The Instigator
K.GKevinGeary
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
imabench
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

The U.S having a 2 political party system

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,532 times Debate No: 22083
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

K.GKevinGeary

Con

The U.S. having a two political party system is bad for the U.S. and the progression of the U.S. The republicans and democrats only posses their limited ideology and each candidate and political individual is almost a robot to its individual's higher political ideologies whether republican or democrat. On gun laws most republicans are extremely open to it and pro as democrats want to limit gun laws hence con. Abortion, republicans are against it and democrats are pro-choice. These are two examples of topics specifically the abortion subject being on flames in current debate. Each party monopolizes the system singular and assures that no other party can become a contender. A contender of course being a threat to their lifestyles when it comes to laws, rights, institutions that back up their laws and rights and so forth. What I am proposing is for the U.S. to open its political door so to speak to other political parties. What I am proposing is that the U.S. should have a more French style of running government and election. A democracy is a government ran by the people those who actively engage in it. A two party system is pathetic not tragic and the U.S needs and I emphasize needs more parties that can represent the ones that consent to be governed. Its only a tragedy if the two party system stays in place and not one individual who is the consented rallies and fails at its objective of creating a more multi party system. In The Poetics written by Aristotle a tragedy is when someone has a choice and does nothing to help them self where as the term pathetic is utilized when someone has no choice over the matter and must accept the outcome. For example Newspapers/media in general constantly get the two words mixed up. The proper use of the term can go like this: The 9/11 victims who were aboard a flight that crashed into one of the towers had a pathetic ending where as the hijackers had a tragic ending. By having a two political party system the people of the U.S. are engaging in a tragedy because we have the choice to market more ideologies to be consented by possibly having a better lifestyle in general. It is disheartening that the U.S. only has only two contenders that I can put my vote to the ballot. Frankly I do not want to even put my vote in for the 2012 election though I will but, to state the least for now the people of the U.S. need more parties.
imabench

Pro

I accept this debate and will be arguing that the 2 party system is better than a 1 party system

Other than that

Debate Round No. 1
K.GKevinGeary

Con

A two party system being consented by the U.S. citizens is a consent to tyranny not democracy. What is being stated by the two parties is limited and other issues that can have other interpretations do not come out. If the U.S. had a multiparty system than a wide variety of viewpoints can come into play and allow citizens to engage in a democracy. Minor parties in the U.S. do not get any leeway and voice. Without that voice it limits voters. A democracy is the people to consent to the government. The U.S. democracy is consenting to a tyranny of the two party system. For example: The voice of the Democratic Socialist of the U.S. is not heard at all unless an individual keeps their ear to the ground and listens to the message. That message is a shallow whisper thanks to the totalitarianism of the two party system. By having a multiparty system similar to France not one group can take the reigns of power of office. The polarization of these two large parties creates huge legions that do not allow smaller voices to be heard. There are over three million people in the U.S. How can three million people just be bracketed to one party or the other? The republican debates going on right now are joke. There is no real issues being brought up but, how much taxes do you pay? The Republican Party's debates are circumventing around larger issues that are not being addressed. Hey where's your birth certificate? That is not politics but B.S. The Democratic Party does the same thing. They promise and make their promises but not one promise has helped me individually in the broad aspect. What is being presented by the two parties is the face of tyranny of utter lies to gain power. Patriotism allows for whatever the president states to be backed up by America. It is always funny that the U.S. considers themselves Americans. Is not a Canadan an American? Or an individual in Columbia an American? They in fact both reside in North and South America. What makes the U.S. to be so high and intuned to stating that a U.S. citizen is an American? The parties present their lies and come into the community with their b.s. knowing that an active democratic citizen will vote. The voter sees R. and D. and that's it perhaps an independent. The smaller voices and the moderate voices if heard can progress U.S. society in the benefit of the individual. Other parties can expand new ideas and bring harmony rather than tyranny to the U.S. allowing the active participant to actively select a candidate that suits them.
imabench

Pro

Quick clarification:
Pro is against the two party system, I am for a two party system.

The reason we have a two party system isnt because these two parties suppress the voice of other parties through tyrannical means to further their own agenda, the reason the US has a two party system is because the Democratic and Republican parties are very well organized, know how to raise money, know how to appeal to voters, and know how to win elections, both on the presidential, congressional, and mayoral scale. Something that many other parties do not know how to do.

" If the U.S. had a multiparty system than a wide variety of viewpoints can come into play and allow citizens to engage in a democracy."
Here's the thing though, the Democratic and Republican parties are very moderate when it comes to issues compared to many of the independent third parties. The US Nazi party wants to take a fascist position on all issues, the US Communist Party takes a communist position on all issues, etc etc whereas the Republican and Democratic parties take rather moderate stances on all the issues. Their stances are the most normal and appeal to Americans (US voters) the most compared to other radical third parties.

Point is, the Democratic and Republican parties dont repress other viewpoints, they simply adapt to them the best and that is why the US has a two party system, because the two parties know how to appeal to everyone more than any unorganized third party.

" The U.S. democracy is consenting to a tyranny of the two party system. For example: The voice of the Democratic Socialist of the U.S. is not heard at all unless an individual keeps their ear to the ground and listens to the message"
Yeah for many reasons,
1) The Democratic Socialist Party doesnt organize or raise funds well which is why they dont win elections ever
2) The Democratic Socialist Party doesnt appeal to voters well
3) Have you seen this country? People hate socialism so its no wonder why the Democratic Socialist Party doesnt have much support.
4) If they cant get their message out, its not because Democrats or Republicans are muzzling them, its because they simply suck at trying to get a message out. Ever seen a TV ad or a news paper ad for the Democratic Socialist Party? Chances are you have not.

" The polarization of these two large parties creates huge legions that do not allow smaller voices to be heard"
Yeah, but its because these two parties are the most appealing to voters and know how to campaign and win elections, not because they secretly silence other parties....

"There are over three million people in the U.S"
Three hundred sixty million people......

"How can three million people just be bracketed to one party or the other"
1) Not all of them vote, 2) If they dont like either party they can still choose other parties, 3) Democratic and Republican parties appeal the most to these people more than any other independent party

"The republican debates going on right now are joke."
Opinion.....

"There is no real issues being brought up but"
Are you crazy? these debates have brought up Medicare, Obamacare, Social Security, Defense, Israel, Iran, Taxes, Taxes, Taxes, Energy, Taxes again, Economy, Border security, Illegal immigration, and Taxes......

"The Republican Party's debates are circumventing around larger issues that are not being addressed"
Name ONE.....

"They promise and make their promises but not one promise has helped me individually in the broad aspect."
Then you should probably vote for a party that would help you..... That is if you even vote at all

" It is always funny that the U.S. considers themselves Americans. Is not a Canadan an American? Or an individual in Columbia an American? They in fact both reside in North and South America. What makes the U.S. to be so high and intuned to stating that a U.S. citizen is an American?"
What the hell are you even talking about???

"The voter sees R. and D. and that's it perhaps an independent."
Yeah, because all the other parties often lack a sufficient amount of support to get on the ticket in the first place and those that do often take either extremely radical positions on issues, or moderate positions that resemble similar stances to the Democratic or Republican parties...... Independent parties do get on the ticket, they just dont get elected because they suck at campaigning and winning elections.

"The smaller voices and the moderate voices if heard can progress U.S. society in the benefit of the individual"
Probably. But if they cant organize and cant get the message out then blame the third party, not the Democratic or Republican party....

"Other parties can expand new ideas and bring harmony rather than tyranny to the U.S."
Heres the funny thing Pro, THAT ALREADY HAPPENS....

Here is a list of very famous third parties and their fates
Prohibition Party............ Socially conservative on many issues similar to the Republican Party
Green back Party........... Protested how much power banks had and desired more regulation like the Democratic Party
Populist Party................ Loved labor unions and appealed to poor farmers, views were adapted by the Democrats
Libertarian Party............ Still exists but have views comparable to very liberal Democrats
Green Party................... Takes a very hard stance on environmentalism which is similar to the Democratic stance

Point is, every major third party has either been a more extreme version of the moderate Democratic or Republican Party, or has advocated such a great view that it was ADOPTED by the Democratic or Republican parties.....

