Two party model

I have always been facinated by the fact that the two party model of the USA has remained unchallenged for as long as the USA has existed. My knwledge of American history is poor, but as far as I know the Democratic and Republican party have always ruled the USA.

Do you think that a third party will ever be able to climb to the top, and what is it that is stopping third parties from gaining influence and subsequently power at the moment? Why do Americans always vote for Republicans or Democrats?

Also doesn't this model lead to undemocratic practices? We all know for example that the single party model that existed in the USSR was hindering democracy. To what extent is the same applicable to the bipartite system of the USA?

Originally posted by bg_turk I have always been facinated by the fact that the two party model of the USA has remained unchallenged for as long as the USA has existed. My knwledge of American history is poor, but as far as I know the Democratic and Republican party have always ruled the USA. Do you think that a third party will ever be able to climb to the top, and what is it that is stopping third parties from gaining influence and subsequently power at the moment? Why do Americans always vote for Republicans or Democrats? Also doesn't this model lead to undemocratic practices? We all know for example that the single party model that existed in the USSR was hindering democracy. To what extent is the same applicable to the bipartite system of the USA?

Originally posted by Akolouthos Originally posted by bg_turk I have always been facinated by the fact that the two party model of the USA has remained unchallenged for as long as the USA has existed. My knwledge of American history is poor, but as far as I know the Democratic and Republican party have always ruled the USA. Do you think that a third party will ever be able to climb to the top, and what is it that is stopping third parties from gaining influence and subsequently power at the moment? Why do Americans always vote for Republicans or Democrats? Also doesn't this model lead to undemocratic practices? We all know for example that the single party model that existed in the USSR was hindering democracy. To what extent is the same applicable to the bipartite system of the USA?   The two parties have huge networks of support, and garner most of the twenty-four hour news cycle's attention; thus, they are able to strangle beginning parties before they really get off the ground.   Though there have been a few examples of viable third parties, as well as different two-party systems (federalists vs. democratic republicans; whigs vs. democrats), I believe that the speed with which information is conveyed today prevents our thorough understanding of that information, and thus makes it harder for a third party to get off the ground.   Undemocratic? Undoubtedly.   -Akolouthos

How do we explain the existence of a "two party system" in the US from the 1790s up until now?  No mass media in Jefferson's or Lincoln's time.

That's true. Also there are many countries where the mass media have a big influence, but that are still multiparty democracies.

I think the electoral system is the number one cause that the US is a two party state

Edited by Mixcoatl - 23-Jun-2006 at 18:40

Originally posted by Mixcoatl I think the electoral system is the number one cause that the US is a two party state

The greatest reason is that the United States uses single member winner-take-all districts, which prevents almost all parties but those which have a chance of winning a majority from becoming very large and powerful.  If the USA adopted proportional representation, you would probably see the emergence of the Libertarians and Greens as coalitition partners of the Republicans and Democrats respectively.

The 2-Party Model is not a democratic Model,it's an oligarchic Model.And usually in a 2-Party Model,the 2 parties are both corrupted.

When i cannot vote the CPUSA for about 40 years for security reasons and i am forced to vote the 2 in power,then that is not democracy.

Ofcourse.

If the "people" didn't want Capitalism anymore they can form their own party with alternative methods of governance, the problem is they don't attract enough supporters to create any sort of power.

Now wat happens next is actually the worst part, they are allowed to create and try to rally for their party but if they fail they then have the cheak to say, we don't have a democracy, the reason? just because their party can't attract the masses. Sorry but that's a pretty poor reason, it would be better to blame yourself than the system which allows you to create a party.

In a Communist system even thinking to create a Capitalist party would definately be taboo and forbidden.

Communism is over guys, its a decadent oppressive method of rule which decieves people into thinking lifes gonna be all equal and great when really its just a dictator treating the masses like robots. Its funny that people who were actually under Commi regimes don't rant and rave about how great it is and if you ever visited a country under the Soviets it was a sorry sight, you would have left feeling depressed.

Regardless of what some people say, the US comes closest to an oligarchic republic, not a democracy. There are actually far more than 2 parties in the US (I belive that it's about 14), but it is only the 2 major parties which have the corporate backing which is needed for fundraising the hundreds of millions of dollars essential to winning an election. Herein lies the problem: the electoral system is about 200 years out of date, and winning 10,20,30, even 40% of the vote in a riding (or a state in the case of the presidential election), means that you get absolutely no benefits from your campaign, even if 40% is quite a substantial show of support from the voters. The party that finished second in a riding or a state, gets no representation. When one considers the very large size of the ridings, and the amount of money needed for the campaign, one realizes that winning a riding is extremely difficult withour corporate funding. Many American voters thus end up voting with one or the other major party, because there's a feeling that their vote would be wasted otherwise. If the system were reformed to allow for some form of proportional representation, then perhaps we'd see the other parties gaining some ground. But I doubt that that's ever going to happen, since an electoral reform would contravene the interests of the 2 parties which would have the power to reform it in the first place.