Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CCIP
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  |
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