After finding myself outside the two mainstream parties these days I believe it's time we seriously look at either allowing ALL parties to be involved in all political races or ban political parties altogether.
Imagine if we had NO political parties, *gasp!* you'd have to actually know what those running stood for and they would in turn have to say "something" of value.
Imagine if Bush and Kerry had no parties and they were on even ground with Michael Peroutka, Michael Badnarik, Ralph Nader and the others. Holy Crap!, those two would have to stand up and say something of value besides "my opponent is a dumb ass" speeches we hear everyday, or Kerry's famous "I have a plan to fix that" yet no plan has ever surfaced.
I thought this a perfect time to see what the people think. Since we'll never know what the two candidates honestly think.
You're 100% correct in stating that the current system is a joke. The two parties do nothing to address issues, but just attack each other. There is much more talent out there, just take a look at the following link:
http://jivemagazine.com/article.php?pid=2656
Agree or disagree w/ Michael Badnarik, at least he actually answers the questions.
Easier access to the ballot may be our answer, or maybe it's a new voting system such as IRV.
Posted by: michael at October 31, 2004 11:20 AMWell a big part of the problem is that the media promotes the 2 party system and eveyrone is convinced that if you vote for a third party you're wasting your vote. What an idiotic concept! How do you "Waste" a vote? A vote is you stating your opinion!
Posted by: skywalker at October 31, 2004 11:42 AM"...Kerry's famous "I have a plan to fix that" yet no plan has ever surfaced."
Well, you do have to give the guy credit. I mean, even though he doesn't actually *give* a plan...he *does* give out his website address all the time because that's where his plan is suppossed to be. And, as we all know...EVERYONE has access to a computer and the internet, right? So looking things up on his website should be of no problem to anyone especially for the poor (who can't afford a computer), senior citizens and people who live out in the boonies where it usually costs you your first born to get the internet.
Posted by: mrs. muddy at October 31, 2004 09:58 PMa buddy of mine can't afford the internet...he goes to the library to use it.
Posted by: skywalker at November 1, 2004 12:24 AMThat is a choice - and a wise one...but not exactly my point.
Posted by: mrs. muddy at November 1, 2004 01:02 AMdont confuse kerry with schwarznegger. john kerry has no plan? i just went to his website for the first time and in the left margin it clearly says "plan for america" and list his objectives for certain issues.
when schwarznegger ran for govenor, his platform was "vote for me im manly". his main argument for how he would fix the budget was, "to cut government spending and waste". wow thats original. 6 months later he puts nearly 20 billion worth of bonds on the ballot to finance the debt.
getting back on issue, YES the 2 party system needs to die. its leads to sheepish people that are forced to swallow big horse [$h!t] pills. i would love it if one day a landside victory would be 23%. however with the electoral college and the power the 2 parties share.... it will be a long time before they give it up without killing every attempt for alternate parties.
Posted by: mooseboy84 at November 2, 2004 11:48 AM"i just went to his website for the first time and in the left margin it clearly says "plan for america" and list his objectives for certain issues."
Really? Hmmmm....I must have went to the wrong official website for them because I saw nothing that was "clear". And I went to it last night *and* just now. But, hey, I guess that's just me.
Posted by: mrs. muddy at November 2, 2004 12:55 PMI think there should be a law regulating all political Ads that requires the candidate to use their own voice in all commercials. No more high priced hollywood narrators, female narrators for male candidates, emotional narration, etc... I want to hear their own words in their own voice. I think this would also lead to less negative ads - since it wouldnt sound so good coming right from the opponents mouth. Negative ads would be exposed for the bitterness that they are.
Posted by: bennyhill1978 at November 2, 2004 04:30 PMBenny: I don't because that's a blatant violation of freedom of speech.
Posted by: skywalker at November 2, 2004 05:01 PMI think that for every dollor spent on campaing financing, there should be at least quarter put towards the defict, homeless children, or something worthwhile...
Posted by: cwilli at November 3, 2004 01:08 PMhey, cwilli...never thought of that one. That's a good idea.
Posted by: mrs. muddy at November 3, 2004 01:54 PM