Are Political Parties Ruining the US?

[Lilly32]

With Elections a week away Im starting to think Political Parties are ruining this country. Hell Im starting to think Democracy doesnt even work. It seems like No one ever votes for who the best candidate is. Its "OMG that guy is a dirty Republican Im voting for the other guy" or "Hey this guy is Black and Im Black Im definitely voting for him" Then you have everyone in Congress blocking everything trying to get done just because of political party affiliation. I guarantee someone will respond with "OMG its only the Republicans" which just proves my point. If there were no political parties then people would do whats right rather than sticking to party loyalties. If a Democrat goes against the President or a Republican sides with the President its like they are traitors. Why is that? Whats wrong with doing whats right for the people not what party they represent

Shouldnt we actually have a form of government where the best candidates are in office and people in Congress work together to make the US the best in the world rather than just fight each other? A system where people vote simply because they are a Republican or a Democrat is fucking horrible and I dont understand what idiot thought it would be a good idea. Wouldnt voting for a guy because you like his viewpoint on certain issues be a better way to put people in office? I dont see what a person being a Dem or Pub has to do with how well they will lead a country.

[Blueobelisk]

Political parties is so people can get together with a similar set of ideologies and it'll be easy for them to campaign because people will sort of know what they're about and they can get funded easier.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry I forgot to ask what alternative you want to use.

[Independent voter]

Once you start looking at how you'd make changes to make things better, you'll realize it's not as easy as it looks. There are people with different viewpoints who have to feel like they are part of the system for example, how do you make all of them happy.

Every country on earth has the same problems we do.

[Strakha]

Any country that has elections on a tuesday does not care about the democratic process.

[Deleted]

Democracy is a flawed system but until we get a supreme leader that's not full of shit and indeed only thinks of the people, or an AI, it's the best system we got.

The former can never happen because Politics inherently requires someone who is a political animal in order to succeed at it, and a political animal will never be a great man/woman. And the latter is even less likely.

[Vizardlorde]

Any country that has elections on a tuesday does not care about the democratic process.

Wouldn't be a problem if they declared it a national holiday.

[Gumboy]

Political parties only serve (In the us at least) so that people have a "Sports team " to root for. In a two party system, it is virtually impossible to have a party you agree with even on the majority of issues. You will get some people saying they love the party and tout the party line no matter what, but that is generally inexperienced in life people that find no fault in there own party.

[TheGravemind]

Both political parties in the US are controlled by the same corporate cabal. If you do not understand that yet, you are not very perceptive.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Party themselves? No. The people within those parties that accept money and business deals from lobbyist? Yes.

[Strakha]

Wouldn't be a problem if they declared it a national holiday.

I honestly wonder if that would increase or decrease the voter turn out. "Yeah it's a holiday, lets get shitfaced!" nobody shows up to the booths.

[Aeno]

Parties used to be interest groups. In the name of staying relevant, they chose to take up sides on more issues, until they are what is today. There would have to be MAJOR fundamental changes in Law if that were to change (even if parties die, interest groups will grow into parties again).

[Lefeng]

Wouldn't be a problem if they declared it a national holiday.

I don't think it would make any difference. People would treat it as a vacation day and not vote. Currently your employer is obligated to let you leave work to vote without fear of retaliation.

[belfpala]

Parties used to be interest groups. In the name of staying relevant, they chose to take up sides on more issues, until they are what is today. There would have to be MAJOR fundamental changes in Law if that were to change (even if parties die, interest groups will grow into parties again).

Parties have been around since day 1 in the US. And it's been just as vicious the whole time. Washington was the only POTUS that didn't have an official party, although he supported the Federalist party mostly.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think it would make any difference. People would treat it as a vacation day and not vote. Currently your employer is obligated to let you leave work to vote without fear of retaliation.

It's mandatory to allow employees time off to vote.

[Tastyfish]

Gamergate taught me Horseshoe Theory. It's something folks should think about when they talk politics.
I think the farther you move from center the more crazy it gets.
So yea, both parties are cancerous.

[Lilly32]

Sorry I forgot to ask what alternative you want to use.

