Should America have more political parties?

Question

And no, I'm not talking about drinking parties. But those are fun too. 🥳

Anyways, I usually avoid political questions since I do not know much of how our system works and what I do understand makes little sense to me. And please, please, please I do not want this to turn into a political debate.

But I guess my question is why can't Democrats and Republicans take the best of both parties and meet in the middle somewhere? And I am asking for future reference. There will be a day when our current President will no longer be in office, so, please, I want to focus on possible future solutions for ALL, not just current problems and who may or may not be responsible for them.

Why does America have only Democrats and Republicans since from what I have learned in history , they never seem to get along long. It's always one side fighting against the other. Wouldn't it be better if they worked together somehow for the good of everyone instead? I know we have Independents but they don't seem to do much from what I've seen either. So what are possible solutions for America? I mean, someday it's going to be my generation running this country. What would you like us to learn? How do you want us to run it? Is our system outdated? What do you want us to change? Where do you want us to go as a Nation?

And again, please, keep your answers polite. 💖

Should America have more political parties?

Chazmatazz269 · Accepted Answer

Definitely. The two party farce exacerbates the effects of tribalism and results in more lame duck congressional hearings and less anything meaningfully productive. If the democrats were smart, they’d declare their extremist members an entirely different party. MAGA definitely has the potential to be a more centrist conservative party than their traditional republican counterparts.
I definitely consider myself more libertarian than anything, and i have for a long time. Unfortunately, the only thing the two major parties agree upon is oppressing alternative parties and candidates. Both parties have put forth candidates who have gotten fewer votes than those required for alternative candidates to get their names on primaries. As far as i’m concerned, that should be a crime. The democrats went so far as to appoint Kamala Harris WITHOUT a primary that acknowledged multiple other democrats were eligible, interested, and had voter support. That should be illegal too. The “equal representation in media” laws have only ever been used to protect democrats and republicans. The mainstream media has never given equal air time to libertarians, green party, tea party, labor party, etc. We have known for generations that the winner of any given election is the one that receives the most air time. That’s the reason that law was enacted. So why can’t most people even name other candidates, let alone speak intelligently on their platforms?
The term “uniparty” is used to describe how democripps and rebloodlicans are just opposite sides of the same coin. Part of a two-party farce designed to convince the idiots that they have some kind of choice in their governance. The argument holds merit.
Most politicians are more interested in winning and staying in power than they are interested in doing what is best for the country and its citizens. Similarly, most voters are more interested in being associated with the winners than in electing candidates who will do what is best for the country and its people.
Our days are numbered and we are doomed.
🤞🤞 Still pulling for the meteor over here.

WindAtMyBack · Accepted Answer

It doesn't really need more parties, it needs more viable parties. I don't think I've ever voted in a presidential election that didn't have at least 5-6 parties. Since not every state has the same parties, there are even more parties. If you count parties from non-presidential candidates, there are over 60 registered parties in the US.

They need to get rid of the first-past-the-post system where a plurality wins. They should go to a ranking system. That would make third parties much more viable. Another thing to realize is that there are no national elections. There are only state and local elections. States and localities can do it any way they want. There is no requirement to do first-past-the-post.

Even so, a third party candidate sometimes does pretty well in the presidential elections, and win in other elections. Bernie Sanders is an example of a third party politician for most of his career. In my lifetime, Ross Perot did the best in a presidential election. Some people thought he could have won except he dropped out of the race for a while then reentered.

There is also the primary system. The big presidential election that you hear so much about is actually a runoff election between the candidates that won the primary election. The primaries have LOTS of candidates, not just two.

A big problem in the US is that it's very large and very expensive to campaign. Presidential campaigns are costing over a billion dollars now. It's very difficult to come up with that kind of money for multiple candidates. The money goes to the most viable candidates. There is just not enough money to support several parties. So to make them viable, the finances need to change drastically.

emeraldsaphire · Accepted Answer

America has lots of parties, Libertarians, Green party, the Constitution party. And the are lots more. You could create your own party if you like. It's just no one votes for them. Typically in America people work in caucuses with in parties. Like The Freedom caucus or the justice democrats. Both of these groups have power with in the party, but you also have the neo conservatives and the neo liberals who balance things out. Ideally the democrats and the republicans compromise to give you the best of both worlds.

I also think wanting more political parties is the wrong goal, what you want is more voices. George Washington was the only independent American president and he warned about political parties. The last thing you want is the kind of democracy where instead of electing people to represent your district you vote for parties that get to pick who represents you. Countries like that have more parties, but less voices.

Ez-Bri-Z_v2 · Accepted Answer

I mean, we do have lots of political parties, the problem is that the two biggest ones have WAY more financial backing to ever be beaten in a major political race. Doesn't mean it's never happened, just less likely.

