Are Political Parties Ruining the US?

[belfpala]

I know how to use the ' key. I just dont use it because its a pain in the ass to use and the words are easily understood without it. At least I know the difference between their, they're, and there, as well as waste and waist.

Moving your right pinky finger is a pain in the ass? Cool. Let's raid sometime.

[anakin57]

the two we have in power right now definitely are IMO

[Wildtree]

Are political parties ruining the country?
No, not really...

It's the people, not the parties.

How's the expression going? Hate the player, not the game?

The game is politics, the players are the people.
You get what you ask for. Congress is but a reflection of what you created. You vote for these people. They did not take capitol hill by force.
Or worse, you don't vote at all.. That's the worst atrocity in that regard.
Result.. Two party system...
And if you believe that these two parties are really that divided, how they are portrait in public, you're quite naive.
Remember.... crows do not pick out crow’s eyes... That's another applicable expression.

The blame lies, and remains with the people.
Force the change, by voting accordingly.
There's very little hope to get a change through. Not with the cattle that follows both bulls (parties) already blindly. It's the independent and non-voters that have to set the exclamation mark. Get a third party into this system and the two party gridlock falls apart.

[petej0]

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.

We dont have a democracy though, we have a representative republic.

[Kraenen]

@Wildtree On that note someone could use the example of obama convincing everyone he's a real lefty lib who's gonna change the way washington works, then he gets into office and is more of a conservative/moderate. In this way there's something in the system that makes candidates you vote for conform to power. Why wouldn't this work the same way with a third-party candidate?

[Fahrenheit]

Are political parties ruining the country?
No, not really...

It's the people, not the parties.

How's the expression going? Hate the player, not the game?

The game is politics, the players are the people.
You get what you ask for. Congress is but a reflection of what you created. You vote for these people. They did not take capitol hill by force.
Or worse, you don't vote at all.. That's the worst atrocity in that regard.
Result.. Two party system...
And if you believe that these two parties are really that divided, how they are portrait in public, you're quite naive.
Remember.... crows do not pick out crow’s eyes... That's another applicable expression.

The blame lies, and remains with the people.
Force the change, by voting accordingly.
There's very little hope to get a change through. Not with the cattle that follows both bulls (parties) already blindly. It's the independent and non-voters that have to set the exclamation mark. Get a third party into this system and the two party gridlock falls apart.

It's hate the game, not the player.

[Kraenen]

We dont have a democracy though, we have a representative republic.

"Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens are meant to participate equally – either directly or, through elected representatives, indirectly – in the proposal, development and establishment of the laws by which their society is run." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy . Scroll down to section 4 "Types" and under "Variants" you'll see "Republic".

[petej0]

"Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens are meant to participate equally – either directly or, through elected representatives, indirectly – in the proposal, development and establishment of the laws by which their society is run." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy . Scroll down to section 4 "Types" and under "Variants" you'll see "Republic".

While we are quoting from wiki

A republic is a form of government in which power resides in the people,[1] and the government is ruled by elected leaders run according to law (from Latin: res publica), rather than inherited or appointed (such as through inheritance or divine mandate).

Representative democracy involves the election of government officials by the people being represented. If the head of state is also democratically elected then it is called a democratic republic.

So it isnt either or, but some of each.

In contemporary usage, the term democracy refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative.[85] The term republic has many different meanings, but today often refers to a representative democracy with an elected head of state, such as a president, serving for a limited term, in contrast to states with a hereditary monarch as a head of state, even if these states also are representative democracies with an elected or appointed head of government such as a prime minister.[86]

The Founding Fathers of the United States rarely praised and often criticised democracy, which in their time tended to specifically mean direct democracy, often without the protection of a Constitution enshrining basic rights; James Madison argued, especially in The Federalist No. 10, that what distinguished a democracy from a republic was that the former became weaker as it got larger and suffered more violently from the effects of faction, whereas a republic could get stronger as it got larger and combats faction by its very structure.

What was critical to American values, John Adams insisted,[87] was that the government be "bound by fixed laws, which the people have a voice in making, and a right to defend." As Benjamin Franklin was exiting after writing the U.S. constitution, a woman asked him "Well, Doctor, what have we got—a republic or a monarchy?". He replied "A republic—if you can keep it."[88]

[Wildtree]

It's hate the game, not the player.

absolutely...
But the meaning of the expression is, as I worded it
It's - the original wording - an example of reverse logic on purpose.