Why cant you just have 2 people who run anonymously. You never see their race, sex, or what they look like. You dont even know their political parties. All you know is where they stand on certain issues. Im going to have to use the Black vote as an example simply because it was ridiculously skewed. Since Obama won 93% of the Black vote if you didnt know the race of the people running would he still have gotten 93% of the Vote. I mean how many people voted for Obama simply because he was Black. If a Black person ran for president and he was a serial killer rapist would all the Blacks still vote for him?

If people are out voting and have no earthly idea what each candidate stands for they shouldnt even be allowed to vote. Each ballot should contain a short questionnaire where you bubble in answers based on that candidate's stance on views like abortion, gays, foreign policy, immigration. If you fail that test then your vote doesnt count. Or do we actually want idiots who dont even know why they are voting to vote?

[belfpala]

Since Obama won 93% of the Black vote if you didnt know the race of the people running would he still have gotten 93% of the Vote.

What percent of the "Black vote" did Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry get?

[Underverse]

Why cant you just have 2 people who run anonymously. You never see their race, sex, or what they look like. You dont even know their political parties. All you know is where they stand on certain issues. Im going to have to use the Black vote as an example simply because it was ridiculously skewed. Since Obama won 93% of the Black vote if you didnt know the race of the people running would he still have gotten 93% of the Vote. I mean how many people voted for Obama simply because he was Black. If a Black person ran for president and he was a serial killer rapist would all the Blacks still vote for him?

If people are out voting and have no earthly idea what each candidate stands for they shouldnt even be allowed to vote. Each ballot should contain a short questionnaire where you bubble in answers based on that candidate's stance on views like abortion, gays, foreign policy, immigration. If you fail that test then your vote doesnt count. Or do we actually want idiots who dont even know why they are voting to vote?

I agree with this, but I don't think there is an ultimately democratic cure.

[Xar226]

Well, in a sense they're hurting things. However, the underlying problem with political parties are the voters themselves, who are often unwilling to even vote much less educate themselves about their choices or the issues at hand. Half of this country are people just too damn lazy to look beyond the letter after a candidate's name. We could abolish political parties tomorrow and people would still find a way to lump candidates together. To butcher Voltaire, "if political parties did not exist, it would be necessary to invent them."

That said, I think the even larger problem is our voting system. According to Wikipedia, through a 2010 Gallup poll, about 31% of the country considers themselves Democrats, 29% Republicans. That's pretty dang even, but it also leaves the largest voting bloc of nearly 40% unaccounted for. The real power should be with the independents, since 31% who will reliably vote for the D (teehee) and 29% who will reliably vote for the R pretty much cancel each other out. Unfortunately, independents' choices are limited to bolstering one or the other. They (we?) provide the illusion of a balanced system by breaking one way or another, usually the opposite of however they broke the previous election.

Imagine how things might change if that 40% truly flexed its muscles and started electing independents. Not only would it moderate the overall political climate, but it would force both of the other parties toward the center as suddenly these people are instrumental in getting things done. Alas, with our current voting system voting for an independent who doesn't win hurts the chances of the guy you would prefer to win, and with 60% of the vote already basically automatically distributed to those guys it's too big of a risk for most to take. So they instead pick one or the other major party. Whoop-de-do.

If we switched to a system of preferential ("instant-runoff") voting, it would allow independents a serious chance at winning while still guaranteeing that if he does not, the voter's vote still goes toward his most preferred candidate. I suspect it would also allow a lot of those "declared" voters to think for themselves a bit. With a system like that, the major parties wouldn't find themselves in a position to ruin much of anything.

(Not that that is the only problem with our system, of course. I just think it would go further than any single other change toward fixing them.)

[Strakha]

What percent of the "Black vote" did Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry get?

i think bill got a lot. they always used to jokingly refer to him as the first black president, also he went on arsenio hall and played saxaphone to increase his voting outcome amongst black voters.

dude was and still is a crafty politician.

[Lilly32]

What percent of the "Black vote" did Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry get?

gonna be kinda hard to accurately gauge that. Im fairly certain far far more Blacks turned out to Vote in 2008 and 2012 just because there was a Black guy running. Trying to find the numbers now but all I seem to get is percentages. From what I have seen its still 90+% but 90% of what? I mean is it 90% of 50 million or 90% of 5 million?