View Full Version : Ralph Nader for President
waste gate
03-02-07, 06:40 PM
This man needs to run for president.
ASWnut101
03-02-07, 06:43 PM
I'll pass on that vote.
Should I ask the question?
The Avon Lady
03-03-07, 12:55 PM
This man needs to run for president.
Have you been invaded by the body snatchers? :hmm:
Why is the U.S. so set on a two party system? Mind I'm not saying I think Nader is a good alternative.
Why is the U.S. so set on a two party system? Mind I'm not saying I think Nader is a good alternative.
We don't have a two party system Joe. There are many political parties in the US all able to get their candidates on the ballot, it's just that only two of them have enough public support to win national elections. Third parties have affected which one them will win however.
SUBMAN1
03-03-07, 01:34 PM
Our founding fathers never inteded to only have two parties. You may think that more parties are present, but there is no chance of them winning. We need the occasional 3rd party to upset the agenda of the two main parties though. I don't like Nader much however.
I wish Ross Peroe could upset a think or two.
-S
... but there is no chance of them winning.
Their chances of winning is based completely on their public support, not constitutional law.
SUBMAN1
03-03-07, 03:24 PM
... but there is no chance of them winning.
Their chances of winning is based completely on their public support, not constitutional law.
True, but one could argue about how public support is being manipulated.
-S
dean_acheson
03-03-07, 03:36 PM
Why is the U.S. so set on a two party system? Mind I'm not saying I think Nader is a good alternative.
two observations:
1. Italy.
2. It's a free market, anyone can start their own party.
Shaffer4
03-03-07, 05:35 PM
Um... Nader.. as I recall has run in atleast the past three presidential elections...
As far has him for President?.... Hell no... Corvair Forever!!!! :arrgh!: Nader is the one that is Un-safe at any speed ..:rotfl:
waste gate
03-03-07, 06:01 PM
Why is the U.S. so set on a two party system? Mind I'm not saying I think Nader is a good alternative.
This link will take you to a list of political parties in the US. More than you probably thought.
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm
Existence of other parties doesn't really make it a multi-party system. The US system is by and large set up to be a two-party system and it works as such; a comparison/contrast would be Canada which is also technially set up as a two-party system but has not worked as such for many years, ironically enough.
As far as free market - indeed! Consider who holds the power: the ones with the fat party coffers. Anyone can run a party, except noone but two can actually afford to, and the system will skew results towards them and inherently disfavour anything outside of them. Net result: people off the edge of the two parties (like myself) - however many of them there may be (and often these are substantial minorities) - end up completely unrepresented in government, and disillusiond with the system as such. Democracy at its finest :roll:
waste gate
03-03-07, 06:54 PM
Existence of other parties doesn't really make it a multi-party system. The US system is by and large set up to be a two-party system and it works as such; a comparison/contrast would be Canada which is also technially set up as a two-party system but has not worked as such for many years, ironically enough.
As far as free market - indeed! Consider who holds the power: the ones with the fat party coffers. Anyone can run a party, except noone but two can actually afford to, and the system will skew results towards them and inherently disfavour anything outside of them. Net result: people off the edge of the two parties (like myself) - however many of them there may be (and often these are substantial minorities) - end up completely unrepresented in government, and disillusiond with the system as such. Democracy at its finest :roll:
During the conventions, which choose the candidate who will run under the respective party banner, a platform is established. Delegates to these conventions come with influences from other parties w/in the US. Some of the delegates are to use a term extremists, others are moderate. Together they draw up the platform. It is during this process, that the negotiation and alliances which are seen in parlimentary systems, takes place.
When looking at the platforms yuo can see the results of these negotiations and alliances. Although it may not appear evident even the smaller, less well funded political entities get a say in the process.
Attached you will find the platforms from 2004.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2004_GOP_Platform.htm
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dem_Platform_2004.htm
Chaotic42
03-03-07, 07:55 PM
... but there is no chance of them winning.
Their chances of winning is based completely on their public support, not constitutional law.
True, but one could argue about how public support is being manipulated.
-S
When it's all said and done, each person must make his or her own decision. If someone is stupid enough to vote for who they're told to vote for, they deserve whatever happens to them.
Why is the U.S. so set on a two party system? Mind I'm not saying I think Nader is a good alternative.
two observations:
1. Italy.
2. It's a free market, anyone can start their own party.
Oh wow Dean, I didn't endorse the other extreme! :lol: I would not wish the Italian system on y'all! Now as for the free market bit sure, but as was pointed out you need the big bucks to get heard.
Net result: people off the edge of the two parties (like myself) - however many of them there may be (and often these are substantial minorities) - end up completely unrepresented in government, and disillusiond with the system as such. Democracy at its finest :roll:
Canadian politics are quite different than American politics and I don't really think you can compare the two. For example by "off the edge" to you may mean a centrist belief whereas here in the US it means the radical fringes.
True that August, I also get the impression both main parties are broad enough to accomodate a large spectrum of belief. BTW looking at wastegate's link...some real nuts you got over there too, no Rhino party but the Pot Party? :D
dean_acheson
03-03-07, 11:42 PM
Why is the U.S. so set on a two party system? Mind I'm not saying I think Nader is a good alternative.
two observations:
1. Italy.
2. It's a free market, anyone can start their own party.
Oh wow Dean, I didn't endorse the other extreme! :lol: I would not wish the Italian system on y'all! Now as for the free market bit sure, but as was pointed out you need the big bucks to get heard.
lol! Sorry, that was a bit harsh, wasn't it.
I am not a fan of the way money drives things, but I am much less a fan or restrictions on free speech. McCain/Feingold is a step in the wrong direction in my book.
nikimcbee
03-04-07, 02:17 AM
Wow, I met him when I was in high school.
dean_acheson
03-04-07, 12:07 PM
who?
True that August, I also get the impression both main parties are broad enough to accomodate a large spectrum of belief. BTW looking at wastegate's link...some real nuts you got over there too, no Rhino party but the Pot Party? :D
The fringe element effect on both sides of the political spectrum in this country is interesting. Since they tend to pull their respective mainstream parties away from the center it has the effect of allowing the un or barely affiliated centrist voters to ultimately determine the winner of every election by throwing their weight to one side or the other.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.