Raving Conservative

Google

Thursday, October 27, 2005

The Two Party System

There is a lot bickering among conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats. I call it bickering because it is uncivilized, dirty, and rude. If it were otherwise I would call it debate and I wouldn’t be having a problem right now. Still, this bickering is better than the other alternative.

An unchecked political group having all the power in America would be a tragedy no matter whether it is the Republicans or the Democrats. Every nation that has a one-party system has grown fully corrupt and oppressive. So while I am a staunch conservative and a Republican, I place great value on having liberals and Democrats around as well.

Allow me to explain.

Any political group that has held onto power for a long period of time becomes complacent. They may become corrupted. They may simply lose touch with the people who gave them their power. Either way, it’s bad. Having a second strong group to offer the people a realistic alternative does the nation a great service by forcing the majority party to remain clean, in touch with its constituents, and to work hard. The majority party must do this or it will become the minority party.

This was the case in the 90’s when the Republicans took over both houses of Congress and gained the majority of Governorships in America. The Democrats had grown both complacent and corrupt, and had gone so far to the left that they alienated many people. This far left swing actually created the Neocons as moderate and conservative Democrats abandoned the party to join the Republicans where they were warmly welcomed. The people spoke loud and clear, they said “We want a change!”

So we have that change now, and I for one am pleased. But the Republicans are beginning to grow complacent as the Democrats continue to sputter aimlessly in what have to be the weakest political arguments made in a long time. The Republicans are convinced nobody will vote for a party that complains constantly without offering any solutions. So they make missteps. They begin to forget why they were voted into office to begin with. They start to spend like Democrats. They start to obsess about special interest groups and alienate their base. They start to make mistakes because, like the Democrats before them, they just don’t believe that Americans want the alternative.

The problem with the logic as stated above is that the people only have so much tolerance. Once their patience is used up they vote someone else into office. In this time of war, soaring gas prices, chaos on the border, and natural disasters the people have far less tolerance for complacency and foolish pride than usual. Mistakes mean much more to a nation under duress, and we are a nation under duress.

So the Republicans are doing nothing about the border. They are moving slowly on the energy crisis. They are making tactical mistakes in Iraq. They are spending like the national budget is endless. With all of these very legitimate issues that even conservative gripe about; what do the Democrats settle on as their strategy for 2006? They are running on the theme of wild claims of corruption. How stupid can you get?

This strategy will not work as well as the Democrats hope. By failing to address the concerns of the people by offering solutions they are seen as ineffective whiners rather than go-getters. When the voters go to the polls, if they are convinced of Republican corruption they will be facing this choice: Do I vote for a corrupt person who gets things done, or do I vote for a do-nothing whiner with no ideas on how fix anything?

However, with the general dissatisfaction with the way things are going right now the Democrats do stand to gain a few seats in each house of Congress, though I doubt they will regain the majority just yet. This will serve as wake-up call to the Republicans and they will get it done because they will know that if they don’t they will be replaced in the next election.

This is why I value America’s liberals and Democrats as a political force. Without them to keep the Republicans feet to the flames the party would corrode into worthlessness, just like the Democrats did. Rest assured, the Democrats will get their acts together sooner or later, then they will be a real threat, which will force the Republicans to a greater level of excellence, or they will be replaced. This is how our government is checked and balanced by the voters.

11 Comments:

  • Excellent post Daniel. I would love to see a third party being able to duke it out with the big boys. Of all the alternative parties, the Libertarians look the best to me. I dont agree with all their views, but then again I dont agree with all Republican views either.

    By Blogger Nedreck Milhunky, at 8:46 AM  

  • I second Nedreck! I'd love to see more people vote Libertarian. I think if more people got away from party loyalty (ex. "My parents were Democrats/Republicans so that's what I am.") then they'd really like a lot of the things that Libertarianism has to offer. There's something for everybody!

    By Blogger Nightcrawler, at 9:02 AM  

  • Forgive for being offended, but it seems like you just called Democrats "useful tools."

    Don't get me wrong. I am not a full-fledged Democrat, but that is basically what your post boiled down to.

    With that being said, I agree with you in that a two-party system allows for checks and balances. However, a multi-party system would allow for more centrists and moderate views. I personally would like to see four major parties--Socialist, Democrat, Republican, and Libertarian--populating state and federal government because I find that a generous mix of all four is the best kind of government.

    By Blogger Son of Lilith, at 9:42 AM  

  • In my opinion, the Socialist party has failed everytime it's been tried...but I would GLADLY vote for a party that is in the middle, between Democrat & Republican! Because, I think MOST voters are not the far right...and neither are most the far left...so, how do we fix it??
    BoUnCeS!! LibbY!

    By Blogger Libby, at 9:55 AM  

  • Question: If the top independent/third party candidates were givin a chance to debate during major elections would you watch the debates?

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 10:43 AM  

  • Oh yeah! Third parties are the most fun to listen to! Remember Perot?

    Instant Runoff Voting. Look it up.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 11:08 AM  

  • Question: If the top independent/third party candidates were givin a chance to debate during major elections would you watch the debates?"

    Well, in Canada the third party is the Bloq. Canada's Quebec seperation party. The other party is a one of a hardcore strain of communism. I don't think the debates have a higher value than that of American ones. They are quite lame, in fact.

    Regarding checks and balances for the American parties, this is true for Canada also. Only in the opposite direction. A "check" to the Canadian left is immenent.

    By Blogger KnightofGoodMrIronMan, at 2:23 PM  

  • You want to see what long term political corruption does to a country, look north, it's disgusting... You guys need a middle party, as suggested, to smooth out the radical swings.

    By Blogger ABFreedom, at 2:45 PM  

  • I'm fed up with the 2 party system. The Dems ad Repubs have a stranglehold on elections. I would love to see viable alternative parties that can more truly represent their constituencies. As for the Libertarians, they don't even try, they are a joke. Only diehard Libertarians ever even know who the Libertarian candidate is. Hmm. Is that why I changed my voter registration from Libertarian to Independent? The Dems face the same kind of problem with the lie that a third party vote is a throwaway vote that gets the opposition elected. Many of them would like to support the eco-commies - er, green party, that is, but they get told by doing so they are getting Repubs elected. BS! If The Ds and Rs don't stand for what you believe in then don't choose the lesser of 2 evils. Vote your beliefs. If You vote Green, and a R wins by a slim percent, The D shoud take that as a message that he's not doing his job right, and the party should re-evaluate its policies. The same goes switched around. If the Rs don't develop a spine then I will NOT be voting for them. If a D gets elected as a result, then hopefully the party will re-evaluate and become stronger. Sometimes moving forward requires a step backward.

    By Anonymous Fitch, at 3:05 PM  

  • I have to agree on so many levels.

    www.nunziasright.blogspot.com

    By Blogger Nunzia, at 3:31 PM  

  • Yes, I would watch the debates should a third party participate. And probably be much, much, less angered by them.

    By Blogger Son of Lilith, at 12:42 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


 
Listed on BlogShares