• 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.

  • 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.

  • Groupthink is promoted

    Political parties discourage political discourse and promote solidarity of opinion. People should have opinions based on analyses and not be allowed to be lazy in their voting. Remove political parties to force thought behind candidate support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

  • 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.

  • Divisions and chaos

    People fight because of political parties. The country will fall. It causes conflict which leads to contrariety. All rights should be protected. The framers feared that this would happen. People hate our leaders. It makes life harder for a lot of people. This is why we don't need political parties. We don't need political parties.

  • All we get consistently are lies

    We always get told which party to vote for and what they will do but increasingly they "never" pull through. We don't need men/women of power trying to lead our countries of the world, but humble honest people. Also transparent people who are not of any faith.. Be helping run the country. There should only be 20 or so people at the top there are too many people doing different things and it causes utter chaos

  • Party first, country second will never work

    They spend so much time making promises to voters to get elected, just to be elected and focus on more campaigning instead of their duties. All we ever hear is scandal after scandal, name calling and placing blame on the other parties. Enough is enough. They should be doing their jobs by passing laws and finding solutions to problems instead of just pointing them out, creating new ones and blaming the other party for it.

  • 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

  • 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.