1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Defeating the Lesser of Two Evils:Getting a Third Party Elected in a Two Party System

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by KenH, Dec 29, 2007.

  1. KenH

    KenH Active Member

    May 18, 2002
    Likes Received:
    Defeating the Lesser of Two Evils: Getting a Third Party Elected in a Two Party System

    Every election cycle, third parties across America get motivated and try to win votes; they hit the streets, the churches, the community centers and address problems that the two major parties either ignore or limit to impotent lip service. The masses of voters like what they hear, they agree with the message, but still end up casting their votes for either of the two parties that they find the lesser of two evils or decide not to vote at all. This lesser of two evils mentality serves as a psychological roadblock that appears insurmountable to third parties and the electorate that finds them to be the good which they shun in favor of the lesser of two evils. It is the culmination of an outdated electoral system formed from idealism that failed to ferment into reality.

    When America’s founders attempted to form the first known true republic since the time of the Romans, they feared the formation of parties altogether, “factions” which would threaten their new republic. In this idealism, what they failed to take into account is that different people have different experiences and have seen different things, which leads them to come to different conclusions about what needs to be done and how. Parties, or “factions,” are natural results of an open political process. The problem here is that the American electoral system is not designed for parties, it is designed for individual candidates where each will be listened to openly and none are assumed to be leaders in the election from the start. We have a winner-take-all system, which always, on a local level anyways, leads to the dominance of two parties. In the United States, this dominance is always for the Republicans and Democrats. In other countries, such as Canada, you see it unfold differently such as how the Bloc Québecois is popular in Québec running primarily against the Liberal Party; nationwide the Bloc Québecois has no power and the Liberal Party rules with the Progressive Conservative Party.

    - rest at http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/...-a-third-party-elected-in-a-two-party-system/
  2. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Jan 16, 2006
    Likes Received:
    If one or both parties that are in power were basically run by honest people that cared about the American people, that would be fine. However, today we have two parties that produce inept leaders, that elect self-indulgent, power hungry pigs, and elect those without any conviction of what he or she believes, only what gets votes.

    There would be nothing wrong with a two party system, even with their differences, if we knew that despite who is elected, the American people would be well served.

    It has gotten so bad, the goal of a strong third party is not good enough. We need third parties to replace the democratic and republican parties as major players in American politics.

    The mindset of voting for the lesser of two evils to avoid a third party (on the issue of abortion for example), has got to sear the conscience of any Christian. The fact is it takes backbone and faith to step out of the pig trough and vote for someone that will make a difference.

    A Romney or Giuliani nomination is an automatic third party vote for me.