Why have political parties become so polarized that they fail to address the concerns of most Americans?

Favorite Answer

Hi Sam...hope you are coming back next season!

I have been blogging about this issue for many months and could not agree more that we need a true independent party system that allows all parties access to the electorate, first, in the Primaries then in the General Election. I also favor term limits for all elective office holders.

Currently our system is tightly controlled by the major parties and lobbyists, making it nearly impossible for truly representative government. We need to send a message - Politicians who do not listen and do not do what is best for us will be replaced.

What amazes me is the fact that polling showed that Congress was rated lower than President Bush prior to the 2006 Election. There was a shift in power because of it, yet, they still haven't gotten the message.

We want performance of our wishes!

Groups such as Unity08 are a step in that direction.
______________________

Jim DeSantis publishes political commentary at http://on-line-tribune-front-page.blogspot.com . Guests commentary is invited....Show more

Both the Dem's' and re pubs' can rarely agree on anything even when they want the same thing.
Unless you go to c-span you will not see much coverage of third party candidates.
Large corporations make huge contributions to candidates they support,you are limited in how much you can donate to a candidate personally. Corporations set up committees and groups to support and fund candidates.
The latest bankruptcy laws were written by the banking industry for congress to make into law and it bit them in the butt.
The other problem is that some people vote for 1 party all the time,either because they support that party all the time and believe it is the only party to do whats right,or they are dissatisfied with the other party for some reason.
Both parties want it their way and will compromise some to get their way.
If what I read on the Internet last night is even half true,this election may not matter anyway. If we have another attack like 9/11 or a major disaster before the elections F.E.M.A . will take control and George Bush will become the true power of government. If it happens after the elections and before the new president takes office,I don't know what will happen.
G.W. signed an executive order for the continuity of government and F.E.M.A. will take over and suspend the constitution and the President will be the unity executive.
Congress and the Supreme Court will still exist but will have very little voice,the President has the final say in all matters.
There was also another site talking about the formation of the North American Union (Canada,U.S. and Mexico forming a union like the E.U. and the U.S. Constitution will be gone....Show more

Because most Americans let them. We found out that we can vote ourselves money and we won't stop until we are bankrupt. Government has become a career.

Basically the biggest enemy of the Republicans is the Democrats and vice versa. It is like a college rivalry. Boosters will give money as long as you beat state, just like special interests will support you as long as you kill that bill.

Party trumps principle. The need to get reelected is somehow justification for tabling difficult issues. Quid pro quo for earmarks is viewed as compromise. AndGetting a victory over the other party is more imporant than making a good law or solving a problem.

We haven't had a true leader for a long time, and unfortunately, I don't think Unity08 is anything more than a gimmick. We need a new political party, not a mix of what we already have. I don't see how a mixed ticket will solve anything. We don't get co-presidents. So having a VP of a different party doesn't mean much unless the senate is 50/50. Looking for our answer from within the groups that messed up the system is a bad idea.

We need true election reform. Get rid of the stranglehold that the Republicans and Democrats have on the government.

Dump the electoral college. Change it so that each congressional district gets one vote (gets rid of 100 electoral voters) and make each district independent of their states. Have a national primary and then have a runnoff between the top 2. People can then vote for Greens, Socialist Workers, Libertarians, Constitution, whatever. No one will have to worry about throwing away their vote and other parties will get significantly more votes.

Let's see what happens in the Senate when there are 48 Republicans 48 Democrats, 2 Greens and 2 Libertarians. You might see people actually work together.

Maybe this is too much to even dream for, but it shouldn't be....Show more

When our Founding Fathers helped create our country, they had originally attempted to set up a partyless form of government. As great as that sounds, human beings cannot help but to become polarized on issues that cause great concerns. Right or left, up or down, front or back, my way or the highway, people try everything they can to convice others that their way is the best way.

But many issues cannot be simplified to just black or white. Many things have grey areas involved. Sometimes the extremist view or solution can do much more harm than good.

Our country's true problem is that there is no other view than either the Republicans or the Democrats. Attempts by others in the past to develop a third party have failed, usually because they were taking still yet another extremist view. Ross Perot probably has come the closest since the Whigs were put out of power. He took a 'common man's' approach, even though he was no longer a common man himself, which I think is what hurt him in the end.

Even though the Democrats and the Republicans each have moderates within their ranks, the 'party line' is usually the dominating factor with most politicians. If they don't follow the party line, then they find themselves with a lot less support come time for re-elections. I think the problem most Americans have with the different party lines is that they don't agree with either policy 100%. But since there are no other viable candidates available to choose from, a person MUST select someone to vote for who probably has at least one point of view or agenda they they personally do not agree with. There is no middle ground. Many times, voting feels like a choice between the lesser of two evils.

This country needs a good, strong third party. Or 4, or even 5. The more views, the better. After all, our country's founders instituted a tri-cameral government, with equal powers, just for the purpose of the checks and balances. So that no one person or group of people could permanently take power without the people's consent.

As many problems as we have, I am so very glad that I was born in this country. When I see on the news about some third world country having yet another military coup, or some place that doesn't give all of their citizens their rights, or even a first world country having yet another change of power when the prime minister decides to resign, I am so very glad that our Founding Fathers had such foresight as to have written a flexible but powerful document such as our Constitution. Read it. You will not find anywhere in that document any wording whatsoever about the founding of a political party. It was never intended. And I personally believe we don't need them....Show more

The problem is that special interest groups are constantly throwing their ideas and dollars at every politician from both major parties. What needs to happen is: a) have any and all contributions pooled, then divided to all political parties that have a candidate. Or: b) cap the contribution to a monetary amount per political party (i.e. a million dollars is a good number). Having a number capped would limit influence from a corporation wishing to do business with the government, and still anyone that wishes to help out a political party can do so without special guarantees.
Another Idea I have is to banish all contributions to all politicial parties. Ban these $10,000 a plate fundraisers just to hear a politician speak on a issue that affects that fundraiser. Back before any media had influence, politician's paid for their own staffing and travel. They came to cities large and small to speak to all American voters, not expecting a cent from these people on their 'whistlestop' tours of the U.S. Politicians wishing to take the top job should pay their own way and not expect all the perks and Secret Service protection.
Not all candidates get protection from the Secret Service but Obama and Hillary do? Not very fair as I see it. So what if Hillary was a former First Lady, everybody plays from the same field, no more no less. I may think this is all old school politics, but it was far less corrupt than the garbage were being given every election year. Get rid of special interest and you just might actually see something get done, like the Iraq war or the price gouging at the gas pump....Show more