Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kentuck

(110,950 posts)
31. I don't think the present system is set up for a presidential bid...
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 05:37 PM
Apr 2012

....and there would not have to be a huge number for a coalition, so long as they prevented either of the other parties from being a majority. The Tea Party had an opportunity but they blew it by falling prey to the Republican propaganda machine. We need a similar coalition that would vote with a progressive agenda.

It isnt the two party system at fault. As long as American citizens rhett o rick Apr 2012 #1
Amen Brother... cbrer Apr 2012 #3
Unfortunately, the present system does not permit either side to wake up... kentuck Apr 2012 #5
In a practical sense, there aren't any options. Selatius Apr 2012 #10
In my opinion... kentuck Apr 2012 #13
Duverger's Law would tend to work against a third viable party from emerging here. Selatius Apr 2012 #20
The electoral college is the most important problem facing multiparty advocates. stevenleser Apr 2012 #21
no doubt... kentuck Apr 2012 #23
IMO getting a "rational candidate" to win against the SYSTEM is like rhett o rick Apr 2012 #27
It would not be easy... kentuck Apr 2012 #28
Even when the people dont like what is happening, I dont believe they recognize rhett o rick Apr 2012 #54
The US simply lacks publicly funded elections. That's why we always choose rich people. Selatius Apr 2012 #6
I agree and in addition, until we get a huge majority of the population willing to vote to change it stevenleser Apr 2012 #9
I don't think that is possible... kentuck Apr 2012 #11
I think it hurts DJ13 Apr 2012 #2
I think it is becoming a necessity... kentuck Apr 2012 #4
I'll go along with this gratuitous Apr 2012 #12
Well said. kentuck Apr 2012 #16
OK let's look at how to break out a third party. rhett o rick Apr 2012 #55
how is republicans and republican-lites a 2 party system? nt msongs Apr 2012 #7
It's the natural evolution of politics... kentuck Apr 2012 #8
Of course it hurts us. That was the founders' greatest mistake. DevonRex Apr 2012 #14
I've said it before: We have a 12 party system. Speck Tater Apr 2012 #15
destroys... nt Romulox Apr 2012 #17
It hurts badly because at this stage the debate is so damn phony but ever more partisan TheKentuckian Apr 2012 #18
It hurts, but it can be fixed with instant run-off voting like the Aussies do it. n/t Cleita Apr 2012 #19
I think the electoral college is an insurmountable obstacle to third parties. It has to go first. stevenleser Apr 2012 #22
I'm all for that. Cleita Apr 2012 #24
But, the electoral college only affects presidential elections. kentuck Apr 2012 #25
My point is, if a party can't make a credible bid for the White House, getting support for it stevenleser Apr 2012 #29
I don't think the present system is set up for a presidential bid... kentuck Apr 2012 #31
And in that we are in agreement, it is not set up for a Presidential bid, therefore the electoral stevenleser Apr 2012 #33
You assume that a Democratic President would not support... kentuck Apr 2012 #36
Winning a national campaign would still entail getting support from the same voters. Therefore... stevenleser Apr 2012 #40
I am just brain-storming but... kentuck Apr 2012 #42
The GOP changed radically with Reagan. All of the progressive legislation you mentioned is preReagan stevenleser Apr 2012 #50
Do you mean "centrist" legislation like...? kentuck Apr 2012 #26
Nope, no specifics. I meant just what I said. You will have frequent centrist coalitions. The issues stevenleser Apr 2012 #32
My point is that... kentuck Apr 2012 #34
I don't think so. I think the Republicans have successfully brainwashed their folks to the point stevenleser Apr 2012 #41
I would agree they do not like Democrats... kentuck Apr 2012 #43
Has nothing to do with Party label. They have thrown out Republicans who voted for these things too stevenleser Apr 2012 #44
Good people have the power of persuasion... kentuck Apr 2012 #45
Which people? Chomsky? Kucinich? Klein? Obama? Clinton? Gravel? Sanders? They are already speaking stevenleser Apr 2012 #49
OK, but how are you going to get the oligarchs to allow IRO voting? nm rhett o rick Apr 2012 #59
Occupy the voting booth? Yes, they will resist so we must insist. Cleita Apr 2012 #62
Before we can replace those reps that have sold out to Corp-America rhett o rick Apr 2012 #63
True, but giving up is not an option either. n/t Cleita Apr 2012 #65
NGU, however we must realize that voting and sending emails isnt enough. nm rhett o rick Apr 2012 #66
The two party system was fine guitar man Apr 2012 #30
The system is broken and the oligarchs wont let you fix it. rhett o rick Apr 2012 #35
That is one option... kentuck Apr 2012 #39
If you want me to believe that there is hope, you will have to convince me that rhett o rick Apr 2012 #53
I think we should have four major parties meow2u3 Apr 2012 #37
I am a staunch supporter of the two-party system KamaAina Apr 2012 #38
Lewis Black on the two party system: Initech Apr 2012 #46
The "two party system" helps maintain the illusion of democracy in a capitalist state. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2012 #47
Sh-h-h-h.... kentuck Apr 2012 #48
.. rhett o rick Apr 2012 #57
Helps. bluestate10 Apr 2012 #51
Hurts. GeorgeGist Apr 2012 #52
Anyone who dislikes it is welcome to start a new party (nt) Nye Bevan Apr 2012 #56
So how do you feel about it? nm rhett o rick Apr 2012 #58
One of my senators is neither a Republican nor a Democrat. Nye Bevan Apr 2012 #60
And yet he does not support starting a new party. nm rhett o rick Apr 2012 #64
crippling KG Apr 2012 #61
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does the two-Party system...»Reply #31