I vote for a new party in my image. We will call it the Bri-publicans. We do like you said and take the best of both worlds, but in the end, I ultimately make all the decisions based on whatever whims I have that day. The pure chaos of a devoted brat. I am sure that will go over well.

I still like the idea of a drinking party though. It's certainly more fun than anything either of those political parties in the US can deliver on.

ohsheeT · Answer

In the beginning it was a good idea to have Republicans and Democrats but they have sold out they do not run the government it's the secret societies the rich Elite that own all of the major corporations that run the country when you get elected the day you get elected you are told what to do how to do it and you'll be financially taken care of if you vote a certain way on certain things if not you will not be re-elected money starts going into your pockets the moment you going to office if you want to see something unreal look what somebody that steps into office has in their bank account before they get to Washington see how much money they have a year later two years later 3 years later in their bank accounts we need people not to sell out is what we need we need people with a backbone is what we need but it's all about greed these secret society groups not only run our government they've run other countries governments too that's how wealthy these people are they have taken over everything they want us the ones who pay for all these things happening in the world taxpayers money they want us to keep paying but they don't want us to own anything to have anything not even our voice pretty soon gag won't be because we won't be able to say what we say to this day they want to control us they want to control our money they want to control the food that way they have their thumb on us and we do what they say I don't think it's ever going to work that way it might be a good try and Americans might not wake up until the very last day but when they wake up it's going to all change we have been free for so long that's all we know and that's all we want but we want to be treated like human beings not the way we're being treated right now we don't eat real food anymore you walk into a store and you gather all the Box stuff and move it to one side of the store all the stuff that did not come from this planet and move it to the same side of the store and you got 95% of a store that is made from nothing but chemicals to kill us to keep big Pharma going making money and to destroy us we are being manipulated in so many directions and we don't have a positive voice either on Democrats or Republicans we have agreed on both sides we have puppets on both sides because just look at the bank accounts it will tell you everything but you are right we need something to happen we need change because we're headed down the wrong path and if we make it to 2030 I will be surprised because they already want to put implants chips in kids nowadays in human beings to make them do what I can already do what you already can do and that is to feel and see things before they happen they want to genetically change us and that's where it's headed God's human race is getting pushed to the side AI manipulation is on the Forefront because they want something that they can control because they know that they cannot control all of us

MisterWack · Answer

I fear that party factions leads to ignoring party controversies and conducting controversies to frame the other, when you have more parties not only is it less constrained to one particular faction, but it allows greater accountability and transparency. Along with more issues come from it.

We all know the two party system has foreign influence, corporate influence, and biases. It is a flawed system, due to being closely associated with faction partisanship.

The Two Party System is for one to be victorious over the other and hold more power than the other however never actual achieve anything that truly benefits the average American citizen.

When you increase parties, you increase representation. If one or two parties don’t hold your sentiment, then you can always vote for the third or fourth or fifth. It forces them to compete for your political positions, worldview, and aspirations as an American.
So when elected, they contribute to the good of the people who voted them in and all people to hopefully win reelection. They work with other parties to benefit the people and those other parties work with them on the framework. That should be vision of the future.

With more candidates running and multiple races everywhere, the less corporate and foreign influence can dig deep since anyone can win not just a coin flip of Red or Blue.

Maybe_Maybe_not · Answer

"Why does America have only Democrats and Republicans since from what I have learned in history?" Quoting:  "There has been speculation that a two-party system arose in the United States from early political battling between the federalists and anti-federalists in the first few decades after the ratification of the Constitution, according to several views. In addition, there has been more speculation that the winner-takes-all electoral system as well as particular state and federal laws regarding voting procedures helped to cause a two-party system."  "Wouldn't it be better if they worked together somehow for the good of everyone instead?" I heard that, initially, the plan was exactly what you said. Meaning that improvement should come from the opposition of Dems and Reps, that is, when they were similar enough, when Dems were center-left and Reps were center-right. But then, in a few decades, it seems like both parties went gradually away from center-leaning philosophy and policies, for reasons I don't really understand. As a result, what supposed to be some healthy opposition became, logically, an open conflict. And that's the extent of what I grasp. As a foreigner.

exitseven · Answer

It never was this bad until Obama became president. Democrats have gotten so crazy and with them it is their way or the highway. Look at the recent shutdown of DHS. They have caused great disruptions in many lives which will echo for years to come. All this was done so President Trump cannot deport people who are not supposed to be in the country. They entered the country without authorization which is a crime in itself. And are planning on giving them all amnesty if they ever get back in power. The November election is one of the most important elections in history. If Republicans do not win both the House and the Senate all the good work that President Trump has accomplished will come to a screeching halt.