You're caught cheating, violation of sportsmanship... your response, don't hate the player, hate the game.

[Kraenen]

While we are quoting from wiki

So it isnt either or, but some of each.

Some of each what? A republic is a subset of democracy. Democracy is direct or representative, republic is representative and fits the conditions for democracy.

A republic is a form of government in which power resides in the people,[1] and the government is ruled by elected leaders run according to law (from Latin: res publica), rather than inherited or appointed (such as through inheritance or divine mandate).

This fits with indirect/representative democracy

Representative democracy involves the election of government officials by the people being represented. If the head of state is also democratically elected then it is called a democratic republic.

It's not really a dychotomy - it's a subset. I couldn't really imagine a republic where representatives weren't voted in - that would be something like monarchy or aristocracy and so on, which wiki notes in distinction to a republic.

[Kellhound]

Some of each what? A republic is a subset of democracy. Democracy is direct or representative, republic is representative and fits the conditions for democracy.


This fits with indirect/representative democracy



It's not really a dychotomy - it's a subset. I couldn't really imagine a republic where representatives weren't voted in - that would be something like monarchy or aristocracy and so on, which wiki notes in distinction to a republic.

What really makes things odd is the US voter does not actually elect the President.

[schwarzkopf]

What is ruining the US is the loss of it's core ideals of capitalism and freedom.

They are being replaced with monopoly via mega-corps and control via fear.

No - political parties were fine 50 years ago, they can be fine now.

What isn't fine is the government being owned by monopolies.

- - - Updated - - -

What really makes things odd is the US voter does not actually elect the President.

That isn't really odd - barely any functional democracy elects their functional leader through popular vote. The Westminster system elects representatives to govern.

What is odd with the US system is that those representatives don't elect the president

[Kellhound]

What is ruining the US is the loss of it's core ideals of capitalism and freedom.

They are being replaced with monopoly via mega-corps and control via fear.

No - political parties were fine 50 years ago, they can be fine now.

What isn't fine is the government being owned by monopolies.

- - - Updated - - -



That isn't really odd - barely any functional democracy elects their functional leader through popular vote. The Westminster system elects representatives to govern.

What is odd with the US system is that those representatives don't elect the president

It is odd in the sense that we like to claim we elect out President when we actually do not.
Thank god our representatives do not elect the President though.

[GreatOak]

I think so, but they're not the only reason why. Strangely enough I agree with Federalist 10 and most it's critics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._10

[Belize]

Considering politics have always been shit... Not sure what there is to ruin...

[ItachiZaku]

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

Don't forget all of the white shaming that got Obama elected. Mind you, he was the better candidate, but he only actually won because he was black. Make no mistake.

Political parties do ruin everything. It is exactly as you describe it. Even if they like someone in the opposite party, they won't get the vote, since they fear that guy would party vote more than not.

[BLCalliente]

Polls are open from 7AM to 9PM there is no excuse for 99.99% of the people to not go vote. You dont need to be off work. Unless you work from 7AM to 9PM (which is hardly anyone, you can go before or after work

Uhhh, no.

Conservatives have been successfully campaigning to get the polls closed earlier in a lot of places, in order to stop the people who have shit jobs from voting.

[Zecora]

Are Political Parties Ruining the US?

Short answer: Yes.

Slightly longer answer: Yes, because both the Dems and Reps (the only parties that have a chance to win an election at current in the US) are solidly on the side of the wealthiest people, the largest corporations and the special interest groups with the most resources. Seemingly, no emphasis is placed on making the country better for the average citizen. A country is best judged by how it treats its weakest members, and in this, the US is sadly lacking in every way.

[Chain Chungus]

Partisan politics are the virus of our political system. It will never heal as long as parties exist.

[Azrile]

One mistake you all are making is that you think it is worse now than it used to be. Our country has always been like this ( well maybe not for the first 10 years or so). But ´back in the day´ they used to actual duel and kill each other.

And if you think money controls politicians any more than it used to....check out the 40 years before slavery was abolished, or the 10 years before child labor was made illegal. Big money was able to fend off both of those things for a long time by buying politicians.

It looks a little different now because we have TV and can see more of it.. but politics have always been like this.