So to summarize my arguments, the Democratic and Republican parties dont repress third parties, try to silence other views, or try to advocate their tyrannical rule over US elections so that third parties cannot win. Third parties are often unorganized, unskilled in gathering support for candidates, take radical or hostile views on issues that alienate voters, or simply mirror the stances of the two primary parties and make a few irrelevant changes to their stances, or are simply absorbed by the Democratic or Republican parties..... The Democratic and Republican parties are very well organized, appeal to many voters, and know how to win elections unlike most third parties......
Debate Round No. 2
K.GKevinGeary

Con

Not all people hate socialism when it comes to this country regarding the democratic socialists of the U.S. People who are in the ghetto would love socialism because that would put them on the same level as Donald Trump. Speculating socialism would help the inner cities and the murder rate that is correlated to the two. They only cannot get their message across because of the tyranny of the two party system raking in the funds that prevent any other message to get across. So a democratic by the idea that a democratic would support green ideologies that is a farce. Canada is the Saudi Arabia of tar shale. It took a couple thousand citizens last year to prevent a bill to be passed that would allow an underground network of tar shale to be transported into the U.S. specifically the eastern seaboard, by going to the white house in protest. Obama had to think twice before signing that bill that he did not put what is irrelevant is that it still in contention to be passed. If the green party was in power it would be obvious not to sign a bill that would cause more harm than help. The small blame is on the Democratic and Republican party for not allowing the smaller voices to get out. The big blame is on those that consent to the government. If the smaller voices get out and a new party called X comes into play that is a threat to the democratic and republican party. They work together singular to ensure that not one party can become that X party. The U.S. calling themselves Americans are as if they are high and mighty because obviously there is more Americans that just the U.S. citizens or Americans. That American idea is so in tuned to that we are Americans people need to be like What the hell is he talking about. We are Americans. Yea so is Canadians. If people still think of the Patriotic American Dream idea that an individual can move up the ranks of social mobility that is a lie. I am looking around, Americans or really U.S. citizens have a better chance to move down from middle to lower class. People are so in tuned to living not right that when it comes to living right that righteousness of living is so far from being obtained because the mind is so perverted to this system of the U.S.A. Clack, Clack, the guns are still going off in the game pointed at the youth in the inner cities as Obama's dream must have helped prevent the 100 plus murders that occurred in Newark last year. People are content to just listening to their brand new ipad standing by the pool getting their tan on as alcohol and drugs are so readily available for anyone to obtain. By doing these acts of leisure these individuals are playing into the card of allowing the act of the two party system's oppression to be maintained because they are killing off their brain cells never being a threat to the livihood of obtaining a society for the people. The rich are not only backing themselves up by their laws they pass but institutions exist behind them that back up the Democrats and Republicans. The present secretary of the U.S. Department of Treasury is Timothy Geithner, a banker with connections to A.I.G. and Goldman Sachs. Geithner replaced Henry Paulson whom was a former C.E.O. of Goldman Sachs. Not only is an immense amount of areas of high government administered by people of Goldman Sachs, the business generously contributed millions for political campaigns for the current presidency as well as other political ventures. In economical crisis Goldman Sachs has benefited tremendously with bailouts and preferential treatment, after all the business commands areas of the government. As the wealthy assist the wealthy, the average citizen suffers. A N.J. C.E.O. earns roughly five million dollars per year. A N.J. rocket scientist's yearly average salary is about $ 97,500. N.J.'s minimum wage yearly average salary is about $ 15,000. Poverty and oppression come alive in the effort for the average citizen to obtain limited wealth when so much of the resources are unevenly distributed from the wealthiest to the poor. I am looking around and this is what I see. And the rocket scientist dig is for the old saying that you do not have to be as smart as a rocket scientist to figure X out. Bring an end to the Democratic candidate and the Republican candidate or allow for other parties to organize and get their radical, moderate, minimal voices to come out with the help of the government. Hear what they have to say and if the active voting citizen does not like it then vote D. or R. or I. Independent does not get voted to much as they cannot organize as you say but Jesse Ventura was voted for as the governor. When he was voted into power the CIA grilled him in the capitol building. Does not the CIA exist in the foreign spectrum and the FBI in the domestic spectrum? They government never thought an Independent would actually win and proceeded to ask how he won and many other questions. The Two Party System is a tyranny. What do people have to loss by advancing more parties to the ballot? The current national debt is over the figure of 14 trillion.

