No surprise! The old people (with the money) and those likely to be on welfare like things the way their are. The people in the middle think they are being ripped of by the old people with money and those on welfare. Everyone understands that the two major parties are two factions of one major party.

Personally; I think any system that allows one party to dominate as the democrats do in the house is flawed. There is no equal representation for the citizens in this case and no point of balance or controls on the ruling party. That can easily lead to facism.

I am sick at heart when I see the democrats say that we will pass this or that without the Republicans. This should never be! Everyone’s vote counts, and Americans are being robbed of their rights when one party can dictate policy even when it runs strongly against the wishes of the citizens of this country as in the case of government sponsored health care. The only way around this kind of rule becomes one that can be misconstrued and twisted to mean rebellion instead of genuine concern and can brand sincere patriots as traitors as was the case when the first continental congress chose to establish this country separate from England.

Their revolt cost a lot of lives to purhase our freedoms and create a Republic with a Constitution. I am afraid that if the government keeps on thwarting the citizens because Democrats and a few Republicans refuse to hear the voice of the people another revolution may come. I would rather not see it myself.

A brief comment on the comments. We are already liveing in a mostly faciest state. The constitution wone for us in the revolution is being used as toilet paper by our current government. As to an armed insurection I think it likley. Harry L. Friend

The question is not how many major political parties we need; but who the parties party with. Democrats and Republicans have become agents of the groups that are providing the money to keep them in office. The reasons are complex, but the solution is simple – Term limits, severe restriction or elimination of campaign television advertising, and voters that care enough to do the hard work of getting involved evaluating the candidates, especially at the primary level where most of the important choices are made.
Until the system allows for real representation of the voters, there really is not much hope for substantive change, and the politicians are not going to willingly change a system that it structured to serve their interests over the voter’s.
Whether there are one, two or twenty political parties really does not matter much when politics – especially at the national level – is seen as a lifetime career; driven largely by the ability to raise money to stay in office and subsequently use the power of the office to build personal wealth. It is not every one, but it is enough to prevent changes that would make the political system responsive to the citizen voters.
If two terms is sufficient for the President, then two terms should also be sufficient for Congressional Representatives and Senators. Since they will not do it voluntarily, we can start by voting them out; preferably at the primary level, after two terms. If the system does not reform from inside to provide valid government then it is likely to be reformed from outside the system – call it revolution if you choose – but it will happen eventually and it really will not matter how many political parties there are or what they claim to represent.

I think the survey is a lot of crap. If people really wanted more than two parties, they would vote for more than two. But they dont’.

Just like the Rasmussen poll that says a majority wants the entire Congress voted out, people are frustrated with the way the country is headed and they are venting.

When push comes to shove, people will vote either D or R.

Dean, nothing in political science research or practical experience supports your view. The U.S. is the extreme case of two-party domination because of the rules of the game: single-member, winner-take-all districts for legislative office, plus direct election of the executive branch (inherently winner-take-all), plus legislative bodies that are too small for the populations they serve, plus ballot access laws that make it hard for new parties to get started.

Yes, when push comes to shove people do vote D or R under these rules. In order to know what they really want, we’d have to have proportional representation for legislatures so they wouldn’t be wasting their votes on other parties. Until then, surveys like this are more valid than the vote totals.

People will vote for more than two parties when more than two parties are in a position to win.

U.S. voters need an electoral system that fairly accomodates more than two viable political parties.

Many democracies around the world — including those created at the behest of the U.S. military in Afghanistan and Ieaq — have a more competitive and representative electoral system called “proportional representation.”

For more information about replacing the two-party system with a more inclusive and dynamic multi-party system, visit FairVote: The Center for Voting and Democracy.

@Rick

Rick:

Recent (and frequent) surveys on Americans show that about 2/3 of them want Single Payer medicine. I don’t know why you are saying that most Americans don’t, when it is clear that most do.

Of course, Americans want more parties. They just don’t know how to bring it about. I would suggest that people engage in pre-party organizing. I say that because the system is rigged. Legally rigged, but rigged just the same. Districts have been gerrymandered into one party districts. Once the partisan primary is over, if there is one, the there is no democracy at the district level in some 93% of the districts. This can only be changed through the initiative process by creating multi-member districts and using proportional representation to elect members of legislative bodies. That way if a third party get 15% or 20% of the vote in the general election that party will have 15% or 20% of the seats in the legislative body. The other reform that is needed is to remove private money from elections and publicly fund all ballot qualified candidates on an equal basis. Again this requires using the initiative process. This is a call to all those armchair dreamers to get up and start the process. Organize and build the third party movement.