Parties used to work together often. Now Democrats want open borders, high taxes, more regulations, high energy costs , more crime, more fentanyl deaths, and more exporting of American jobs to foreign countries.

If you are okay with all this, then stay home on Election day and let the democrats come back and take your country away from you.

MrShaun · Answer

I use to think the same thing but, in most cases, it wouldn't make sense.

The reason for two dominant parties is balance. It comes from being left-wing or right-wing.

Think about it this way: In the U. S. we are fairly heavily balanced with the Electoral College. When elections are held and electoral votes are tallied, it's not uncommon for the votes to be close. Hypothetical, lets say I was Republican. In the last election, lets say I had won the nomination to be the GOP's candidate for President. Trump, being Trump, couldn't stand not being the nominee. He then runs independently on his ultra-right-wing agenda. What do you think would happen?

He'd be giving a great gift to the left-wing Democrats. He'd split the conservative vote which would help the other side.

This is why there is only two major parties. If you were to suggest another dominant party that leaned conservative, you'd actually help the liberals -- and visa-versa.

The option to vote for more candidates comes in the primary elections where you would vote for the candidate you preferred. Then allow that candidate to campaign to win as many votes as he/she may get on their side of this two party balance.

Because of this system, I think it wise to change party affiliations from one election to the next. You study the topics and decide which candidates meet your beliefs.

With all of that said, now might be the one time that creating a third dominant party might make sense. Why? There's an extreme in the U. S. right now. Trump's GOP is highly extreme and the Democratic party is somewhat extreme on the left. If there was a party that advocated for balance and would take votes somewhat equally from both sides, you could maybe see a third party being successful.

OneViewpoint · Answer

More Political Party's and increased choice won't help. That's not the problem. The problem is billionaires and corporations can buy politicians with dark money that has been legalized by the politicians already owned by billionaires and corporations.

There are only 100 Senators, about 440 Representatives in the House, and one Executive in the presidency. That's 541 people who need to be bought to control this government and a population of 340 million people. That doesn't change if you have 2 Party's, 3, 4, or 5.

How hard do you think it is for a relatively small group of people with trillions of dollars of wealth to buy 541 greedy, ambitious, slime balls? If the 1% own the majority of the candidates across all Party's, your vote is irrelevant. Whoever you vote for, you will be voting for a candidate who is owned by the 1%. Those candidates do not work for the people. They work for the people who fill their pockets.

The system is rigged young lady.

nolabels · Answer

There are more U. S. political parties than the big two.
They've been around for a long time.
They evolve, change names, and change platforms over time.
New parties pop up and then fade away.

Unfortunately, the evolution of three or more large parties melding into two main parties is a natural progression of how voting preferences mold the system over time.

George Washington foresaw the potential problems that a mainly two-party system would cause, with him decrying that it should come about, but it has.
Sorry, George.

I don't see any way of getting it to change, but it'd surely help things to have at least one more major party.

That, term limits and no revolving door politics would go a long way in helping the U. S.

I don't see that happening any time soon.

purplepoppy · Answer

As i understand it you do but they hardly get any votes.

Here in the UK we've lots right across the spectrum from hard left to hard right and some that mix it up. In a way it's better because the two main parties don't get hijacked by extremists as in the USA.

The down side is it splits the vote a lot. With a first past the post system you could win with less than 30% of the vote effectively handing power to the minority. Normally these fringe parties did very poorly but at the minute Reform and the Greens, both lunatics are doing well.

I wouldn't be surprised if a middle ground party made up of disgruntled moderates arises soon in America

FreyaRed · Answer

Usually other smaller parties are just Trojan Horses of bigger parties. Something that happened in my country a right wing party creates a smaller party that separates and become more radical and independent since radicals have always 10-20% approval. It's like Trump and his cronies would separate from republican party and make their own party. This happens sometimes to left leaning parties like those so popular currently green parties in some EU,
I reality more parties means more colored socks for the sock puppet theater, while player's hands remain the same. There will be some small nuances, some sock will play the good another the bad cop but at the end all of the have the goal to screw up the pleb.

Tarifa · Answer

A lot can be said in favor of these claims. Diversity of opinion reflects the diversity of the population.

But in practical terms, you need a different approach. Take Spain for instance. There are two big parties, one left wing and one right wing. Since approximately 10 years, another party, close to extreme right, is taking away votes from the center right. On the other side, no less than 14 left wing parties, some moderate and some extreme left, are taking away votes from the center left. It means that none of the 2 big parties can govern alone and need to make compromises. In practical terms, it leads to a blockade.

The best system is the one they have in France. Maybe there's a similar one in other countries too. All parties can enter the election process. After the votes have been counted, there is a second vote 2 weeks later, where only the first and second contenders can take part.

