Amazon.com Widgets
  • Nothing but Chaos

    Aligning to a particular party has cost us very much. While it seems like the two parties present in today's society are seemingly opposing, covering a broad spectrum of commoners' tastes, they are essentially the same thing. Obama has Obamacare; Romney has Romneycare. Really, this bickering is essentially reduced to one's opinion of if they like red or blue the most.

  • I Think They Should

    They serve no other purpose than to promote chaos, division, and inefficiency. Washington and the founding fathers warned us against the evils of partisanship, now we have seen the repercussions. In my opinion, politicians should run as individuals instead of being poster boys for whatever party they are a part of. This allows for a more efficient republic and democracy.

  • Unnecessary. Ban them.

    Political parties give people an "easy button" to choose so that they can just align with the people choosing their stances for them. Politicians should have to run on the issues and articulate their beliefs directly to the people, Not to their partisan sides trying to build a base. Political parties are also exclusionary, In that centrism is highly discouraged by parties, Even though they may appeal, Individually, To a broad segment of the population.

  • I agree man

    It’s just not so good, Yaknow? Pretty bad, Pretty pretty bad. Super duper not good! Wow man I can't believe some people think its good. Honestly, Do you think its good? Ill give you a hint, Its not. It’s BAD. Oh no no its not good at all. Wow. Bad

  • Political, Professional, Religious other unions can, Not be banned but shouldn't rule countries, This only could be trusted to individuals as only individual effectively can be held responsible.

    World History teaches us ideologies can be banned, Restricted or proved by time to be harmful but there always will be some that will keep believing, See some good in what some will see bad in, There always will be majority and minority, Good and bad, But each is temporary as Individual Life by itself.

  • Its just not good

    Because its just not good. It only brings chaos and i don't think its good. Yea. Its not good. Like its just not really good. In conclusion, I think political parties aren't good. They should be banned because its just not so good. You know. Its not too great. End.

  • They are the most partisan and childish system in politics that forces groupthink to dominate ideologies

    The current system in the U. S allows political parties to have majorities in all 3 branches of the government, Making checks & balances non-existant since party politics will always have priority over good & compromising policy. Politicians need to focus on what is best for the country, Its allies and its citizens, Not what their party tells them to do.

  • Close down republic party

    The only thing the republic party cares is the money , nothing else matters to them they are all full of shit, they should all move to the USSR and take turns sucking off putin & become his bitch & we the dem party will gladly pay putin to keep them ,another thought is send them all to north korea & they can see how far there bull shit will get them & we will gladly pay un as well oh by the way trump must take his family with him{leave the wife ] WE CAN GIVE HER A SECOND CHANCE LOL ANY WAY IN CLOSING { FUCK U TRUMP & UR FUCKED UP FAMILY.

  • Not banned but limited.

    Ban is too drastic a solution, raises all kinds of free speech issues, and would be difficult to enforce in a democratic society. The problem is not the existence of the parties themselves but their overwhelming and unchecked power to exclude anyone else. Partisan state election committees, gerrymandering, exclusive primaries, and a host of other laws at all levels of government create a formidable barrier to non-partisan or third party would-be public servants. This has created a duopoly in America--two arrogant parties, so secure in their ability to exclude anyone else that they can safely neglect governing properly and concentrate almost exclusively on obtaining and maintaining power by any means. It doesn't matter if they are disliked by the voters as long as they are disliked less than the only other side (like the old "you can't run faster than that bear" joke "...Yea, but I only need to run faster than you") they win.

    The solution is to limit partisan power. Support initiatives to end gerrymandering, for open primaries, scrap the electoral college,
    change the presidential electoral system to a run-off system instead of 'Congress chooses in case of a non-majority'. Also, if you can find any, support and vote for independent candidates--particularly ones that don't advocate for a narrow "base".

    Beyond rhetoric, neither party represents the interest of the majority of Americans. Governing based on reason and for the benefit of all of our country is frequently at odds with the current hyper-partisan binary political landscape. The current trend is for both parties to move further to the extremes and to use divisive tactics in an attempt to demonize the other side. Tribalism is a primitive, powerful, and dangerous human affliction. Unprincipled politicians (and others) have always tried to take advantage of this with no regard for it's toxic effects on society. Allowing the two parties to have an exclusive right to power only makes division worst. Let's all stop, calm down, and think outside the two boxes.

  • The Constitution Didn't Want Them

    Why not a single mention of political parties, if the system created by the Constitution was meant to function with them? They make the Electoral College irrelevant, when it could be truly representative of individual voters. Dissolving them would need to be accompanied by campaign finance laws, so it doesn't become a de facto party system, as in the Nebraska legislature. But once representatives are free to align their values with their campaigns, instead of according to a party line, we will enable a more sophisticated representation of American values and expectations.

  • They need the unity

    Individual couldn't possibly have the money to fund their campaigns alone. So only the corrupt and/or rich people can become politicians?
    In poorer countries this is an even bigger problem since the amount of rich people tend to be less.
    So every country would be an oligarchy of the rich if political parties are banned.

    Also, no one person is a perfect leader. They can use the advice they may get from fellow party members. If there were no parties and every man for himself scenario. Then nobody will want to advise each other on doing their jobs better

  • No! This is bad

    Banning political parties is BAD. They do a lot of good things and help you decide how to vote. Our right to have political parties was guaranteed in the constitution and it can't be taken away. Banning political parties would be like when hitler founded nazi germany and banned all political parties and made himself king

  • To Ban is just as BAD!

    Don't agree with banning a group, let them have their "Freedom of Speech" same as everyone else. I learn a lot from listening to enemies, (Bhagavadgita, Art of War) but the CURRENT SYSTEM denies anyone EXCEPT D & R as "real and getting government support monies". So the media also supports this behavior. The D & R own the Debate system so they of course do not "allow" outsiders, and the Koch Brothers show WHY Corporations & Individuals should be limited in HOW THEY CAN SPEND, not how much they spend on an election. The fact of Koch Bros owning media is sick and propaganda is thick. USA does not teach learning, it teaches Obedience & Social behavior molding to conform. A system designed for FAILURE

  • No no no

    Cause why ewflh el;fnwlekfnkl;wenf wenfnnfnfn n nfn n n n n n n n n n n n n n n nn n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n nn n n n n n n n n

  • Political parties are important even they are "dirty" sometimes

    The debate party is media for people with same vision in politic also a media to go into politic much easier. If we didnt have political paryies those people who have interest, will totally confuse, because they wont know whose gonna help him tahat have same vision with him, we need political parties

  • They should NOT control our primaries...

    There is no need to ban political parties outright. In fact, the party a candidate aligns with can give citizens a better understand of the principles practiced by said candidate.

    But these political parties should not control our primary elections. As it stands now, political parties exert complete control over primaries and they operate completely outside of federal elections law until the primary process is over and a candidate has already been chosen. This has allowed the two major parties to provide only controlled choices in every presidential election since their inception.

    If we are going to allow the parties to control the primary process, we need to seriously consider switching to an approval voting system where all parties can be adequately represented.

    Posted by: Tink

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.