I guess Cain firmly wanted to be president of the U.S… O.k. perhaps he was just trying to get publicity…o what you know he has a brand new book out…A. These are real debates on real issues… B. This is not too much talk about Iran. Thanks Romney or Mrs. Cleo and stating that Iran will have a nuke if Obama is still president. There already in the process of obtaining nukes. I guess when he is in office he will have some coercive power of similar to the Leviathan to end Iran's ambition to obtain nukes. Riddle me that this debate was a serious debate about Iran. Sure Iran has been brought up many times but nothing to the effect of Iran in depth. Note also that Obamacare was originally a republican plan. Look how far the republicans have radically changed from denouncing their own ideal and pushing for contemporary ideals. So a radically message can be found in the R. The D. and a multiparty system. C. Great ideas about taxes. Nice ad hominem aka man vs. man in debate.
A.http://inkwellstrategies.com...
B.http://www.cbsnews.com...
C.https://www.youtube.com...
imabench

Pro

"They only cannot get their message across because of the tyranny of the two party system raking in the funds that prevent any other message to get across"
There is a huge difference between using funds to prevent others from getting the message out and using funds to promote your own message WAY better than anybody else..... And thats whats going on with the two party system in America. The Democratic and Republican parties just know how to appeal to people and raise money the best.

" If the green party was in power it would be obvious not to sign a bill that would cause more harm than help"
The green party has only one goal and that is to protect the environment under any circumstances. Any issues outside of the environment though and the green party adopts stances similar to the Democratic or Republican party. This makes the Green Party a more extreme version of the Democratic or Republican party, and considering the lack of funding or support from Americans many, including me, see the party as too extreme.

"They work together singular to ensure that not one party can become that X party."
So now the Republican and Democratic parties are coordinating to make sure that all of the third parties dont combine together to make a new party that could threaten them....... These small parties dont want to form a super party with all the other smaller parties, they just gear their stances on issues towards one ideology or goal, never change their stances, and get creamed every election because they are either too extreme in the eyes of Americans, suck at getting support, suck at getting funds, and suck at getting their message out....

There most certainly is not a conspiracy by the two major parties to keep all the smaller third parties from combining to form one mega ultra party.....

"If people still think of the Patriotic American Dream idea that an individual can move up the ranks of social mobility that is a lie.........Does not the CIA exist in the foreign spectrum and the FBI in the domestic spectrum?"
Try to focus on the debate resolution rather than just go on an incoherent tirade, it will most likely cost you votes considering nobody knows what the hell your talking about or the point youre trying to make anymore.

" The Two Party System is a tyranny. What do people have to loss by advancing more parties to the ballot"
They are on the ballot its just that nobody knows who they are because the parties representing that candidate have no idea how to win a damn election as well as the Republican or Democratic parties!

To the voters still reading this, I dont know what crawled up the Con's a** but this debate has turned more into a tirade against............. Hell I dont even know what the Con is yelling about but he has failed to give much evidence suggesting that all the independent parties are being kept down from the Republican and Democratic parties to form one super party, or that the Democratic and Republican parties are using their money to somehow stifle the voice of the other smaller independent parties through an unknown means......
Debate Round No. 3
K.GKevinGeary