RavVid · Answer

It is pretty much an Anglo thing. We seem to like two major parties whereas non English speakers like many parties that have to form coalitions to govern.

In Australia, we have tried to foster minor parties by preferential or ranked choice voting. In the Senate we have had 52 parties contesting but being Anglos we vote for the two majors mostly.

It does encourage political parties that want to party. e. g.
Sun Ripened Warm Tomato Party
Party! Party! Party!
Deadly Serious Party

The Senate candidate for the Shooters, Fishers & Farmers campaign on his ability to eat kangaroo poo.

Maybe you should start a Drunken Moose Party.

strawberryapple · Answer

America uses a winner-take- all system, and I believe that’s what’s screwing us. Many countries use a proportional system, which I think is better. I would like to see that when Congress meets it’s not just two parties fighting, but a handful of parties.
Like right now, I believe the government would be reopened if it wasn’t just two parties fighting against it.

strateguy632 · Answer

First of all "more than 2 " WAS trump! He ran independent! Until rnc' realized trump was best!

The middle? Democrats keep pulling further and further to the side! Obama -d did expel migrants but that same policy is "racist" according to democrat now.

AviatorTom · Answer

America has many political parties, but only candidates from the two major ones, Democrat and Republican, ever get elected. The others are called Minor parties.

This Wikipedia article has a list of all of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States#Politics

CaptainObivous · Answer

We do have other parties, the problem is our political system rigged by the uni-party so it's impossible for other parties to be viable. The Democratic and Republican parties have moved so far to the left and right, we really need a viable moderate 3rd party, but that will never happen as long as the uni-party controls our elections.

genericname85 · Answer

eh. i'm from a european country that has more political parties. it's not any better. yeah you have more choices and maybe you'll find a party that aligns with what you want. but they're not gonna win anyway. they'll be a side note while the big players that always win keep doing the same bullshit pretty much like dems and reps in USA.

Agape93 · Answer

We do, they just don't have as many members because most people don't know about em. The dichotomy doesn't like them having power.

Hispanic-Cool-Guy · Answer

I thought about it, no. America is already a highly developed country.

America just needs to get rid of the Democrat political party as that party clearly doesn't have America's best interest in heart.

Bklynbadboy12 · Answer

No they just need to get rid of all of these old geriatric politicians. I swear there need to be an age limit put in place

slatyb · Answer

We need a parliamentary system so we can have a vote of no confidence and call a new election.

MotherEarth2020 · Answer

I think we need a new system. Its too corrupt

driven159 · Answer

we should have no political parties they are the problems we have now they work for us not their party

Bricealan · Answer

@randomgirl42 No. Two parties are more than enough bullshit to have to listen to! 😁😁😁😁

Xawyx-2 · Answer

I think America already does have many parties, but only two big ones. The other ones are minor parties, usually unable to win the elections.

Xoirwinkan · Answer

I'm not American but I think it does. When you have a two party system or first past the post, it can feel like half the country is disenfranchised when they lost.

Dargil · Answer

No it should not. With more parties, you would never get anything done

Mike_Hum · Answer

Every time Democrats and Republicans work together it's a disaster for the average American. I want more fighting.

Alex-Snow · Answer

I would like a 3rd party that is moaderte in their stance

KostasKouvalis · Answer

We DO, they just aren't popular for some reason

noohair · Answer

That would make the US more like Europe and that is not what I would choose. Keep the flakes in cereal and not the government.

msc545 · Answer

Not without changing it to a parliamentary system. Aren't the two or three parties we have not right now crazy enough?

Pohjolan · Answer

There should be more options than just  woke insanity  Vs  pedo elitism.

foxsquirrell · Answer

I think two are enough. Two representing opposites.

ABC1x1x · Answer

No. America should have one party. The National Socialist party of America

beefcakebradybatson · Answer

YES !!! The Yankee duopoly favours the rich.

oldman26 · Answer

At least one more strong party, two more would be great

msg321 · Answer

They will never have more than two parties. It's called 'controlled democracy'.

AcidMan · Answer

They should and did in the past. But the bank of usa party will ever election if made into a political party

RingOfFire · Answer

...

Kingofkings1992 · Answer

No. We should do away with parties altogether

Staximus · Answer

I think political parties should be banned

LC75LC71 · Answer

Perot had the bast chance in '92.

Fromdusktilldawn · Answer

Definitely yes

Surely · Answer

At least one Common Sense party!

Darkest-Knight · Answer

Random for President!!

Jeff51 · Answer

No. 2 is bad enough

Jonettacali · Answer

Parties like israel? 🤣

JaredSfarra · Answer

More parties period!!!

AgentG111 · Answer

Nope!

jahaims · Answer

Duh.

fish5505_87 · Answer

Yes!

Should America have more political parties?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Should America have more political parties?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.