Candidate in 1 party only

[lupacexi]

I was thinking of an idea.
Instead of, for example, Obama being both the Liberal and the Democrat candidate he would have to be only the Demos.
The Liberal party would have to choose someone else.
It would effectivally(sp) cut his votes in half.
Instead of 2 major and countless minor people we would have 4 major and many minor people.
At least it gets out of the 2 party slump and puts us in a 4 party slightly smaller slump.

[euphemia]

Not really sure who you are, but maybe you don't know that the two major state parties decided voting districts and make the rules for primaries and ballots and whatnot.

"We" don't get to make the rules unless "we" take over the parties. "They" have a stronghold there and will do anything to keep power. "They" can disqualify delegates for no reason and defy "their" own rules if "they" see "we" might win.

[timosman]

We should only have one party. This would reflect the reality better than any artificial introduction of more parties who would simply force people to lose their votes. With one party system everybody can cast a vote for a winning candidate.

[euphemia]

Or maybe no parties at all. Make the individual responsible for his own positions.

[timosman]

Or maybe no parties at all. Make the individual responsible for his own positions.

I am starting to miss Zippy and CPUd. When are they coming back?

[euphemia]

I am starting to miss Zippy and CPUd. When are they coming back?

You are cranky today. What's up? Why do we need political parties at all? Political parties hurt the process.

[oyarde]

I was thinking of an idea.
Instead of, for example, Obama being both the Liberal and the Democrat candidate he would have to be only the Demos.
The Liberal party would have to choose someone else.
It would effectivally(sp) cut his votes in half.
Instead of 2 major and countless minor people we would have 4 major and many minor people.
At least it gets out of the 2 party slump and puts us in a 4 party slightly smaller slump.

Sounds european kind of like the dog ball licker party and the crazy box recycler party both end up wih 5 percent of the parliment . Here just the two parties own it . You are right , it needs improved on .

[not.your.average.joe]

This discussion reminds me of one of the Liberty Reports. Of course I would recommend watching the whole thing, but if you just want to hear about the election process, start at 3:30 and watch until 7:15.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPirc0rAKaQ

[specsaregood]

You are cranky today. What's up? Why do we need political parties at all? Political parties hurt the process.

Cuz the courts decided not listing party affiliation is racist. Because evidently black people cant figure out who to vote for without them -- courts claim, not mine.

[euphemia]

That's kind of dumb, but then judges are either elected or appointed based on party.

[specsaregood]

That's kind of dumb, but then judges are either elected or appointed based in party.

its kinda racist too

[Swordsmyth]

The OP is Dead WRONG, The government has no right to restrict freedom of association, if you want to debate about putting party affiliation on the ballot then you can but I find it useful.

[Unte1976]

The OP is Dead WRONG, The government has no right to restrict freedom of association, if you want to debate about putting party affiliation on the ballot then you can but I find it useful.

*Insert THANK YOU GIF here*!
that's what i wanted to say. and that's so strange for me that nobody said it earlier!