Con

The Jesse Ventura comment was to bring resolution that the government did not see an independent candidate to win an election hence the grilling done by the CIA. That is the point I was attempting to make was that it appears odd that when he was voted into power of governor of Minnesota the government did not except an independent to win because the U.S. is a two party system. The other points regarding AIG/Goldman Sachs, and the rich backing the rich was to show how this country is leaning towards fascism. Big business and the giant government's coalition. Now let's breaks this down regarding the singular formation of the two parties to insure that another X party does not come into play in simple terms. Take two men/women who are in control of X (whatever you want to call X). If another guy/woman of equableness comes onto the scene and wants a piece of X the two other men already in control of X would insure that this other does not even close to obtaining X because they are in control of X. The two men in control of X have had control X for a long time and have gotten things done for an ample amount of time. They do not want another individual to take any piece of that X by that act becoming a threat to themselves.
Politics is power. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party do not want an X party to emerge of equal value. That X can be a party of similarity to the Democratic and Republican Party. This is not a matter of speculation or conspiracy that some random means are preventing another party to form, but of common sense. Take Pepsi and Cola they do not want another powerhouse X drink that will take up shelf space. They are already milking in the profits, that X drink would diminish their piece of the pie. Though you do have smaller companies (like smaller parties) that get picked out of the shelf every now in then whether waist watchers, or store brand that get brought up to the checkout line. The ideologies of the left and the right are just that. Having another X organized ideology would make a third ideology hence threatening the left and the right's livelihood.
Some people in this country feel that they are just locked into looking at issues from one stance or another. This performance has led to stagnation and lack of finding widespread position on whatever issue. With stagnation and lack of ordinary grounds provides an environment of confusion concurring a system that is intractable. If another brand new party came onto the scene a different government would ensue as each party stands on one side almost to radically and on the other side to drastically meaning a different party would come into play to consent too to shake the odds of one side and of the other side. This Frontwards party can be aka end Thomas Jefferson from rolling in his grave party.
The dysfunctional two party system produced a financial meltdown, and are just postponing to fix the educational system that other countries are beating the U.S. at, they have postponed in helping the middle class, and have postponed on many issues as such. The two party system forces the voter to look through the lens of an issue through the prison of Right and Left. When an issue can just be looked at as frontwards. People want change, Obama's election is some prove to that changeless, the Tea Party is proof to that yearning for change or again radical changelessness. Seeing through the political system that is now causing more hurt than help is necessary for the nation and our generation to aid the next generation to overcome current obstacles to obtain an obligation of a true democracy system. I am not going to receive a better life with a party of right and left ideology but going to get there with my own thinking and with my own straightforward candidate that I can say represents me. Not a candidate backed by an institutions who knows how to talk and move in a formidable lie to prey on the voters with their smile. This is not just a matter of let a candidate of the DSA become president or the greenback party, or a coalition of parties it is a matter to obtain function in the current time of 2012. For this generation to write the script and rattle the harmony for the government to insure. Candidates are stuck in a system where their own thinking gets construed to a prism of the two party system that cannot allow them to think for themselves but to an ideology. They cannot pilot the life's they want to guide. It is a marriage that needs a divorce. Republicans have an idea and the Democrats have an idea but they never can get their idea across like an old married couple. The current debt is blasphemy and these two parties are not brisk enough or capable to form a centrist movement that can sit down and get a something done. If you think that they can hey keep on voting for that R. And D. it is a democracy right? If I took 20 people from across the political spectrum and put them together in a room and gave them a paper with a number that represents a debt I guarantee they can work together and figure out a robust solution. Same scenario put 10 Democrats who are very organized and 10 Republicans who again are extremely organized nothing will come out of that room but their roots and prides.
This is a matter of getting rid of the decayed two party system for something that can be better than that and be something functional that Durkheim would approve of. An organism that works. The political organism of the U.S. is not working in harmony. Democrats do not want talk about Medico and Medicaid and social security reductions. That needs to happen. Republicans refuse to raise taxes. Is that not obvious?
Something is surely crawling around the U.S. a** for sure because they cannot get squat done. What is crawling is an economic meltdown. 2020 the interest on the debt will be 110 billion dollars. This government was based on social mobility to give the consented the ability to obtain something. The cows are flying and the two party system in 2012 is still working. The parties are working in organized manner to achieve nil.
It is not that Romney does not have any good ideas. It is not that Obama does not have any good ideas. OR X. They are stuck in the means of a party that brings an end to the candidate that perverts the system the U.S. people consents to.
imabench

Pro

"The Republican Party and the Democratic Party do not want an X party to emerge of equal value.... This is not a matter of speculation or conspiracy that some random means are preventing another party to form, but of common sense"
I have never heard of the American Nazi party and the America Communist party along with other completely opposite parties deciding to form a new party. There is absolutely no evidence that all these parties are trying to make a new super-party and there is even less evidence that the Republican and Democratic parties are behind why this has not yet happened.

"Take Pepsi and Cola they do not want another powerhouse X drink that will take up shelf space."
Yeah but it happens.... Root beer, Sprite, 7 Up, Sierra Mist, Dr Pepper, Fanta, all these sodas are available but Coke and Pepsi are the most popular because they connect with people the most in terms of taste, MUCH LIKE THE REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC PARTIES.

"With stagnation and lack of ordinary grounds provides an environment of confusion concurring a system that is intractable"
Voters do compromise on issues you know...... They are not mindless opinionated zombies who dont know how to punch a hole in a ballot, voting for a candidate is pretty straightforward....

"The dysfunctional two party system produced a financial meltdown...."
Not even close,
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://useconomy.about.com...
http://theeconomicrecession.blogspot.com...

"the Tea Party is proof to that yearning for change or again radical changelessness. "
Oh yeah because the Tea party always puts their own candidates in the election and when you see their names on the ballot it says "Tea Party" next to it.......................

Oh wait thats not true, since Tea Party activists are just a branch of REPUBLICANS who are pro guns, pro life, and against big government.

"Republicans have an idea and the Democrats have an idea but they never can get their idea across like an old married couple"
Thats called politics.....

If this whole debate is a rambling argument trying to say that the US should not be a two party system because the current two party system doesnt get sh*t done, then thats a really bad argument because A) third parties cant do any better at getting anything done than the two main parties..... B) Politics is designed to be slow because the system created by the founding fathers made a government that would not be so responsive to change but would still work at a reasonable pace to create laws that abide by the parameters within the Constitution..... C) On large issues there is almost never an easy, reasonable, and proven solution to a problem meaning that both parties, and any other party, would argue viciously over what would work........ And D) Adding a third party into such a scenario would be like adding another internet retard into an internet argument going on between two other internet retards. Now we have three internet retards arguing over something and even if one party wins it doesnt matter because that party is still retarded so to speak.....

If it was made so that Republican and Democratic parties were forced to let some radical third party debate into the discussion then even LESS would be accomplished, at the expense of the Republicans, the Democrats, the voters, and Americans as a whole

1) Independent parties are more radical then Republican and Democratic parties
2) Independent parties do not get the message out because they suck at campaigning and getting funding, not because Democrats and Republicans keep them down
3) Independent parties are not trying to form a new super party
4) Politics is a lengthy process and somehow limiting the power of the two main parties to allow some crazy a** third party to only further slow down the process would be bad for everyone

This is why the US should remain a 2 party system.
Debate Round No. 4
K.GKevinGeary

Con

"Politics is designed to be slow because the system created by the founding fathers made a government that would not be so responsive to change but would still work at a reasonable pace to create laws that abide by the parameters within the Constitution".
What is the pace pro? The two parties will figure out something tomorrow. And then tomorrow. And then tomorrow. And then tomorrow. I guess that pace is working Pro. The two parties 40-50 years ago overlapped regarding congress and now they are only flapping with the left wing and the right wing of a bald eagle.
Over 120 million Americans are in absolute gridlock. The imperfections in this country are obvious pro.
John Locke was a father to some of the founding fathers.
"Government being for the preservation of every man's right and property, by preserving him from the violence or injury of others, is for the good of the governed". (First Treatise, Chapter 9).
"And thus the community perpetually retains a supreme power of saving themselves from the attempts and designs of anybody, even of their legislators, whenever they shall be so foolish, or so wicked, as to lay and carry on designs against the liberties and properties of the subject". (Second Treatise, Chapter 13).

"But if a long train of abuses, prevarications and artifices, all tending the same way, make the design visible to the people, and they cannot but feel, what they lie under, and whither they are going, 'tis not to be wondered, that they should then rouse themselves, and endeavor to put the rule into such hands, which may secure to them the ends for which government was at first enacted". (Second Treatise, Chapter 19).
"But though men when they enter into society, give up the equality, liberty and executive power they had in the state of nature, into the hands of the society, to be so far disposed of by the legislature, as the good of the society shall require; yet it being only with an intention to everyone the better to preserve himself his liberty and property"" (Second Treatise, Chapter 9

The Patriot act. That idea totally rips apart constitutional liberties.
The commerce clause.
Laws are passed every day arbitrarily without the consent of the consented to be governed.
Democracy is supposed to be an active event for all citizens. Another problem is that many people do not participate.

"Sprite, 7 Up, Sierra Mist, Dr Pepper, Fanta"
Regarding my analogy. All of these are products of Coke, and Pepsi pro, but it is irrelevant.

"Adding a third party into such a scenario would be like adding another internet retard into an internet argument going on between two other internet retards. Now we have three internet retards arguing over something and even if one party wins it doesnt matter because that party is still retarded so to speak....."
So by your own words so to speak is that the Republicans represent one "retard", the Democrats another "retard", and X party represents another "retard", Exactly but to be more friendly the two party system is not capable of functioning, it is "retarded" … because of your advice given regarding votes in a previous round, I would like to give advice of stating the word "retarded" online…I guess your against disabled folks or pro in calling others "retards"… droping the r bomb, that is for another debate…Life essentially is a decaying process beginning in the womb till the clock ends, everyone will inherit one form of disability or another if they hang around on earth…

The tax reform in 86 there was a functional system going on. They fought to balance each other out and now they sit idle or at some mysterious pace. In social mobility going up we are behind France and that is a country to note definitively in government compared to our system. The parties do not represent the country as a whole. The Republicans are representing a small view. The Democrats represent the same tiny lens to look out of. Vast numbers of views are not represented. There is about 39 percent of independent voter's registered. That points that the two party system is working in "retard" villa located in North America from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Frankly this debate was never for me to establish any new form of government ( as I did mention bringing in another party of some sort or demolish the one at hand) but to state that this system is not functional and there must be a more functional system out there for our generation to seize but con is representing how this two party system is not working and attempted to work something of value out. Frankly what is wrong with another party or two more and these parties do not necessarily have to be a small radical party but can be a new party called the generation X party or a radical one or a moderate one, or the real change movement party that is blossoming across the U.S. (the tea party, Obama's real implication of change), change cannot happen because he is stuck looking through the democratic. Allow for more conflict. Politics it seems is the only system that an individual has to pick their party for their vote to count on one side or on the other side. That does not seem like freedom does it? If it is freedom explain. Call it a harangue against who knows. That is not hesitant comment to make but pinpoint because who knows what needs to happen in the political sphere regarding the incarcerated marriage of the dysfunctional two party system that is not working. I am not able to establish a new government by any means but only to advocate this idea. I am a nobody that lives in N.J. but if enough nobody's get together there can be a somebody. The conditions citizens are facing today can the two party system fix it? Unemployment, housing markets, the economy, and so forth. It all happened under the two party system is the two party system capable of fixing the mess. Are they still capable of righteously employing their politics in harmony to help the average citizen effected by the mess. The two party system currently is not providing stability if it is vote pro. During the years of 1981 and 1990 the two parties worked wonderful together even with conflict. The tradition of moderate Americans having a voice in politics is gone. Where is it in society? Each party has been constantly at each other's throats so the other looks worse producing nil of political thought. There is FOX there is MSNBC. The views people get through the media establish this pre-modern views of looking at each subject at hand.

Conclusion: The Two party system in the U.S. needs to be dusted off and is not working. Real change and a real blue print needs to be developed not just for now but for future generations to retain. Is the U.S. destined to be like Rome? Rome after all spanned for centuries and was lost to history, the U.S.'s economy is going down the tubes. Freedom is not found in the Two Party System.
imabench

Pro

"What is the pace pro? The two parties will figure out something tomorrow. And then tomorrow. And then tomorrow. And then tomorrow. I guess that pace is working Pro" - Con

14 seconds later.....

"Laws are passed every day arbitrarily without the consent of the consented to be governed." - Con
While trying to attack me personally the Con contradicts himself very badly, considering that he hasnt shown proof for either.

"Democracy is supposed to be an active event for all citizens. Another problem is that many people do not participate"
America is a republic, and in the last presidential election 130 million people voted which is more than the entire populations of almost any other country
http://www.williampmeyers.org...
http://alexandermark.hubpages.com...
http://askville.amazon.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Frankly this debate was never for me to establish any new form of government (as I did mention bringing in another party of some sort or demolish the one at hand)" - Con
I never get to see people contradict themselves in the same sentence, hats off to you Con, especially since later you went and said
"I am not able to establish a new government by any means but only to advocate this idea."
Next time you accept a debate........ Pick a side and try to stick to it......

"Politics it seems is the only system that an individual has to pick their party for their vote to count on one side or on the other side"
Split ticket voting, A ballot on which the voter has chosen candidates from different political parties when multiple offices are being decided by a single election.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

So once again the Con is making up lies since people in America almost routinely choose candidates from different parties to hold different levels of government.

"Unemployment, housing markets, the economy, and so forth. It all happened under the two party system"
Your powers of observation are amazing however the two party system didnt cause any of these things, a whole variety of factors did, as I explained before in the last round.

" The two party system currently is not providing stability if it is vote pro"
Last i checked the government still is working, people still have jobs, the economy is slowly recovering, we are ending wars, people who work for the government are still getting paid, people still choose their leaders, people still vote.

