Beyond Party Lines: The Fallacy of America’s Two Party System

The two-party system is a necessary equilibrium that has dominated American politics from its inception. It can be no other way. Any third party that begins to grow must, by necessity, form coalitions and begin to face divisions within their own ranks. The next largest third party behind the Democrats and Republicans in America is the Libertarian party. They are not large enough to do anything other than act as a spoiler to the two other parties, in particular the Republicans. If enough of the American population started voting for Libertarians, the Republicans would, by necessity, shift further towards the right to make themselves more attractive to the voters at the margin. This happens too on the left with the Nader and the Green party. Third parties form from idealists that cannot ever convince a majority of Americans to vote for them. Therefore, extremists will never accumulate enough funding or political share and can only serve as to push one the Republicans or the Democrats out of the race. While possible, it is highly improbable that we will ever have a serious third party candidate that’s truly electable. And if that were to occur, very quickly the demographics would shift and the closest two parties would merge to combine their resources.

So, for better or worse, we have a two parties. And given a two party system, one must vote for the lesser of two evils as it is highly unlikely you will ever find any candidate from either party who agrees with your ideals 100%. A vote to either extreme is a vote for the opposition to what you believe, electing the candidate furthest from your beliefs. It is possible that enough third party votes may influence the closest major party to swing further to your side in future elections if their percentage is high enough to warrant the shift – but voting your extreme means enduring the opposition for the near term. And there is presently no indication the third parties have any influence as to the candidates the major parties run for President or even Congress.

And finally, to state that both parties are “sickeningly conservative” places you so far left you can’t see straight! A true conservative would seek to lower taxes, lower government spending, reduce entitlements, etc. Obama certainly won’t head in this direction and, based on McCain’s voting record, it is unlikely things will swing this way either – especially with a liberal Congress firmly in place. However, the vote you cast is for how large you want spending and government entitlements to grow. Example: The prescription drug benefit that passed through under Bush’s watch was the beginning of another government entitlement which I completely oppose, but it was far less costly than the plan Senator Kennedy would have stuck the taxpayers for had the Democrats had their way. So yes, voting in a two party system means you seek to pull the rope in the direction you think it should go in the ongoing tug-of-war of ideals. It means you won’t get your America, and I won’t get mine, but perhaps we can keep a balance somewhere in the middle. And, like it or not, the majority determines where that middle ground is fought. That’s politics. Grow up.

Kat, your criticism, regardless of whether it is aimed at me or the original writer of this topic, amounts to childish name calling and offers no substance. Define specifically what you think is propaganda, and what qualifies as over-generalization. If you take a position in this debate, state it clearly. But perhaps you are one of those people without the intellectual merits to form, much less substantiate, a position.

Read your article jo. While it is true that Republicans and Democrats shift positions based on political expediency and changing attitudes, I never said, “true republican” – I said “true conservative”, there is a distinction. Republicans are free to pick and choose from a number of conservative principles, but by-and-large those principles are as agreed upon as most liberal principles. Nothing is set in stone, but in the realm of ideals, one must choose a base philosophy to align themselves with so that we can communicate. The next time you quote someone, you may wish to actually get it right.

To Sweet Liberty: I think a third party could be viable some day. It would have to begin with a dynamic candidate that a majority wanted to vote for, and who had platform morsels that tantalizes our taste buds. Our system is actually ripe for it, because we are sick of bland and corrupt politicians. When someone fresh comes onto the scene (think Huckabee) he or she rises to immediate popularity. This is pretty scary, come to think about it. The two party system does provide some safety for the people, making it harder for a fanatic to rise to the top. But I predict one day a 3rd party person will arise, and win it all.