• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How the Left Created Trump

SheWolf said:
Discussing what's best for Americans versus what's best for a two party system is a different discussion. Obstructionism is what is best in a two party system. Gerrymandering, etc.
Click to expand...

The two party system derives from the structure of our government. The House of Representatives would have to abandon single member districts and move to proportional representation by state.
 
Jack Hays said:
Single member districts incentivize parties that are broad coalitions. The requirement for breadth almost always limits the space available to two.
Click to expand...

Back in the 1930's and 40's most minor or third parties didn't contest for the presidency, they concentrated on state and local races along with the House of Representatives. In fact 74th session there were 10 representatives from minor parties, in the 75th 13, from there it went down to 4, up to 6, down to 4 then 2. In the 1951-53 session there were two.

But for some reason, third parties or minor parties stopped contesting house races. It isn't that it can't be done, it just isn't done anymore. They concentrate on the presidency. There was a time my tiny reform party back in the 1990's had elected more than one hundred state representatives and of course, one governor. But third parties like the Green Party and Libertarian don't run anyone for state representative or senate.

But if any third party is to become viable at the national level, it needs to start out at the grass roots level. It can be done, history has proven that.
 
SheWolf said:
Discussing what's best for Americans versus what's best for a two party system is a different discussion. Obstructionism is what is best in a two party system. Gerrymandering, etc.
Click to expand...

there is nothing worse than having our representatives choose their voters instead of the voters choosing their representatives. I am 100% against gerrymandering. Once the district was drawn in my state and the one I am in, I could tell you not only who was going to win the next election before the first vote was cast, but who would win the next five elections. That was a done deal.
 
Jack Hays said:
I suspect the GOP is willing to forgive the middle finger in exchange for their House & Senate majorities.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

:agree: And choosing Reince Priebus as his Chief of Staff is one of the best picks he could have made, IMO. Trump is a businessman, but I think he is realizing he is going to have to deal with politicians on a different level than he ever has before, and Priebus knows how those games are played. :thumbs:
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

:agree: And choosing Reince Priebus as his Chief of Staff is one of the best picks he could have made, IMO. Trump is a businessman, but I think he is realizing he is going to have to deal with politicians on a different level than he ever has before, and Priebus knows how those games are played. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Greetings, Polgara.:2wave:

You have it right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom