Quantcast

Rave this if you think 150+ years is enough for the Republicans and Democrats.

kir 2012/07/03 15:52:51
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Republicans and Democrats have been the two parties for the last 150 years or so; they most definitely had different positions in the beginning, but over time they have merged into a rather disgusting conglomerate of big government politicians.

Is it time to scrap these parties?

Read More: http://politicoid.blogspot.com/2012/04/why-i-wont-...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Robert - Palm Desert 2012/07/05 09:32:23
    Undecided
    Robert - Palm Desert
    Which party's would replace them with? Libertarian, Tea Party, Green Party, Communist Party, Socialist Party, Ku Klux Klan, The Blue Dog Party, American Patriot Party, Confederate Party, Global Warming Party, Peace and Freedom Party, DixieCrat Party, or The Rent Is Too Damn High Party?

    It's not that you don't have choices, you know?
  • kir Robert ... 2012/07/05 11:29:31
    kir
    +1
    Hopefully a party that supports limited government and lots of freedom. We've had our lives controlled by authoritarian elitists for too long.
  • xcide13 Robert ... 2012/07/05 21:17:41
    xcide13
    +1
    How bout no parties? Like our first Prez wanted?
  • Robert ... xcide13 2012/07/10 10:02:06
    Robert - Palm Desert
    "Wanted." That's a misnomer. George never proposed or "wanted" any such thing. To say or think otherwise would be tantamount to calling Washington an idiot.
  • xcide13 Robert ... 2012/07/11 14:46:51
    xcide13
    +1
    In George Washington's last speech he WARNED of the dangers of political parties. You obviously don't know much about our history.
  • Arel 2012/07/04 21:44:03
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    Arel
  • Aubrie77 2012/07/04 14:38:05
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    Aubrie77
    +2
    I believe that getting rid of political parties will leave voters more open-minded about all candidates. I know people who would never even consider certain candidates just because of their political party, with no regard for what they actually have to say. It's ridiculous.
  • Mr. Stark 2012/07/04 06:38:34
  • kir Mr. Stark 2012/07/04 14:40:02
    kir
    +1
    I think you need to talk to more libertarians; most libertarians have major issues with Republicans and the Tea Party.
  • Mr. Stark kir 2012/07/04 19:45:17
    Mr. Stark
    That may be true. I've spent copious amounts of time just reading on the topic from those who advocated for it in the past rather than the interpreted versions of today. I have no doubt that there are some legitimate libertarians. But I have quarrels with the philosophical approach to government. I suppose, in one sense, it's not that I disagree with it so much as I view it as something to achieve, not something to force.
  • kir Mr. Stark 2012/07/04 20:07:45
    kir
    +1
    If left unchecked government will always grow; it is up to the people to keep it small. I think that's how the founding fathers viewed it.
  • Minarchist 2012/07/04 05:23:46
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    Minarchist
  • chelseigh.jae 2012/07/04 04:48:28
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    chelseigh.jae
    +4
    Its about time
  • bleep 2012/07/04 04:06:33
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    bleep
    +1
    They don't even do what there name says
  • Red_Horse 2012/07/04 03:20:21
  • bmacklowe 2012/07/04 03:16:08
    No; don't get rid of them.
    bmacklowe
    Both parties have very different platforms, but they both encompass a wide range of issues that huge portions of the electorate care about. The reason no third party ever makes it is not just about money, but about their ability to reach a wide enough base of supporters. They are usually one-item tickets, or they don't have a charismatic candidate who can deliver a coherent message that people are drawn to. The last third-party candidate who even had a shot was Ross Perot, who won 19% of the vote in 1992. He lost his chance when he ducked out of the race only to return weeks later. By then, many of his supporters had moved on to one of the other men. There is a reason that a third party has not won the presidency since the Whig Party disintegrated in the 19th century. They just don't catch on, because their focus is usually so narrow. If there was an actual Tea Party, rather than just a movement, the support would be there but probably not enough to win a national race. The focus there is mostly on the economy. While the economy is the biggest topic, it is not the only one that will decide how voters pick their preference. And so the big-tent parties that have a different view of most issues, but include a wide range of them, will be where most voters go for the foreseeable future.
  • apachehellfire65 2012/07/04 02:58:24
    None of the above
    apachehellfire65
    does not matter if it is enough or not. it is all you get unless their is a massive political uprising that can't be ignored. and that won't happen till a third party can produce a strong UNIFING candidate! someone that has strong appeal on both the right and the left.
  • Calm down! 2012/07/04 01:47:38
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    Calm down!
    People are sick of the same old corrupt politics! We need one party called Americans!
  • Red_Horse Calm down! 2012/07/04 03:21:55
  • Picasso's Cat 2012/07/04 01:12:26
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    Picasso's Cat
  • chicago Picasso... 2012/07/04 01:13:03
    chicago
    +1
    Fully agree!

    "The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. The extremes, right and left, are in the gutters." Dwight D. Eisenhower
  • ed 2012/07/03 23:46:06
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    ed
    I think it's time we dismantled both parties.
  • zapped 2012/07/03 23:20:33
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    zapped
    +1
    I've felt this way for 35 voting yrs now ..I've always voted independent & registered the same ..

    both sides are pathetic ....just different sides of same rotten apple ....!
  • ed zapped 2012/07/03 23:48:41
    ed
    I think we need to give a third party the chance at running the government and at least we will be able to see if they can do better.But they need that chance.
  • zapped ed 2012/07/04 03:40:40
    zapped
    +1
    OH..... I AGREE !!!!!!
  • Nimitz 2012/07/03 23:05:32
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    Nimitz
    +1
    Does the phrase "PHUCK YEAH" adequately express my sentiments?
  • KarenInKenoshaWisconsin 2012/07/03 22:50:54
    No; don't get rid of them.
    KarenInKenoshaWisconsin
    +1
    They shouldn't be treated as the only two viable alternatives. It begs divisive dualism that dumbs everything down and that gets used as a smoke screen for a lot of crap.
  • fudge35 2012/07/03 22:50:15
    None of the above
    fudge35
    Yeah I'm sick of how these parties have been bought off by the Plutocrats. All of the Republicans kneel to the feet of the Plutocrats, and too many of the Democrats have also. Until this country gets rid of Citizens United, and has public funded elections all new parties will be bought off by the Plutocrats also !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • john Kills 2012/07/03 22:02:05
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    john Kills
    +1
    fools are caught in the two corrupt party trap and can't see they are being manipulated. both parties are working for and toward a one world government
  • justfred 2012/07/03 21:06:51
    None of the above
    justfred
    +1
    Time to overhaul the whole system. Get a parliamentary form of government so third parties can get some traction.
  • Tuna 2012/07/03 21:06:04
    Yes; let's get rid of them.
    Tuna
    Another "HOLD YOUR NOSE AND VOTE"; why do WE THE PEOPLE keep doing this to ourselves?? Then every 4-8 years get angry at them. It is time for the Second Continental Congress.
    vote for tea party 2012 revolution
  • zapped Tuna 2012/07/03 23:23:36
    zapped
    +1
    that just minght happen yet ...REVOLUTION !
  • Tuna zapped 2012/07/05 14:34:49
    Tuna
    Did you know that Bill Clinton, Bush 41, and Bush 43 together raised over $20 million for earthquake victims in Haiti? Haiti is worse off now than before the earthquake hit? We are being robbed, some blind.
  • kir Tuna 2012/07/05 14:36:25
    kir
    +1
    Unfortunately throwing money at an issue will never help, especially when that money is transferred from one government to another.
  • Tuna kir 2012/07/05 14:38:23
    Tuna
    +1
    It's not the governments, it's the people IN the governments. We CAN NOT keep electing these socialist, redistributionist candidates; same ilk over and over.
  • kir Tuna 2012/07/05 14:44:55
    kir
    +1
    Reduce the power of the government and it won't matter who is in it. We should start by keeping a closer eye on local governments and electing limited government politicians to office.
  • Tuna kir 2012/07/05 14:49:44
    Tuna
    EXACTAMUNDO; if you study that UN Agenda 21 (21st century) you will find they target the locals so when they get to D.C., they are already endoctrinated. This is how they did it in C. America and S. America only there they worked through the church since all of that is 99% Roman Catholic. Those pedophile priests we have SUDDENLY make me think they are entering into our churches, too.
  • kir Tuna 2012/07/05 14:51:01
    kir
    +1
    Shameless plug #10248.125-ish: http://politicoid.blogspot.co...
  • Tuna kir 2012/07/05 14:56:16
    Tuna
    +1
    They are putting up candidates for election to talk the talk; you think you are getting a conservative but he governs like a progressive; ie; Scott Brown and Marco Rubio.
  • zapped Tuna 2012/07/05 17:28:19
    zapped
    I 'm ready ,for anything !

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/24 08:51:36

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals