Quote:
Originally Posted by 33girl
Which (the bolded) is really unfair. The Reps or Dems can basically run a flounder for President if they want to, but someone who's far more qualified has to run around begging for signatures? Totally bogus.
|
In most states, it's more than the two major parties -- there are Libertarians, Greens, Reform, whoever else. Beyond that, the signature requirements are raraly too onerous for a half-way credible candidate. And like I said, if you don't have some kind of system like this, there is a real risk of ballot and electoral nightmares.
You have to remember too that in many states, independent voters or maybe even anyone can vote in a party's primary, not just registered members of the party. Some states don't even have voter registration by parties.
To me the real question is not whether the party system is a good or bad thing in and of itself. To me the questions are why, for almost all of our history, has the US had what is essentially a two-party system (and I know that the fact that we don't have proportional representation is part of the reason) and why have the same two parties dominated basically since the Civil War?