"The two party system currently is not providing stability if it is vote pro. During the years of 1981 and 1990 the two parties worked wonderful together even with conflict"
Somebody bring the contradiction count up to three because the Con just did it again..... The Con admits that this system worked just fine in 1990 but now that according to his own opinion it isnt it should be reformed drastically, no wait he says he doesnt want to reform government, no wait he does. God Con you flip flop more than Mitt Romney.

"The tradition of moderate Americans having a voice in politics is gone. Where is it in society?"
Republican primaries stupid...... People have been giving their output in politics since the first primary started back in January now
http://news.yahoo.com...

"Conclusion: The Two party system in the U.S. needs to be dusted off and is not working."
Even though you yourself say they pass laws everyday and have worked fine in the recent past....

"Real change and a real blue print needs to be developed not just for now but for future generations to retain"

Even though you before said that you completely denied advocating for a change of government

"Is the U.S. destined to be like Rome? Rome after all spanned for centuries and was lost to history,"

Rome is still around if you havent noticed, its not like Atlantis...

"the U.S.'s economy is going down the tubes."

Yes I rememebr when going down the tubes also meant that thousands of jobs are created each month
http://www.democraticleader.gov...

"Freedom is not found in the Two Party System."

Anybody who is a registered voter can vote, Hell even blind people can vote,
http://www.direct.gov.uk...

Forfeited arguments by the Pro
1) Pro has failed to give evidence claiming that the Democratic and Republican Parties use their funds to silence other parties
2) Pro forfeits at raising funds, winning elections, and campaigning
3) Pro has failed to provide evidence that all the independent parties are trying to form a super party
4) Pro has failed to provide evidence that the Democratic and Republican parties are using their funds to somehow prevent such a party from forming
5) Pro forfeits that an independent party would severely slow down the rate at which laws are passed (instead he went on a tirade for my use of the word retard and forgot what he was even arguing about.....)
6) The two party system does work
7) Independent parties sometimes do win elections

I thank the Con for the debate and I thank the voters for reading :)
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by K.GKevinGeary 5 years ago
K.GKevinGeary
Wilco, I am all kinda new at this but the mistakes will be learned to progress, thanks.
Posted by randolph7 5 years ago
randolph7
Yeah, I agree Wallstreet.. I get the point he was trying to make that the viewpoints get integrated but Libertarian has some views that are held by either party.
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
Yeah I messed up on that one quite a bit....
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
"Libertarian Party............ Still exists but have views comparable to very liberal Democrats"

It's comparable to classical liberals and paleoconservatives.
Posted by THEBOMB 5 years ago
THEBOMB
wth....ok here's my RFD...

S&G

Con's massive wall of text was impossible to read. It hurt my eyes.

Conduct

Hurting my eyes didn't help your case here Con and when Pro rightly pointed out you tried to attack him...

Arguments

Con's arguments were contradictory, historically inaccurate (in some cases), and sometimes just plain bad...
Posted by K.GKevinGeary 5 years ago
K.GKevinGeary
Just as a side note to the analogy regarding coke and pepsi. I cannot speak for all the supermarkets across the spectrum or even the mom and pop stores. In N.J. the products of Coke is on left side, in the middle generally is the store brand and a bunch of random drinks, and Pepsi is on the right side. Pepsi and Coke do not want an X drink to take up shelf space. This is common sense. What would happen if now some shelf space got taken by a Formidable X drink on both sides? Coke and pepsi would loose their profits, and only speculation can occur from there on... Go into big politics such as the two party system. They do not want any other X party taking up their shelf space. This X party can be anything, it could be something this generation composed.
Posted by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
Good topic. The challenge will probably be accepted quickly.

If not, I will accept if the voting period is changed from 3 days to one month. Few people read five round debates, so it would be better as three or four, but I don't insist on that. You can challenge me directly if you like.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by randolph7 5 years ago
randolph7
K.GKevinGearyimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con: I will not read an argument all bunched into one paragraph. Formatting is your friend. Also, try focusing on just the subject at hand. Your points may be valid but try not to ramble you will loose your readers and your point will be lost.
Vote Placed by THEBOMB 5 years ago
THEBOMB
K.GKevinGearyimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Yea...this isn't working look at the comments..