why are there not 5 parties

[scandinaviany3]

Looking into Article II Section 1 its clear the constitution was ammended to reflect the capability of 5 candidates or 5 parties to run for president. (see at the bottom of this post)

So why are not 5 candidates debating every year?

Honestly the 5 Major parties exist today looking at ballot access to show this

1) Democrats
2) Republicans
3) Libertarians
4) Nader + Greens + Progressive Reform
5) Constitution Party + AIP + Conserv. Reform + other independent parties

Of note Nader is a 74 year old independent but he was a green supporter and was supported by the reform party. One could see him and Jesse Ventura pulling together that group just like paul is trying to with his movement in the republicans for the end of his career.

If Nader, greens, progressive reforms and CP, AIP, Conservative reforms + other indepedents would reform their groups under 2 whole banners the arguement would be strong that the 5 parties exist today.

How then would someone deny the right of these 5 parties to have equal chances to run for office of the president?


Article II

Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:

Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice President.

[nate895]

I think we should amend the Constitution to merely require a plurality in the electoral college. Also, I think proportional allocation of electors and Representatives should be done at the state level. That is the best way to see a multi-party system emerge. The only thing a third party can do in the present system is to hope to replace the party that it is more closely aligned with.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

Constitution? What's that?

[newyearsrevolution08]

why not 10 parties while we are at it?

hell we can have 20 parties who can all interpret the constitution so it works how they want it to as well.

[nate895]

why not 10 parties while we are at it?

hell we can have 20 parties who can all interpret the constitution so it works how they want it to as well.

If they can get the votes, why not? We should be able to win in the marketplace of ideas, at least on the Federal level.

[Rhys]

all it says is the top five winners will be considered for a tie. It says NOTHING at all about parties or how many there should be.

[scandinaviany3]

I think we should amend the Constitution to merely require a plurality in the electoral college. Also, I think proportional allocation of electors and Representatives should be done at the state level. That is the best way to see a multi-party system emerge. The only thing a third party can do in the present system is to hope to replace the party that it is more closely aligned with.

good point there isnt a requirement just open to plurality

[newyearsrevolution08]

My point which I think was lost in the "i'm right, you are wrong" thinking was this though.

There should not be MANY PARTIES trying to figure out what the constitution stands for though. There is just one constitution and we really only need ONE PARTY to make sure the constitution is upheld.

What is the point of a multi-party system if they all followed the same constitution? I don't see any point at all actually.

[AJ Antimony]

The Constitution isn't the problem, it's the people

[nate895]

My point which I think was lost in the "i'm right, you are wrong" thinking was this though.

There should not be MANY PARTIES trying to figure out what the constitution stands for though. There is just one constitution and we really only need ONE PARTY to make sure the constitution is upheld.

What is the point of a multi-party system if they all followed the same constitution? I don't see any point at all actually.

How we implement it, as well as state policy. One party might believe we should use the power to declare war absolutely only when attacked, another might believe that we should use it to preempt known attacks as well, and another party might believe we should use to intervene in favor of allies.

Also, under our present system, a state could adopt socialist policies outside of the federal government, They could also favor or not favor abortion, an other social policies on the state level.