. Come up with a strategy to show people that more can be accomplished in small, specific parties than buried within one larger party. The Dems could split into parties for Unions, Environmentalists, and Teachers. The Reps could split into parties for Conservatives, Tea party, and Big Business. And that's just for starters. Splits could also occur around geographic issues, sex, education, etc.