Would we be better off if there were no political parties....?

[kentuck]

And candidates had to run on ideas only? Would the majority of voters support workers rights over employer rights? Would most voters support individual choice over government intervention? Would most people support regulation if it was for public safety reasons? Would most people support huge taxcuts if they knew it was going to lead to huge deficits and higher interest rates?

If there were no Parties, would people be more inclined to vote in their own interest, rather than for the Party? Just a thought.

[tom_paine]

1. If we didn't have Political Parties, they would still coalesce

It is human nature. No, I don't think it's possible, practically speaking, for such a change to occur.

[evil_orange_cat]

2. Yes... we should have listened to Washington

George that is. ;) He warned against political parties. I think the country would be better off without them.

[IA_Young_Dem]

5. No parties sounds like an interesting idea, but it would never happen.

[ewagner]

7. Was going to post the same thing

Washington saw the rise of political parties as a very damaging influence on the nation.

I suspect, if he was around now, a big I told you so would be in order.

[camero]

3. Multiple parties would be better

Then we can have a better view of the spectrum. The debate of ideas are too narrow with just two big parties and both parties seem more and more like the other with each election.

[dolo amber]

4. Even fewer people would vote

if that were the case...They'd have to actually pay attention to the *ideas* and form some sort of opinion for themselves. :eyes:

[kentuck]

6. You mean like, "Do you think the minimum wage should be increased.."?

..to $10 per hour? If there was no Party there to preach to them that an idea like that would cause more people to be laid off, then they would not be inclined to vote for something that might be in their interest? Same for healthcare.

[no_hypocrisy]

8. An election for local counsel was run w/o party affiliation with the

exception of incumbents vs. non-incumbents. The ideas took precedence over party sponsorship or voting for the party instead of the candidate/ideas. It was refreshing, but I don't see how this experience could be expanded to state or national elections.

Money donations from corporations would still find their way to the candidates instead of their organizations. Corruption under a different name.

[Yupster]

9. Would only vote if we went back to

the constitutional idea of legislatures picking electors who would then vote for great men for president.

Once you get the general population involved in the voting, you need a mass movement of volunteers and partisans speaking for the candidates, which means political parties by one name or another.

[sangh0]

10. We'd definitely be better off if there were no earthquakes

but I don't see those going away anytime soon, either.

[Zolok]

11. Democracy can't function without political parties...

because elections aren't organized solely around "ideas".
Boons, perks, benefits, or revenge all inform the political experience.
If we abolished political parties tomorrow we'd have some loud mouthed demagogue like Bill O'Reilly elected president this fall....and we'd all end up behind barbed wire.


www.chimesatmidnight.blogspot.com